Factory Love: People, Industry and Architecture

Advanced Theory PaperRobert Bowen

.

For My Neglected Friends.

fi g. I, Lewis Hine, Child Laborer, Newberry, South Carolina, 1908

Factory Love

Advanced Theory Paper forMasters of Architecture

School of Architecture Planning and GeomaticsBwnrob003

Plagiarism Declaration.

I Know that plagiarism is wrong. Plagiarism is to use another’s work as though it is my own. I have used the Harvard convention for cita-tion and referencing. Each contribution/quotation in this paper of another has been referenced. This paper is my own work.

R.M Bowen4-May 2013

Contents.

Part 1. Inroduction. 1.Watermills. 2.Industrial Cities & Rational Thinking. 3.What the Words Tell Us. 7.What Architecture Was. 9.Machines for Looking At. 11.Modern Madness. 16.Conclusion Part 1. 18.

Part 2.A Comfortable Feeling. 20.Mimesis. 22.Beauty & Rationality. 25.Man/Chameleon. 27.Heidegger & Technology. 30.Conclusion. 32.

Bibliography. 34.

Aside.

Meat. 2. Disconnection. 4.Blindness. 6.Geography. 8.Mechanisation. 9.Invisibility. 14.

Start.Plagiarism Declaration. IPreface. II

Factory Love

Preface.

This paper forms one aspect of my Master’s of Architecture thesis. There are another two avenues of investigation which together with this one culminate in the design of a building. This paper investigates the application of place- identity theories as an opportunity for architects to provide meaning to industrial buildings. It develops this application using a historical narrative that examines the history of the design of industrial buildings. Running tangential is the historical narrative which led to these investigations. This narrative follows and mildly re-manipulates the life of Sir David Pieter de Villiers Graaff, a capitalist extraordinaire1 and pioneer of cold storage in South Africa.

fi g. 1, LS Lowry - Riverbank

1. Graaff’s total wealth at his death is unclear but in 2007 the Graaff Trust alone amounted to over R700million(Sir David Pieter de Villiers Graaff, First baronet of De Grendel, 2011)

The third and linking aspect of my thesis is the application of Graaff’s industrial spirit which I intend to apply to the design of contemporary cold storage technology. My thesis proposes an industrial building which follows the cold storage tradition set up by Graaff but appreciates the requirements of public responsibility and offers architects an opportunity to reform the negative perception industry holds.

The word ‘shambles’ seems a suitable place from which to start this paper. It is a word with a peculiar history. The Latin root from which it comes holds no menace; Scamnum once defi ned “a stool or bench serving as a seat, step, or support for the feet”. Adapted by Old English it became scamol and referred to a bench, stool or table. The table it most commonly came to defi ne was used to chop meat. Middle English gave us shamel and the compound shamelhouse, which came to mean “slaughterhouse”. Today the Merriam-Webster defi nes the word shambles as “a state of great disorder or confusion”. This use of the word is fi rst recorded in 1926; in this paper it is used to describe the approach taken by architects in the design of industrial buildings.This paper aims to illustrate how the architectural profession has skirted the design of industrial buildings. That is not to say that fi ne examples of industry design do not exist - across timeframes and movements – but rather that this paper critiques the position architects have taken towards the design of industrial buildings2. Part 1 of this paper will include a chronological discussion of the design of industrial buildings; this aims to contextualise the current position held by the architectural industry towards industrial design. It will also describe some of the environmental, social and economic impacts of industry and the reactions engendered amongst the public over time by these impacts. The second part of the paper proposes the application of Mimesis as described by Neil Leach (2006) as a means by which architects may fi nd the latent opportunities hidden and neglected in the design of industrial buildings. The place-identity theory proposed by Leach further helps to directly confront the social position towards ‘dirty industry’ which our architectural ancestors helped to perpetuate.That this paper opened with a description of the word shambles is no accident. The meat industry succinctly displays the geographical migration and shift of public opinion with regards to industry. As such it will act as a case study which runs separate but parallel in order to contextualise these issues in the present.

1.|

Part 1.Introduction.

2. This paper acknowledges that ‘industrial design’ is a particular fi eld of de-sign in and of itself; however, the term is used here to refer to the design of buildings of an industrial nature.

Factory Love

|2.

Watermills.

Meat.Very rarely does one consider the slaughter of those beasts which provide us our meat. The recent meat scandals to have rocked the world bear testament to the disconnection we bear between our food and the place of its processing.

Industrial buildings have existed in many forms throughout history, whether they are the ancient pigeon tower ‘fertilizer factories’ of the middle east or shaduf (water lifts) employed by the Egyptians. Fascinating as they are, this paper is interested in the form of industry birthed during the industrial revolution and which permeates modern society’s approach to design and consideration of industry. Water, the giver of life, gave life also to the industrial revolution. Stemming from a long tradition the watermill ground its way to a place of industrial innovation. In the 1770s water mills began to operate in increasing numbers and increasingly began to service needs beyond the grinding of corn. Power transferred by drive shaft launched spinning mills and the textile industry into history. (Jones , 1985)Mills had never attracted the attention of architects and mill owners had never been particularly inclined to embellish them with symbols of status. Aside from craftsmen the professional expertise employed in mill creation fell only upon what today could be labelled as a form of engineering. Mill-wrights would travel from river to river advising on gearing, types of water wheel and placement of grinding stones. This broad knowledge did not stretch into the refi ned fi eld of architectural theory. “Without the means to undertake a grand tour, their interests, training and the demands of their clients could scarcely have led them along this particular path of classical learning” (Jones , 1985) The mills were simple narrow buildings. The structure was limited by the technology of stone load bearing walls and timber beams, but was suffi cient to house and support the needs of the mill machinery. Millwrights were creating buildings to house machinery whilst architects did not concern themselves with the typology.

