ARCHITECTURE’S STRUGGLE WITH CONTROL: A DISCUSSION ABOUT “FRANKFURT KITCHEN” AND “FOOD DISPENSER” PROJECTS

ion: “Movement-Diagram” Becoming “Machine-Plug Collage” Frankfurt Kitchen was an assertive representative of Modern Architecture’s systematisation of definitions about the immaterial qualities of spaces in design, which can be collected under the terminology of abstraction, A DISCUSSION ABOUT “FRANKFURT KITCHEN” AND “FOOD DISPENSER” PROJECTS METU JFA 2020/2 177 diagram, collage, and pattern. Lihotzky’s analysis of the kitchen’s materialised reality in order to synthesise the crystallisation of human activities into constituent movements took its essence from a scienceoriented approach under the influence of an objective point of view. For the kitchen space, each movement was justified with experiments and related with each other based on these observations. The movements were defined and abstracted in a systematic way for design; yet, it was considered that architect was given a choice to put them together in a freeway. Similar to Le Corbusier’s free-plan and free-façade arguments, which allowed architects to organise free movements in space and liberated them from limitations, the discussions about movement diagrams at that time became an enthusiastic field for architects to explore. Railway and ship dining kitchens, which were industrially created but not categorised as architectural spaces, were inspirational sources for Lihotzky with their efficiency that represented a minimised expression of functionality. Besides, the developments in the work processes of industry were enlightening. Architectural sources point out that, Lihotzky had especially two approved models in front of her, Taylor’s systematisation and Ford’s assembly-line techniques, as design methodologies of Modern Architecture were referring to new approaches in industrial production (Teige, 2002) (Figure 1). By interpreting Taylor’s industrial engineering method of consequential functioning of repetitive tasks for the optimization of employee productivity standards, Lihotzky considered the decomposition of the complex kitchen task into small, simple steps; evaluated the careful observation of the sequence of movements taken by women in performing those steps in order to eliminate wasteful motion; and expounded the measuring of precise time taken for each correct movement. The implementation of installation of gravity slides that facilitated the movement of parts from one work area to the next in production was Henry Ford’s most important innovation. The key point of the manufacturing process, which could be broken down into 84 steps, was having interchangeable parts (3). Translating from Ford’s method, Lihotzky thought that in kitchen’s design, comfortability could be established by organising and designing a machine and its parts. The ensemble of the fitted parts was organized to maximize the basic requirements for living (Teige, 2002, 218-9). Similar to factory or office work, greater production was thought as the result of a reduced time of work. Figure 1. “Frankfurter Küche” Wegstudien, Schrittersparnis, 1927 Blattmaß (H x B): 20,7 x 29,7 cm, Inv. Nr. 50/43 © Universität für angewandte Kunst Wien, Kunstsammlung und Archiv, Inv.Nr. 50/43 © © University of Applied Arts Vienna, Collection and Archive 3. The application of the assigned parts to the pulled down piece and bringing of the additional parts to the assemblers reduced the amount of time spent. The assembly line significantly decreased assembly time and increased profit margin. BAHAR BEŞLİOĞLU 178 METU JFA 2020/2 The innovations of Taylorism and Fordism were not only changing the production style, but they were also a demonstration of a future reconstruction for the new lifestyles of society. Scientific way of thinking that residually had an adherent relation with technology entered into field of architectural design, as construction technology and material industry were developing towards the reconciled social project of creating new definition of individual in the society. In Manfredo Tafuri’s descriptions, the milieus of that individual were the experimental sites of Praunheim or Riedhof-West or the installations of RömerStädt (in which standardisation of the minimum elements of the cell were succeeded) that indicated a future for “the hygienic man in the total introjection of Taylorism” (Tafuri, 1980). The activities in kitchen included everyday rituals as well as varieties. Possible activities and work in kitchen were broken into many steps that determined the limits of this space. Lihotzky obtained time-motion diagrams, which also intended to show the savings in time and work that depended on each step. These time-motion diagrams enabled Lihotzky to position the industrial-style metal sink, the fitted glass-fronted cabinets and the gas range, in optimal relation to each other and suitable for the order of tasks that the preparation of meals and the following clean up required. The old, traditional kitchen required 90 metres