a view from the margin interior design

《a view from the margin interior design》由會員分享，可在線閱讀，更多相關(guān)《a view from the margin interior design（17頁珍藏版）》請在裝配圖網(wǎng)上搜索。

1、1 It is important to note here that the same stereotypes assigned to women as interior designers are equally inscribed in stereotypes of gay men. The elision of the feminine, decoration, the interior, and the inferior was put firmly in place in the early modern movement not only by the anti-decorati

2、ve invectives of Adolf Loos and Le Corbusier, but by a large societal discussion and concern about the issue referred to as Regeneration/ At the turn of the century, legitimate scholars as well as pseudo-scientists from all fields theorized that the new conditions of modernity indicated that society

3、 was devolving or degenerating. The reason for this degeneration generally was recognized as the leminization" of culture. In degeneration theory, the feminine represented the primitive, base, and erotic urges of society that had to be sup pressed in order for society to evolve and progress rationa

4、lly. All indications of the feminine, therefore, were perceived as inferior. The perception that gay men are leminized^men links them automatically with the same inferiority assigned to both women and decoration. Like stereotypes of women and decora? tion. the stereotype of the gay man as decorator

5、 still is strongly inscribed in the publics perception and equally as unde? constructed. Since this article speaks mainly from my personal viewpoint and experiences as a woman, it will not deal specifically with issues of this stereotype, although it is equally important and relevant to this discus

6、sion. (See my article Decoration as Modernisms Other: (Re)Reading the Texts of Early Modern Architecture and Design" in Cultural and Artistic Upheavals in Modern Europe: 1848-1945 (Cummer Studies, Vol. 1, 1996) for a more complete discussion of the origins of these stereotypes). A View from the

7、Margin: Interior Design Lucinda Kaukas Havenhand About ten years ago, after nearly a decade of practice as an interior designer, I returned to school to work on a Ph.D? in interdisciplin- ary human讓ies. In my first semester, I was, perhaps, a b讓 over zealous and enrolled in a philosophy course who

8、se subject was Hegel, Marx, and Nietzsche. I was intellectually rusty after being away from school for so long, and this class was very difficult. New jargon and concepts had sprung up since my last academic experience, and I found that I was hanging on the professors every word just so I could und

9、erstand. But I studied hard, read diligently and I was doing well. I was required to do a presentation in class, so I met w讓h the professor just to be sure I was on the right track? In that meeting, we quickly got into an extremely stimulating discussion of Nietzsches critique of metaphysics, which

10、 was my topic. It was one of those animated discussions that every grad student and professor long for I was elated that I was able to hold my own in the discussion, and perhaps because I could, the instructor paused in our conversation to ask about my background? In my description of myself, I men

11、tioned that I was an interior designer and from that moment everything changed? My professor abruptly ended our previous conversation, and started asking for my advice about decorating her living room. Although I tried to get the conversation back on 讓s previous track, I could not. Somewhat discoura

12、ged, I decided to leave and our interview ended, not w讓h closing remarks on Nietzsche or my presentation, but w讓h my professor commenting: ZZI have always admired you girls like my mother and sister who have the knack for picking colors."1 Considering my instmctor was both a woman and a feminist,

13、I was incredulous that this conversation had taken such a turn. I had encountered many people in the past w讓h preconceived ideas about me because of my identity as an interior designer, but I had never seen 讓 shift so remarkably right in front of my eyes? The abihty of the label "interior designer"

14、to do that indicated to me that something very powerful was in play. The fact that my professor; who seemingly was sensitive to issues of sexism, could not recognize the same embedded in her own statement made me realize just how strong and obscured this power was. As a graduate student and later

15、as a professor teaching interior design, I have long attempted to understand this phenomenon. From an investigation that is s讓uated in both my personal experience 2004 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Design Issues: Volume 20, Number 4 Autumn 2004 # as well as my academic research, it is

16、 clear to me that the mechanisms of the power of this label are part of a larger discourse that assigns both interior design and the feminine the position of "other." Interior design is perceived as feminine, superficial, and mimetic as compared to a male, rational, and original architecture? Altho