Watermills

3.|

Industrial Cities &Rational Thinking.

fi g. 2, Early mill gearing

Industrialisation gave birth to urbanisation. Overpopulated cities were characterised by dark plumes of soot laden smoke and sickness but also opportunity. Lower life expectancies and high child fatality rates couldn’t hold back displaced farmers seeking work in new industries.3 The scourge of Blake’s ‘Dark Satanic Mills’, sent the new middle classes many of whom were industrialists, to the suddenly popular suburbs, where one might fi nd clean air, space and less deadly disease.(Smith, 2012) The revolution however, was well on its way and in 1851 Crystal Palace celebrated mass production in the Great Exhibition of Works of Industry of all nations. Crystal Palace contained within its fabric means of its own production.

3. Enclosure of commons resulted in farmers and their families being displaced from rural areas. (Smith, 2012)

Factory Love

|4.

Hailed as the father of modern construction the building was of prefabricated elements and designed with permanent features which assisted in the construction process. This would-be victory for architects does however belong to gardeners since Joseph Paxton had been experimenting with this technology in order to build green houses at Chatsworth Gardens. (Brockman, 1956) For some the building its contents and means of production were considered inferior to those crafted by man. These were opinions

Disconnection.The perception we hold for animals according to historian Richard Bulliet, has evolved such that there exists two conditions, domesticity and post domesticity. The domestic period is characterised by structures that normalise daily contact with animals, in contrast the post domestic period is characterised by a disconnection both physical and psychological from the animal products of our consumption.

4. Today a cucumber frame might be considered bio-mimicry.

held by men truly infl uential in the fi eld of construction. Pugin appreciated the qualities of space it produced but concluded that it was ‘not architecture; it is engineering of the highest merit and excellence…’ and Ruskin declared it a ‘glass monster’ and ‘cucumber frame’.4 (Jones, 1985)Augustus Pugin was a man who did much to spurn the popular opinion of industry. He published an illustrated pamphlet Contrasts, which juxtaposed fi fteenth century London with that of the early nineteenth. He further linked Gothic architecture, good values and god. Pugin argued that Gothic architecture was functionally inspired and the embodiment of the rational ideal. (Hill, 2007)

fi g. 3, Original Sketchof Crystal Palace, with rigourous rational structure.

Industrial Cities & Rational Thinking

5.|

John Ruskin furthered Pugin’s notion and bemoaned the loss of craft. He advocated mo-rality in buildings through structure, material and construction. For Ruskin the architect became an agent of social engagement through good design. (Jones, 1985)Eugene-Emmanuel Viollet-le-Duc was greatly inspired by the honesty to materials as described by Ruskin. He advocated that style should emanate from the use of rational

fi g. 4Gustave Dore’depicts Ludgate Hilland a dirty London

Factory Love

|6.

Blindness.

“A tension emerges in this era between a growing fondness of some animals and the consumption of others…continues to consume animal products in abundance, but psychologically, its members experience feelings of guilt, shame, and disgust when they think(as seldom as possible) about industrial processes by which domestic animals are rendered into products..” Richard Bulliet (2005). Many sociolo-gists have linked the approach of meat production to a collective forgetting which enables us to consume these products. This ‘col-lective forgetting’ one could argue is the case for many morally questionable industries by which we benefi t.The slaughterhouse emerged as a unique institution in the early nineteenth century as part of a larger transition from an agrarian to an industrialised system, accompanied by increased urbanisa-tion, technological developments and concern about public hygiene. (Brantz, 2008)This came about not long after the period in which animals were slaughtered in a range of locations with no particular specifi ci-ty other than being somewhere between the beasts location and its

source of consumption.

fi g. 5 Meat on rails at the Union Stock yards, a slaughter house of massive scale.

Blindness

7.|

What the Words tell Us.

Reconciling rational thinking with the preoccupation with style was proving to be diffi cult for architecture, which longed for the legitimacy and clarity of engineering and science. This desire to be a scientifi c trade is neatly outlined by Adrian Forty in his essay Spatial Mechanics: Science Metaphors in Architecture (1999). Forty approaches the relationship between architecture and science through the written and spoken language thereby being able to determine its meaning and application.Forty opens with ‘circulation” which today in architectural jargon refers to the movement of people through buildings. This metaphor drawn from physiology is nearly indispensable in contemporary practice. Forty identifi es his earliest known use of “circulation” to describe the movement of people in Viollet-Le-Duc’s second volume of his Lectures. “The appropriation of “circulation” as an architectural term coincides closely with the adoption of other scientifi c metaphors which have become commonplace in architectural vocabulary,

“…its introduction must be seen as a symptom of the desire to bring scientifi c method into architecture. Architecture required a means of breaking free from the phenomenal reality of built work if it wished to approximate a scientifi c method. Circulation satisfi ed this requirement rather well.”(Forty, 1999)

terms such as “function”, “structure”…” (Forty, 1999) This metaphor provided a means of talking about a building beyond its physical materiality in effect it provided a discrete system of architectural description.

