|
| |
You
Are Here:
Home > Trail End Exhibits
>
Independent of the Sun > The New Cleanliness
The New Cleanliness
Release From Drudgery | Truly Time
Saving? | A Conspiracy of Appliances
Dirt is the enemy of health and loveliness.
Elizabeth Hale Gilman, quoted in Housekeeping, 1916
|
The early Twentieth Century was a time of great
change in the areas of household technology and cleanliness. While homes were always
expected to be spotlessly clean, free of dust and dirt, they were now expected to be
sanitary as well –
free of germs. Most of the tasks that would create this sanitary home
environment were exhausting labors that had to be repeated day in and day out, week after
week, year after year.
One could ask the question: which came first, a
higher standard of cleanliness or the appliances that made possible the attainment of that
standard? It's a good question, but one that will not be answered here. Suffice it to say
that electrical appliances played their part in releasing the homemaker from the worst of
household drudgery, but didn't necessarily cut down on the amount of time she spent on
housekeeping tasks.
|
|
Release From
Drudgery
|
|
That keeping the home clean was woman's work –
and necessary work at that –
was
accepted as the proper way of things. As an early Twentieth Century Lydia Pinkham
publication noted:
When a man comes home from work at night, he wants to find his home clean and
comfortable, his supper ready, his children happy and his wife smiling a welcome to him.
These are only natural feelings.
Not much had changed by the time the Cleanliness Institute made the following
observation in 1930:
Of course our homes must be spic-and-span. That’s what homes are for. Everyone
knows that when woodwork and curtains and porcelain and glass get dingy, home happiness,
too, may become less bright. And we can no more get along without fresh towels and
sheets, and spotless table linen than we can put up with dirty clothing or unwashed
bodies.
Nevertheless, now-a-days there is something wrong with ‘a woman’s work is never done’.
Fortunately
for the Twentieth Century housewife, partial relief from this household drudgery finally
arrived in the form of electrically-powered appliances. The electric vacuum cleaner,
refrigerator, washing machine, iron and stove were truly revolutionary in that they
relieved the homemaker of the hardest, most back-breaking and time-consuming tasks of her
day, allowing her the time and strength to be more than just a servant in her own home. As
Josephine Wylie noted in 1930:
The homemaker has been quick to accept the new scheme of things. The release
from so-called drudgery has given her more time to think about her job of
homemaking in all of its aspects. Because she is less under the thumb of the
drudgery sort of work, she has more time to think about her home business, more
time to stand off and view it objectively, more time to line things up in their
relative importance. ... With dignity and importance attached to the job of running a household and the
leisure time that has come as a result of modern homes, the woman in the home now takes
on this role of a home-business woman. She knows that she is attached to one of the
biggest businesses in the world, that she is manager of a very important unit of it,
that it amounts to much more than cooking and sewing and housecleaning, that it is a job
that takes thoughtful planning and work if it is to be well done, that it has its
compensations just as does any other job on this earth.
While some thought the reduction of time spent in housework would result in laziness
and sloth, advertisers such as the Walker Dishwasher Company sought to relieve this burden
of guilt:
The desire to shun disagreeable work isn’t plain laziness. Mothers have a right
to employ their time and effort in the more fruitful and satisfying details of
housework. Cooking [for example] is an art, but dishwashing is drudgery!
|
back to top
|
Truly Time Saving?
|
|
While it is agreed that electric appliances
considerably altered the life of the typical American housewife, few would agree that the
changes were all for the best. Much of the hard labor could be done by machine, so one
would assume that the development of washing machines
and vacuum cleaners would mean less time spent doing housework. But not so! According to
researchers, the average homemaker in 1924 spent fifty-two hours a week doing her
housework. Forty years later, the average American homemaker was spending fifty-five
hours a week on housework – even surrounded as she was by "laborsaving" appliances. Why
might this be? One reason: higher expectations. As one author noted:
People
began to expect more from those who kept the house. For example, whereas once laundry was
done once a week and clothes worn several days before being laundered, modern housekeepers
may do laundry every day because family members wear an item only once before washing it.
In
addition, the American
homemaker became – and to some extent, still is – obsessed by a variety of “germ theories”
stating that kitchens and bathrooms had to be “scrupulously clean” to prevent disease.
While it is true that sanitary homes tend to be healthier homes, magazines such as Good
Housekeeping and Better Homes & Gardens published article after article
encouraging women to achieve an almost impossible degree of "domestic perfection." Dirty was equated Evil, while Clean became synonymous with Good.
Instead of using technology to help meet society's old standards, the homemaker now had to
strive harder and work longer to meet new standards.
Between 1927 and 1932, the Cleanliness Institute worked with government agencies, medical
departments, schools, and social service organizations to encourage the use of soap and
water. They sponsored public service announcements on radio and published full-page
advertisements in national magazines, encouraging the use of soap and water:
To every mother her own are the ideal children. But what do the neighbors think? Do
they smile at happy, grimy faces acquired in wholesome play? For people have a way of
associating unclean clothes and faces with other questionable characteristics.
Fortunately, however, there's soap and water. 'Bright, shining faces' and freshly
laundered clothes seem to make children welcome anywhere –
and, in addition, to speak
volumes concerning their parents' personal habits as well. There's Character in Soap &
Water.
What most consumers didn't know was that the Cleanliness Institute was established in 1927
by the Association of American Soap and Glycerin Producers, Inc. –
in other words, soap
manufacturers! As AASGP spokesman Roscoe C. Edlund said in 1930, "The business of
cleanliness is big business."
Home Economist Elizabeth
Hale Gilman wasn't convinced that Americans were obsessed with cleanliness; she felt that
they just didn't want to be thought of as dirty:
Dust shows, as we say, on a bare floor; it lies under furniture and blows about in
fluffs. If the floor is carpeted, that very same dust ... sinks into the carpet. If we
really minded dust, we would mind it just as much buried in the carpet as rolling round in
fluffs. But we don't mind dust, we mind being thought dusty.
|
back to top
|
A
Conspiracy of Appliances
|
|
Prior to the late 1800s, nearly every household with a dollar
or two to spare employed some sort of domestic assistant – maid, cook, laundress, handyman
– to ease the homemaker’s burden. As time went on, however, hired help became harder and
harder to find. Single young men were heading off to war, single young women were going to
work in offices and factories. No one wanted to slave away at cleaning someone else's
home, and those that did wanted higher salaries than homemakers were used to.
Fortunately, the arrival of affordable household electrical
appliances coincided nicely with this decline in the number of women willing to work as
domestic servants. Electrical servants were seen as easier to
manage than living ones. As one woman put it, “A vacuum cleaner never asks for a raise,
calls in sick or gets drunk.” Many women preferred spending their household money
on appliances and working the machines themselves rather than going through the effort of
trying to find, hire, train, and keep domestic help.
Until very
recently, I kept a maid. Then one day I told my husband I had decided to save the cost
of our maid and put this money in the bank. He said it would be too much work for me –
but it isn’t. I discovered many little servants eager to help me for a wage of only one
cent an hour or less. Now I enjoy my work. Why shouldn’t I with a whole retinue of
servants, each an appliance run by a little electric motor – always ready – always
willing.
This was just as well, because many domestic servants did not
appreciate the new technology. Contemporary writers concluded that
servants "feared the machines as tools in a conspiracy" to force more work from them, to
make them clean more often or accomplish more cleaning tasks per day.
|
Return to
Temporary Exhibits or continue to
An Appliance Revolution
back to top | |
|