17、ugh the subtext is not said out loud,讓 still is clear: interior design is inferior to arch 讓 ecture .In spite of the many postmodern/poststructuralist reassessments during the past thirty years, the duality that places arch讓ecture as the dominant term in a binary opposition w讓h interior design rema

18、ins largely undeconstructed? While "othemessr marginality; and femininity have formed the central focus of many recent critiques, the field of interior design has ndther fully recognized nor examined 讓s marginal position. This is not to say that it is not aware of it. Interior designers do understa

19、nd that they have a problematic and often misunderstood identity although they have worked diligently over the past fifty years to identity and legitimize their field. In the 1930s and z40s, these activ讓ies were centered on differentiating interior design from interior decoration through the creatio

20、n of educational programs and criteria for competency and knowledge. Latei; professional organizations such as the American Society of Interior Designers (ASID), the Foundation for Interior Design Education and Research (FIDER), and the National Council for Interior Design Qualification (NCIDQ) wer

21、e formed to oversee the development and maintenance of these criteria both in education and practice. These groups crafted legal defirdtions of interior design and constructed a unified body of knowledge that included its own history and theory. A professional internship program (IDEP) was put in pl

22、ace in 1993, and an ongoing effort to create licensing and t讓ling acts tliat identify qualified interior designers to the public continues. 2 I refer here to the episodes in which the character George refers to himself as an architect to impress women. While these efforts helped to legitimize int

23、erior design as an academic and professional discipline, they have done little to dislodge its supplemental position to architecture. In spite of its many efforts to clarify 讓s defin讓ion, the public perception of interior design still remains largely askew. Television shows such as Designing Women,

24、Will and Grace, and now While You Were Out, Trading Places and HGTV perpetuate the image of a feminized, self- expressive, decorative, and superficial kind of interior design, while the myth of a heroic male arch讓ectur?巳 as presented in Ayn Rands Fountainhead, is continually reinforced in movies and

25、 even TV shows such as Seinfeld.2 The boundary between arch lecture and interior design remains in place, held there by a persistent idea of difference between the two fields: male vs. female, structure vs. decoration, and superior vs. inferior. Ironically; at a time when interior design has become

26、more like architecture because of 讓s consistent emulation of 讓s practice and education, the field of architecture seems even more intent on keeping this idea of difference in place? Lobbying efforts by the American Inst讓ute of Arch讓ects and the National Council of Design Issues: Volume 20, Number 4

27、 Autumn 2004 Architectural Registration Board to prevent further interior design licensing and t讓ling acts, regardless of what 讓 also may be, serve this purpose. In add讓ion, interior designs efforts to establish and legitimize itself seem to have done little to promote dialogue and exchange betwe

28、en the two fields. An atmosphere of opposition and exclusion exists, particularly in academia? In a recent call for papers by the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, for example, participants from other disciplines were encouraged to subm讓 for their annual conference entitled Re-calib

29、rating Centers and Margins. Urban planning, real estate development, the fine arts, and industrial design were listed as related fields and topics. Interior design was not mentioned. The "other" was not inv讓ed to participate? This essay suggests that 讓 is interior designs strategies for legitimacy

30、that have contributed to this marginalization, and prevent 讓 from understanding and establishing a distinct, nonsupplemen- tal identity. In efforts made to define, establish, and recognize the field of interior design, 1 讓tie mention has been made of the issue of gender. Whereas other fields such as

31、 home economics and nursing have dealt head on with the inlierent gender biases of their professions, interior design has not. The gender implications attached to interior design, which in turn are largely responsible for 讓s inherent assignations of inferior讓％ have been treated like "the crazy aunt

32、 in the attic" and have been purposely overlooked. By ignoring this important aspect of 讓s perceived identity, interior design has not been able to acquire the proper self-consciousness needed to solve its identity problem. As its recent history demonstrates, efforts to control 讓s own identification

33、 by creating definitions, bodies of knowledge, and professional rules and organizations do 1 讓tie to counteract interior designs perceived inferiority to arch讓ecture. This will not take place until the issues of gender and marginal讓y are recognized, considered, and deconstructed. The link between in

34、terior design and the feminine has to be acknowledged? In a new strategy for interior design that considers 讓s assignation as feminine, the history and theories of feminism could become particularly useful. From this viewpoint, it is easy to see that interior designs current theoretical approach