In forty’s essay he concludes by drawing attention to the fact that prior to the late eighteenth century there was no distinction between architecture and science and hence no need for metaphor. This is paired with his observation that metaphors only work by teasing out a possible likeness of unlike things and hence he concludes that these metaphors serve only to illustrate the unlikeness of architecture to science.

fi g. 6 Early diagram describing blood circulation

Factory Love

|8.

Forty succeeds in illustrating how the profession of architecture was desperate to undergo a revolution such as that which had transformed economics and means of production. Engineering had emerged as a separate fi eld of study. And yet architecture was left creating metaphors in order to justify their rationality and ‘scientifi c’ approach to design.

Geography.Reformers argued at the start of the eighteenth century for the relocation of places of slaughter. The case was made for public slaughter houses where they could be properly monitored and cleaned. (Otter, 2008) The abattoir was born in early 19th century France it’s purpose being to slaughter animals for consumption, outside of city centres (Brantz 2008) Public authorities in other Western European countries tried to concentrate the slaughter of animals outside town walls. (Thomas 1983) Ironically these ‘public’ slaughter houses were built with the intention of making them less visible. (Fitzgerald, 2010) fi g. 7 An entry from Diderot’s Encyclopedia

18th Century butchers tools

Blindness

9.|

What Architecture was.

describing

“The whole background to the modern architecture of the period was thus in considerable confusion, dominated fi rst for the ‘battle of the styles’ and secondly by the search among all variations of both styles for the style which should meet the functional and aesthetic requirements of an age which had, since the eighteenth century, made greater technical advances than had ever been seen.” (Brockman, 1974)

Architecture as Brockman describes above, had, styles aside, advanced little. The lessons of crystal palace had not been learned. Those advances which had been made were primarily by engineers who experimented with new materials and means of construction. Many beautiful buildings of an industrial nature were built during the period in various styles. This was a result of the end of the patronage system which gave rise to commercial set ups. However, Industrial buildings on the whole were never a celebrated type, too often falling into the realm of young inexperienced architects who concerned themselves with only appearance. Further more rational thinking applied to industry placed the needs of the machine above those of people and engineers were concerned only with the design of shelter for their machines. (Brockman, 1974)Poor lighting, ventilation and temperature extremes were the built embodiment of harsh conditions laid upon the labourer. Though these were later to improve, the machine and that which housed it had left its mark upon the common man’s psyche. Architecture was about to experience an

Factory Love

|10.

fi g. 8 Here Brintons Carpet factory in Kiddermister is beautifully represented but be not fooled, the building was not pleasant

Architecture was about to experience an overhaul in tune with the new thinking that had emerged and while much was to change, public opinion would still frown upon places of production.

fi g. 9 Not the intrior of Brintons but an effective means of avoiding the trap of nostalgia none the less. Conditions for labourers in factories during the period were rough, in many places, they still are.

What Architecture Was.

11.|

Machines for Looking At.

In Towards a New Architecture, Le Corbusier identifi es, with no small amount of envy, the longing for rational purity engineering had produced, “Our engineers are healthy and virile, active, useful, balanced and happy in their work. Our architects are disillusioned and unemployed, boastful or peevish.” He also bemoaned ‘unwor-thy houses’ which he compared to an old and no longer worthy tool. This stemmed from a belief that the use of rational mathematical thinking of engineers produced an aesthetic which was superior, for it expressed the period of its creation. (Le Cor-busier, 1923)Like those thinkers before him wished the fi eld of architecture would join the ranks of science and engineering.He was convinced traditional houses crushed ones spirit when he said, “our indus-trial friends seem sheepish and shrivelled like tigers in a cage; it is very clear they are happier in their factories...” Le Corbusier set out to employ a new aesthetic

inspired by industry. (Le Corbusier, 1923)

fi g. 10. Holcomb & Hoke factory interior.

Factory Love

|12.

In attempting to fi nd the aesthetic of the machine age, Le Corbusier in collaboration with Amedéé developed Purism. Purism promoted a sleek, refi ned and simplifi ed design free of ornamentation. It desired an architecture as effi cient as the factory line.The famous quote “The house is a machine for living in…” clearly illustrates Le Corbusier’s intentions for architecture. Despite this, the house did not become a machine in which we live. Rather Le Corbusier employed the aesthetic of the machine through a knowledge transfer from engineering. This he believed would

bring architecture into the machine age. That the past was seen to have failed the profession and engineering held the answer was evident in other writings of the time which also leant towards the cases made by Le Corbusier. As such we fi nd Siegfried Gidion stating

“…new attitude towards life manifests itself much sooner in the objective fi elds – such as construction, industry – than those fi elds that lie close to us. Only now is the housing form being seized by those hidden forces a century ago drove man to the constructional and industrial attitude” (Gidion, 1928)

and Knud Lonberg-holm declaring in 1929

“The architectural ideology based on aesthetics has lost its validity in the industrial society. The conception of architecture as a fi ne art in contradistinction to the creations of science and technique, and the resulting conception of form as a value in itself, has brought the architect to exhibit an instinctive antipathy toward the industrial society’s mass- production and toward its negation of arbitrary and absolute form, mass, gravity and of buildings as monuments and media for self expression.”(Knud Lonberg-Holm, 1929)

While architects recognised that mere ornamentation was to miss the advances the world had made, they still looked to decorate through a ‘mass produced aesthetic’.

fi g. Swee

Machines for Looking At

13.|

11 Children, cheaper to pay and easier to feed. eper and doffer in a cotton mill.

Factory Love

|14.