of movements made during a day. Compared with that, in the new fitted kitchen, of which the fixed units and equipment have been designed to be an integral part, the same movements were limited to just eight metres. In this sense, anticipation for modern architecture meant the creation of a fiction for a particular space and can be translated as designing according to its uses and functions. In Frankfurt Kitchen, the spatial consequences of design solutions were anticipated in accordance with a scientific consideration, which were based on spatial analysis that depended upon time and movement diagrams, and that was thought out in detail in respect to the hypothesis put in advance. Crystallisation of task implied the control of crystallised activities of kitchen tasks. Thus, the overall control of design was constructed with the organisation of these pieces. The abstraction obtained through the diagrams of movements intended to enable anticipation depending on the control of crystallised tasks. A minimal yet deeper abstract space could be constructed on a complex exploration of grifted activities, as modern architecture aimed to control them through crystallisation. The accomplishment of the anticipation realm in science brought modern architecture to a level of control over human mind and design as its product. In David Greene’s Food Dispenser, design methodology was not based on diagrams but depended on collages of plugged elements, whose assembly comprised an alternative design in the form of a machine. The verb “dispense” referred to a production process, which included an ability to divide and share out within the framework of a plan. Thus, the tasks in kitchen were combined in this compact machine whose different parts allowed the transfer of one task to another (Figure 2). Archigram group’s efforts, towards the creative invention of early designs of hybrid machines attached to human body or existing buildings, punctuated an enthusiasm about machines as their power could take over human responsibility. They foresaw the unseen potential of electronic systems as having “greater power control than the obvious, symbolic and A DISCUSSION ABOUT “FRANKFURT KITCHEN” AND “FOOD DISPENSER” PROJECTS METU JFA 2020/2 179 almost humanoid presence of a machine”, which reveal their awareness of the technology with rigorous smartness (Cook, et. al., 1972). Certainly, the earlier developments in machine technology enabled the challenging assembled parts of Food Dispenser. In 1679, French physicist D. Papin invented the pressure cooker, which produced a hot steam that cooked food more quickly while preserving nutrients. J. Mason patented the screw neck bottle in 1858. The waffle iron was invented by C. Swarthout in 1869. The first patent for an electric food mixer was issued in 1885 to R. M. Eastman. In 1907, S. Paper introduced the first paper towels. Developments in electricity advanced the technology of labour-saving kitchen devices. Electric refrigeration unit was invented in 1914. The electric kettle was invented in 1922 by A. L. Large. In 1922, S. Poplawski invented the blender. World’s first kitchen garbage disposer was built by architect J. W. Hammes in 1927. Mixmaster was invented by I. Jepson in 1928. In 1929, Europe’s first electric dishwasher was ready for production after permanent plumbing was introduced in 1920s. Green plastic garbage bag made from polyethylene was invented by H. Wasylyk in 1950. The microwave oven was invented by P. L. Spencer in 1967. For Archigram, new technological developments of its time had to be adapted to design, in order to bring up a fruitful environment to discipline by opening up its vocabulary and nurturing from other fields. Food Dispenser was one of these innovations, which could replace the definition of kitchen for architecture, although it remained outside the production process as an experimental project. The collage of machines for creating a kitchen space placed architect, user and space as counterparts with time, activity and technology. The limitations of the assembled parts in a machine-collage required a research of a more elaborate flexibility among different kitchen tasks. It can be said that the aim of crystallising the task in Frankfurt Kitchen turned into the endeavour of combining the task in Food Dispenser project. Machine-plug collage was contrary to Frankfurt Kitchen in its objective of combining the tasks. The control, then, borrowed by the kitchen machine, whose body consisted of parts working with the logic of a functionalist approach. As each part was precise, there were not any liberal movement of parts, unless set/ instructed. Figure 2. Living Pod, Non-static Food Machine section and plan. David Greene, © Archigram 1966. Archigram Archives, Dennis Crompton, Shelly Power © Universität für angewandte Kunst Wien, Kunstsammlung und Archiv © University of Applied Arts Vienna, Collection and Archive, Luzie Lahtinen-Stransky BAHAR BEŞLİOĞLU 180 METU JFA 2020/2 HUMAN-LABOUR TURNING INTO MACHINE-LABOUR Museum D