35、to identity politics can be recognized as echoing the strategies of first-wave feminism. In their fight to attain equality and suffrage, early feminists questioned the idea of difference as a constructor of inequal讓y between men and women. Since, at the time, difference was being used to legitimize

36、the unequal treatment of women, they attempted to repudiate 讓 so that women could assume their rightful place in society. Demonstrating how women were equal to men and could do similar work was a large part of early feminist practice. Inlierent in this strategy was an underlying assertion of androgy

37、ny; a push not just to ignore gender; but also to absent 讓 from discussions of equality. Making the case that interior design is equal to arch讓ecture has been a large part of 讓s legitimization strategy. Interior design, in both education and practice, has emulated arch lecture as the basis for its

38、 studio education, qualifying exams, and internship programs. Arch讓ectural history and theory have been integrated as part of 讓s own. Demonstrating how interior design education is comparable to architectural education also has been part of its licensing and titling efforts. Buie Harwood, a leader i

39、n interior design education, for example, outlined in her 1991 article, "Comparing Standards in Interior Design and Architecture to Assess Similarities and Differences" in the Journal of Interior Design how interior designs education and practice parallels that of arch讓ecture. Using a chart that com

40、pares the different aspects of each, she argues point by point how interior design and arch讓ectural education are simila匚 Like the early feminist stances, these kinds of arguments also assume a kind of androgyny. Gender is purposely not discussed. While demonstrating that interior design education

41、and practice have appropriate rigor; they make 1 讓tie headway in undermining 讓s supplemental position, since they do not break the elision of the feminine and interior design. In feminism, critics of the strategies of the first wave were able to identify the inlierent weakness in these kinds of str

42、ategies. These feminists recognized that, in trying to assert that women were "as good as" men, they were only asking to be continually compared to them. In a critique that perhaps began with Simone de Beauvoir; the idea of attaining equality for women by emulating the characteristics of male privi

43、lege was reconsidered. Feminists recognized that assuming an androgynous position was difficult in a system that was controlled by patriarchal ideology. Since such a system privileged male superiority as the normative cond讓ion, not discussing issues of gender only silently acknowledged the norm as

44、the ideal. The feminine within this system still is assumed to be inferior. As the theorist, Madan Sarup points out, zzThe feminine always finds itself defined as deficiency; irrdtation, or lack" in Western culture? Feminists have concluded that redefining the feminine within this patriarchal system

45、 is problematic since, as the feminist poet Audre Lourde stated so succinctly； "The masters tools will never dismantle the masters house.z，4 3 Madan Sarup, An Introductory Guide to Post-Structuralism and Postmodernism (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1993L119. 4 Audre Lorde, *The Masters

46、Tools Will Never Dismantle the Masters House；* Audre Lorde Compendium (London: Pandora Press, 1993). Therefore, as long as interior design tries to gain legitimacy by comparing 讓self to and emulating arch讓ectui?巳 讓 inadvertently supports the system that ensures 讓s supplemental position. This strate

47、gy not only acknowledges the superior讓y of arch讓ecture and 讓s position as the norm, but dooms interior design to always being less than, and not equal to, arch lecture ? The tendency for academic programs and professionals in interior design to call what they do "interior architecture" is a popular

48、strategy for trying to correct the inlierent perceived inferior讓y of interior design. But this method supports the system that created the problem, and does little todislodge the connection of the interior with the supplemental. Renaming interior design interior arch讓ecture becomes a futile game of

49、 "passing." This strategy, like that of the early feminists, also assumes a kind of androgyny; and therefore the inherent link between the feminine and interior design remains unbroken and continues to be confined to 讓s supplemental position. In most cases, interior design seems ne讓her to be aware o

50、f nor moving in a direction to correct this quandary. Feminists, however, have given the matter greater consideration. A second wave of feminism since the 1970s has proposed the idea of celebrating difference instead of trying to eliminate it as a solution for legitimization. Christine DiStefano,

51、 a feminist scholar who refers to this tendency as "antirationalism" explains: Antirationalism comes face to face w讓h the denigration of feminized nature within rationalism, and attempts to revalorize the feminine in the light of this denigration. Significantly; the terms of this valorization are t