During the 1930s after economists had been forced to abandon their beliefs in a self regulating mechanism, governments began to use industry as a means of positive action. This inevitably led to questions of industrial locations and birthed a relation between industry and planning as is outlined by Brockman, “The question of erecting houses in factory areas, a matter always taken for granted in the days of the fi rst industrial revolution, was later considered to be entirely wrong in princi-ple, noise and pollution being the deciding factor against such action” (Brockman, 1974)

Mechanisation.

While examples of well thought out new towns, such as Welwyn and Letchworth provided useful studies the architect still played no major roll. As late as March 1960, it was written in THE MANAGER, “Whilst the annual value of new indus-trial building in the United Kingdom is second only to housing, it is estimated that architects are responsible for no more than 50 per cent of it” (Brockman, 1974)

Slaughter houses became industrialised when the conveyor belt was introduced. This shifted control from butchers to managers. The infamous Union Stockyards epitomise this industrialisation which operated on a massive scale and with it came an urbanised slum which grew behind the stock pens. (Smith, 2012)

The modern movement remained on the periphery looking in towards engineers and industrialists who were generating form at a rate similar to that of the machinery it served to shelter. Architects in the design of industrial buildings resigned themselves in all but a few cases to little more than decoration.

fi g. 1for s

Machines for Looking At

15.|

Invisibility.

Slaughter houses were designed to be non-descript, designed to look like any other factory. Fitzgerald quoting Villaes describes slaughterhouses as “a place that is no place”, the geography and architecture of slaughter houses served then as they do now to avoid a “collective cultural guilt”. The ignorance of industrialised meat production is endemic of many form of

12, The Union Stockyards, a factory slaughter

Factory Love

|16.

Modern Madness.

Conditions for labourers in factories had improved little. The division of labour had reduced people to servants of basic task, mere cogs in productive machines. Giedion in 1948 traced the history of the assembly line. In it he notes the emergence of Unions which sought to defend labourers from the harsh conditions in which they were expected to work. Giedion’s paper illustrates a strong division between the “production at any cost” attitude of the period and its negative repercussions on people. The social conscious still very much despised the machine whilst enjoying that which it produced.Charlie Chaplin’s fi lm Modern Times humorously brought this condition to life. In the fi lm the same motion of tightening a nut permeates all aspects of the lead character’s existence. The factory becomes a mad house as the assembly line is accelerated and the lead loses his mental balance. All objects, from the breast of a fat woman to the nose of the foreman become a nut which need tightening. Man has lost part of himself to the machine and through exaggeration the problem within the human core is revealed. (Giedion, 1948) By the nature of its development, industry strove to fi nd effi ciency, often the expense was human.Architecture from the early days of the industrial revolution due to concerns of style and other distractions has found itself on the periphery of industrial design. The application of rational thinking was late to permeate the realm of architecture, and when it did it was very much the same stylistic processes under a new veil.

fi g. 13, Charlie Chaplin, one with the

Modern madness

17.|

All the while the industrial building evolved to become less humane serving primarily the needs of the machines housed within. Pollution, noise and modern planning saw factories and people removed from each other alienating the machine ever more. Contemporary planning schemes have seen to it that for the most part people and industry remain divided. While architecture sought to justify itself in the new age through reason, the design of industrial buildings for people and machines had never been a serious concern. The modern age had not reconciled architects and people, nor had it found the clarity it envied in the engineering and science trades.

machine in Modern Times.

Factory Love

|18.

Conclusion Part 1.

Part 1 of this paper aimed to establish an explanation for the current condition which exists between architecture and the design of industrial buildings. It also set out to make clear the estrangement the average person feels towards industry and machines.Today population growth and urbanisation stretch the availability of usable space to new limits. What looms is a clash between man and the industries it has come to rely on. This collision should be seen as an opportunity for architects to meaningfully reas-sert a presence within industrial design. While an engineer may design a place for a machine, an architect has the expertise to imbue that place with value for people. Though industry and people may seem disparate a fi ne example exists. Where the produce of machine directly benefi ted man, the space became people orientated and architects applied design appropriately. I refer to the train station.If industrial buildings served communities beyond that which they produced and the employment they provided how might architects facilitate the successful inte-gration of man and machine? To this conundrum I propose applying some of the strategies as set out by Neil leach in his work Camoufl age. This forms Part 2 of the paper.

Conclusion Part 1.

19.|

Factory Love

|20.

Part 2.A Comfortable Feeling.

The need to relate to place, to connect to the physical and cultural environment is a crucial discourse in architecture. Identity, Leach argues is “no longer a fi xed condition but an ever re-negotiable site of individual expression” (Leach, 2006). Part 2 of this paper argues that this fl uid condition of identity can potentially be manipulated in order to construct a place-identity culture within the industrialised condition. In Camoufl age Neil leach investigates how one identifi es with place. Human beings seek means of concealment within our surroundings. We defi ne ourselves by the communities, jobs, or fashions we subscribe to, we are constantly forced to do so. This argues Leach is governed by a deep desire to feel connected to a place. Leach calls upon diverse fi elds of academia to investigate the architectural implications of such behaviour. Camoufl age describes a set of visual and strategic operations. In particular it will be argued below that mimesis can assist in forming a place-identity relationship with buildings of industry and counter the estrangement perceived of technology.

fi g. 14, A mexican carpet factory

A Comfortable Feeling

21.|

Factory Love

|22.

Mimesis.

Leach negotiates the processes by which we identify with the world through the work of Walter Benjamin and Theodor W Adorno. The mimesis of which is relevant to this essay is not the simple ‘imitation’ of Plato. Rather it is Benjamin’s mimesis, which should be understood as the creative reinterpretation of an original and Adorno’s expansion there on which inspects the sensual there of. For Adorno, it is a psychoanalytic term adapted from Freud which offers a means of identifying with the external world.

Benjamin makes the beautiful observation of children playing hide and seek in order to best describe the principle of mimesis. The child hiding behind a curtain has become so perfectly at one with the environment that in order to escape it he must “utter a shriek of self deliverance to free himself from the spell under which he made himself identical to the interior landscape around him.”(Leach, 2006) This joyful moment describes the balance of mimesis held between assimilating to the other whilst remaining separate.

fi g. 15, Young girl in cotton mill, her tightly tied hair suggestive of the repitition of the machine behind her.

Mimesis

23.|

Assimilation is a key aspect to mimesis. As Leach reminds us through the words of Adorno, mimesis is a form of assimilation not to be confused with imitation, “Mimetic behaviour does not imitate something but assimilates itself to that something.’ In order for this mimesis to occur it is required that a process of identi-fi cation take place. When one stares at a painting one enters that painting, either fi guratively or metaphorically. It is a regression to a child like open mindedness. Mimesis then is reliant on an activation of the imagination. (Leach, 1996)

Imagination is at work in mimesis and is responsible for the reconciliation between object and subject which operates between fantasy and reality. The fantasy we create is not an escape, rather it’s a door way to an ontologically charged reality freed from the limits of an instrumentalised view of the world. It is easily done by children and daydreaming adults. Absorbed by an image is to be transported into another place and in this way to relate to it. It is a “creative engagement with an object” which fuels a process of symbolic identifi cation that allows us to assimilate and feel comfortable with said object. (Leach, 1996)

fi g. 16, 9 p.m in Indianna Glassworks

Factory Love

|24.

Imagination is at work in mimesis and is responsible for the reconciliation between objet and subject which operates between fantasy and reality. The fantasy we cre-ate is not an escape, rather it’s a door way to an ontologically charged reality freed from the limits of an instrumentalised view of the world. It is easily done by children and daydreaming adults. Absorbed by an image is to be transported into another place and in this way to relate to it. It is a “creative engagement with an object” which fuels a process of symbolic identifi cation that allows us to assimilate and feel comfortable with said object. (Leach, 1996)

fi g. 17, Simple tasks requiring little skill encouraged child labour.

This creative moment on the part of the subject identifi es with the object so that the object, industrial machinery or not, is charged with symbolic signifi cance and is

Mimesis

25.|

according to leach “appropriated as part of the symbolic background through which individuals constitute their identity.” (Leach, 2005)This symbolic attachment does not instantly occur but is instead a gradually engendered through the ‘mimetic impulse’. Leach implores us to consider the question of temporality, for symbolic signifi cance often shifts over time. The way we engage with buildings is not a static condition; we are constantly assimilating to our built environment. Little has been written on the question of our reception to buildings over time, but it is fair to say our attitudes are towards specifi c buildings are constantly evolving. This shifting over time is neatly outlined by the argument Adorno takes with Loos.

Beauty & Rationality.

Adorno understand mimesis slightly differently to Benjamin, for him it is not conceptual but rather sensuous and associated with the childlike world of touching, cuddling, caressing and the like. Mimesis breaks free of conceptual thought and it is with this conception that he interrogates Ornament and Crime by Adolf loos. (Leach, 2006)Loos considered ornament wasteful and decadent while Adorno argued that no object could possibly be beautiful to the extent that it is of no function or perfectly functional to the extent that it is without beauty. “There is no chemically pure purposefulness set up as the opposite of the purpose free aesthetic”. Adorno went on to make the case that this attempt to abolish style was itself a style since it took much of its ‘function’ and applied it in ways which were not functional at all. What really irked Adorno was that Loos insisted on reading art in strictly rational terms. Adorno argued that for Loos ornament was seen as only degenerate, as a decadent pleasure and symbolism as redundant expression. (Leach 2006) What Adorno reminds us is that “What begins as a symbol, becomes ornament and fi nally appears superfl uous” and yet many ornamental superfl uous activities carry a social function, such as dance.