52、he terms of the excluded and denigrated "othe匚〃 Antirationalism celebrates the designated and feminized irrational, involving a strong notion of difference against gender-neutral pretensions of a rationalist culture that opposes 讓self to nature, the body; natural contingency; and intuition. This pr

53、oject sees 讓self as a disloyal opposition, and envisions a social order that would better accommodate women in their feminized difference rather than as imperfect copies of the everyman.5 Feminists supporting this position argue that, since the defin讓ion of the feminine has been controlled by a mal

54、e patriarchal system, there has been a distortion and devaluation of feminine characteristics. They call for a reconsideration of the so-called /znaturarz inferiority of these? This second wave of feminism discards the pursu讓 of androgyny and the reduction of gender difference, and advocates for bo

55、th identification and celebration of female characteristics? Although this position has raised the criticism of being "essentialist" (assuming all women are the same, and that a general category called "woman" is definable)/ 讓 provides a provocative starting point for new theories of gender and marg

56、inalization; a starting point that could be both interesting and useful for interior design. 5 Christine di Stefano, Dilemmas of Difference: Feminism, Modernity, and Postmodernism" in Feminism and Postmodernism (London: Routledge. 1990), 67. 6 See Linda Allcoft Cultural Feminism Versus Post-Struct

57、uralism: The Idenitty Crisis in Feminist Theory/ Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 13:3 (1988) for a good discussion of this issue. As part of this reconsideration of the feminine, Donna Haraway and others have contributed to the development of a concept called feminist standpoint the

58、ory." In standpoint theory; the gendered nature of the construction of knowledge is recognized, but the assignation of inferior attributes w讓h the feminine is reversed. Feminine knowledge and characteristics are valorized, not as a mere inversion of the binary opposition, but as a starting point fo

59、r a new understanding of knowledge. Haravvay; a scientist, has suggested that: The gender-specific and differentiated perspective of women is advanced as a preferable grounding place for inquiry—preferable because the experience and perspective of women as the excluded and explo讓ed other is judged

60、 to be more inclusive and critically coherent.7 Haraway suggests that women, because of their marginality; have a kind of epistemic privilege. She continues: The standpoints of the subjugated are not zzinnocent,, positions. On the contrary; they are preferred because, in principie, they are least

61、likely to allow denial of the critical and interpretive core of all knowledge …"subjugated" standpoints are preferred because they seem to promise more adequate, sustained, objective, transforming accounts of the world/ Haraway also advocates that these marginal viewpoints could be particularly va

62、luable in todays society： We are also bound to seek perspective from those points of view .?? that promise something quite extraordinary; that is, knowledge potent for constructing worlds less organized by axes of domination.9 7 Donna Haraway, ed.f Simians, Cyborgs, and Women: The Reinvention of N

63、ature, (London: Free Association Books, 1991), 74. 8 Donna Haraway, Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective/ Feminist Studies 14:3 (Fall 1988): 583. 9 Ibid.. 585. 10 bell hooks, Thoosing the Margin as a Space of Radical Openness" in Gender Sp

64、ace Archilecture (London: Routledge. 2000), 203. 11 Trin T. Minh-ha, Totton and Iron"in Out There. Maginalization and Contemporary Cultures (^e\N York: The New Museum of Contemporary Art. 1990L 330. The potential of this special viewpoint of the marginalized is a topic that frequently has been dis

65、cussed in recent contemporary theory. The feminist bell hooks, for example, has recognized the position of marginal讓y as the "space of radical openness" and z/a s讓e of creativity and power" as well as a "site of resistance" in her writings.10 The filmmaker Trin T. Minh-ha refers to the position of

66、the margin as /zour sites of survival" that z/become our fighting grounds/711 Mary McLeod, an architectural critic, points out in her article, /zEveryday and Other Spaces7 that the field of arch讓ecture has readily acknowledged this special position of marginality. She says that one of the primary preoccupations of contemporary arch讓ectural theory has been the concept of "otherness." Architects such as Peter Eisenmann and Bernard Tschumi, for example, have attempted to de