Factory Love

|26.

Leach then links this to the tattoo which, considered as near criminal by Loos, serves as a form of mimesis. It is through this social behaviour that even in contem-porary times one decorates the body in order to read ourselves into our surround-ings and identify with a group, or place.Mimesis allows us to read ourselves onto our environments without being fully conscious of doing so. It requires an imaginative moment on the part of the subject who identifi es with the object and in so doing invests in it a symbolic importance, this according to Leach “is appropriated as part of the symbolic background through which identity itself is constituted”.If in the design of industrial landscapes the architect might articulate the values of a person and refl ect them back, they may in this way create a mechanism by which a person may begin to feel at home. Through this use of Adorno’s mimesis an architect may assist in the natural inscribing of ourselves into place by acting as a form of mediation. (Leach, 1996)

fi g. 18. Cotton mills were happy to employ children.

Beauty & Rationality

27.|

Man & Chameleon.

The principle by which insects and other creatures blend into nature is worth investigation. It should be noted that the corollary of blending in is standing out. As an analogy to human behaviour we can apply a process of identifi cation whereby the architecture becomes the background from which we form an identity through a process of blending in, standing out or oscillating between the two. (Leach, 1996)The chameleon provides a useful creature of investigation; it has been the source or fascination for centuries based on its colour changing ability. Recent research has revealed that the chameleon only appears to blend in or be camoufl aged when in a relaxed state and spends as much of its time in a different hue. James Martin explains how when angry they will take on vibrant hues of yellow and orange. These changes in colour are tactical and dependent on whether the creature wishes to blend in or stand out.

fi g. 19.Young Knitter In Tenn. Knit Mill 1912/ 1914- 11 Year Old Girl

Factory Love

|28.

The chameleon relies heavily on the visual, as do we. Much like this creature we use visual techniques to form identity. This extends not just to our adaptation to the environment but also to those around us. Suiting the mood we blend in or stand out from buildings and the social situations in which we fi nd ourselves. The noteworthy observation Leach makes however is that this chameleon like urge occurs not only on a physical level but also a psychic one. As Leach states “It is necessary to absorb visual material within a psychic framework, and to invest it with symbolic signifi cance in order to identify with it. This process then operates beyond the level of surface effects.” This urge to assimilate or differentiate argues Leach “is grounded in questions of personal identity.” A fi ne example of this might be experienced when one enters into a night club in a foreign country. The music playing is your favourite type of music and you feel right at home. Despite the fact that those around you speak a different language and you are foreign, you fi t right in. It is this power of music that design of industrial buildings should employ.

fi g. 20, Tight spaces were not uncommon and had to be negotiated with care.

Man & Chameleon

29.|

Should we wish to allow people to read into the ‘foreignness’ of an industrial building it may be necessary to design with this natural chameleonic behaviour in mind. What the above does optimistically point towards is the acceptance people slowly make of even shocking spaces. For instance those buildings which outrage the public often are overlooked and no longer shocking some years later. The Pompidou centre with its industrial feel was at fi rst met with outrage but has over time become a well loved Parisian landmark. Knowing this, could one identify faster with a machine, if that which houses it already relates and feels familiar?

fi g. 21, Bibb Mill No. 1, Macon, Ga. Many youngsters here. Some boys and girls were so small they had to climb up on to the spinning frame to mend broken threads and to put back

Factory Love

|30.

Heidegger & Technology.

Part 1 of this paper described architects and much of society’s fear of industry and the associated technology. Leach tackles this phobia by positioning himself counter to Heidegger’s position towards technology. While Heidegger is not against technology per say, his arguments do lead to a notion of alienation from the essence of technology. His overlooking of ‘appropriation’ (in this sense meant familiarisation over time) offers Leach the opening to challenge this by declaring “Those who argue that technology is the perpetual source of alienation clearly overlooks the potential for human beings to absorb the novel and unusual within their symbolic framework”. (Leach, 2000) Part 1 of this paper described architects and much of society’s fear of industry and the associated technology. Leach tackles this phobia by positioning himself counter to Heidegger’s position towards technology. While Heidegger is not against technology per say, his arguments do lead to a notion of alienation from the essence of technology. His overlooking of ‘appropriation’ (in this sense meant familiarisation over time) offers Leach the opening to challenge this by declaring “Those who argue that technology is the perpetual source of alienation clearly overlooks the potential for human beings to absorb the novel and unusual within their symbolic framework”. (Leach, 2000) What Leach is getting at is that the object for Heidegger is restricted and defi ned only by its ‘standing reserve’5 . That the object may be viewed any other way is not entertained, there is no opportunity for the object to be reappropriated. Leach poses this rebuttal, “Just as one can question whether the ‘authenticity ‘

5 Heidegger’s term for humankinds treatment of the world where everything is seen as a potential resource for exploitation, this he claims lies at the heart of modern technology. (Leach, 2000)

fi g. 23 MidNight at the glassworks, 1908

Heidegger & Technology

31.|

fi g. 22, At machine is Stanislaus Beauvais, has worked in spinning

or indeed ‘inauthenticity’ (in Heideggerian terms) of an artefact will endure once memory of its creation is lost’, so technology can never be seen to be an enduring site of alienation. Technology is always open to poetic appropriation.”Mimesis operates with a degree control, but that does not make it a part of rationality. Rather it should be looked at as rationality’s magical counter part. As Leach states “ If mimesis is to be perceived as a form of correspondence with the outside world which is articulated within the aura of the work or art, then enlightenment rationality, with its effective split between subject and object, and increasing emphasis on knowledge-as-quantifi cation over knowledge-as-sensuous correspondence, represents the opposite pole”.

Factory Love

|32.

Conclusion.

The rationalisation and ordering of everything according to scientifi c principles leaves the vast potential of mimesis overlooked. This links with part 1 of this paper. The sharp blade of rationality was used by architects to cut themselves from the meaningful design of industrial buildings. With no room for sensuous engagement and neglected by the architect, man became the servant of the machine, the machine for whom engineers sought to design only shelter. This coupled with pollution, noise and horrifi c working conditions across generations led to a tradition of dislike amongst the general populace. This despite the mitigating desire we possess to ‘grow into’ the unfamiliar. (Leach, 2006)Modern zoning schemes saw industry removed to remote locations. This distancing in effect removed the opportunity for people to assimilate with such buildings. Today an irrational fear still permeates; Leach has shown how it permeates philosophy through the works of Heidegger. Yet it holds a physical presence through too. This fear is irrational since the impulse to assimilate is ingrained within human nature. What once seems foreign we have shown can through mimesis become familiar. This is evident with ipods, satellite dishes and aircraft which all at one point seemed foreign but now form part of our relational correspondence with the world. (Leach, 2006)By 2050 the UN expects city populations to have grown from 6.3billionto 9.3billion. (UN, 2004) It is here that architects can play a role in mediating the impending collision between industry and people, such that it becomes benefi cial for both. This paper proposes the use of mimesis as a tool for aiding in the formation of place-identity. Buildings offer an opportunity to articulate, with the machine-other, a relational correspondence which is inherent in the concept of mimesis. This approach to design does not seek to fi nd an ‘identity’ formed through architecture but rather serves to build a connection between people and place. Should architects apply these mimetic devices they may fi nd a means of positively augmenting a place-identity relationships between man and buildings of industry. If architects rise to the challenge and design with mimesis in mind they may fi nd their identity redeemed and their desire for rational legitimacy abated.I close with a painting by Lawrence Stephen Lowry entitled An Industrial Town. The painting succeeds in softening the harshness of industry and depicting townsfolk

Conclusion

33.|

as they joyfully go about their recreational activities on a winters day. The spires of churches, chimneys, electricity poles and fence pegs are slightly similar, family even. They form a homogenous home for the townsfolk as they blend between houses and halls, shops and bridges. They go unnoticed, identifi ed with but not feared. They are comfortable. It is towards this relationship between industry and people that architects should design.

fi g. 24 An Industrial Town, L. S. Lowry.

Factory Love

|34.

Bibliography.

Ballantyne, A, 2002, Architecture: A Brief Insight, Sterling, New York, pp. 137 - 143 Brockman, H.A. N, 1974, The British Architect in Industry 1842- 1940, George Allen & Unwin Ltd. London pp. 15-28, 30- 45, 48-50, 55, 60, 69- 77, 81, 87, 93-104 ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, 2007 Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory, Routledge USAFitzgerald, A, 2010, A Social History of the Slaughter House: From Inception to Contemporary Implications, Human Ecology Review, Vol. 17, No. 1Forty, A, 1999, “Spatial Mechanics” : Scientifi c Metaphors in Architecture, MIT Press, London England (in ed. Galison P, Thompson, E, The Architecture of Science, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts)Galison P, Thompson, E, ed. The Architecture of Science, MIT Press, Cambridge, MassachusettsGeddes, P, 1915, Cities in Evolution, (In ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory, Routledge USA, pp 1-21)Giedion, S, 1941 Space, Time and Architecture: The Growth of a New Tradition, Harvard University Press(In ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory, Routledge USA, pp 80 - 82)Giedion, S, 1948 Mechanization Takes Command: A contribution to Anonymous History, Oxford University Press, (In ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory, pp 83 - 112)Hartoonian, G, 2010, Walter Benjamin and Architecture, Routledge, USA pp. 123 – 135Hill, 2007, God’s Architect: Pugin and the Building of Romantic Britain, List of Works, pp. 501–528Jones, E, 1985, Industrial Architecture in Britain 1750- 1939, B.T Batsford Ltd, London, 1985, pp. 11-12, 14-20, 52, 80-85, 110, 122-125, 139-140, 173, 196, 203, 219Kurokawa, K, 1977, Metabolism in Architecture, (In ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory, Routledge USA, pp 229 - 243)Le Corbusier, 1929 Engineers Aesthetic and Architecture, Architectural record (In ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory, Routledge USA, pp 43- 45)Le Corbusier,1986, Towards a New Architecture, pp1- 8, 271- 289, Dover Publications, New York, originally published J. Rodker, London, 1931Leach N, 2000, Forget Heiddegger, Scroope 12, pp. 50-59Leach N, 2003, Belonging, London: Post Colonial City, AA Files, 49, pp. 76-82.Leach N, 2005, Mimesis, in ATR, Special Issue on Walter Benjamin, vol. 10, no. 1 pp. 12-36

Bibliography

35.|

Leach, N, 2006 Camoufl age, MIT Press, London pp, 1-150, 240 – 247Lonberg-Holm, K, 1929 Architecture in the Industrial Age, (In ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory, Routledge USA, pp 51 - 56)Mies Van der Rohe, L, 1950, Technology and Architecture, Speech, (In ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory, Routledge USA, pp 83 - 112)Norton Wise, M, 1999, “Architecture for Steam”, (in ed. Galison P, Thompson, E, The Architecture of Science, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts) Schwartz Cohen, R, 1976, The Social Shaping of Technology, (In ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory, Routledge USA, pp 213 - 218)Smith, P. D, 2012 City, A Guidebook for the Urban Age, Bloomsbury, London pp. 142, 153, 173, 300, 313Till, J, 2009 Architecture Depends, MIT Press, MassachusettsUnited Nations, 2004, Economic and Social affairs: World Population to 2300, United Nations, New YorkWright, F L, 1992, the Art and Craft of the Machine, The Collected Writings of Frank Lloyd Wright, ed. Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer (New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., 1992) 62. (In ed. Braham, W and Hale, J, Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory Routledge USA, pp 1-21) WebsitesHill, R 2012, Pugin: Gods Architect, 2 May 2013, Available from: http://www.guardian. co.uk/books/2012/feb/24/pugin-gothic-architectWikipedia, 2012, Augustus Pugin, 2 May 2013, Availabe from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Augustus_Pugin#ContrastsSorenson, E, ed. 2010, Dictionary of Art Historians, 2 May 2013, Available from: http://www. dictionaryofarthistorians.org/violletleduce.htmlUnknown, 2011, Graphic Design history, 2 May 2013, Available from: http://www. designhistory.org/Arts_Crafts_pages/IndustrialRevolution.html

Factory Love

|36.

List of Figures.Fig 1 - Riverbank by Lowry, painting, viewed 4 May 2013 http://www.l-s-lowry.co.uk/lowry-riverbank.htmlFig 2 - Gledhill L, Early Mill gearing. photograph, viewed 4 may 2013 http://www.fl ickr.com/photos/13084997@N03/2156458407/Fig 3 - Paxton, j Crystal Palace sketch, V & A Online Archive, edited by author drawing. viewed 4 May 2013 http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O186594/facsimile-of-sir-joseph-pax tons-print-paxton-joseph-sir/Fig 4 - Dore’, G, Ludgate Hill, Journal of Victorian Culture Online drawing, Viewed 4 may 2013 http://myblogs.informa.com/jvc/2010/09/02/new-agenda-katharina-boe hm-and-josephine-mcdonagh-urban-mobility-new-maps-of-victorian-london/Fig 5 - Carcasses in Chicago slaughter house, Unknown Photograph, viewed 4 May 2013 www.ediblegeography.comFig 6 - Blood circulation diagram, Florida Centre for Instructional Technology Drawing, Viewed 4 May 2013 http://etc.usf.edu/clipart/44200/44252/44252_circulation.htmFig.7 - Diderot, description of 18th Century Butchers Tools, Diderot’s encyclopedia. drawing, Viewed 4 may 2013, http://woodsrunnersdiary.blogspot.com/2012/05/tools-of-trade-butcher. htmlFig. 8 - The Brintons factory 1870, Unkown, drawing, Viewed 4 may 2013 http://www.hoteldesigns.net/profi les/image_33596.html

Bibliography

37.|

Fig. 9 - Factory Interior, Hines, L Photograph, Viewed 4 may 2013, http://focusfeatures.com/slideshow/all_in_the_family__a_family_slide_ show_album_from_away_we_go_t/embed/977?fi lm=away_we_goFig. 10 - Holcomb and Hoke, factory interior, Photograph, Viewed 4 may 2013, http://focusfeatures.com/slideshow/all_in_the_family__a_family_slide_ show_album_from_away_we_go_t/embed/977?fi lm=away_we_goFig. 11 - Holcomb and Hoke, factory interior, Photograph, Viewed 4 may 2013, http://www.antiquepopcornmuseum.com/history.phpFig. 12 - Lewis Hine, Sweeper and Doffer In Cotton Mill, 1908 Photograph, Viewed 4 may 2013, http://www.boumbang.com/lewis-hine/Fig. 13 - The Union Stockyards, Library of Congress Photograph, Viewed 4 may 2013, http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/fsa2000043801/PP/Fig. 14 - Modern Times, Chaplin, C, 1936 Still, Viewed 4 may 2012 http://corndogchats.blogspot.com/2011/10/modern-times-1936.htmlFig. 15 - Orizaba Mexico - Carpet Factory, 1903, Underwood photograph, Viewed 4 may 2013, http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/00650271/Fig. 16 - Hine, L, Whitnall N.C 1908 photograph, Viewed 4 may 2013 http://www.fl ickr.com/photos/usnationalarchives/7496095746/in/set- 72157630403221230/Fig. 17 - Hine, L, 9 p.m in Indianna Glass Works, 1908 photograph, Viewed 4 May 2013 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-lives-of-young-workers-before-child- labor-was-abolished-2012-9?op=1

Factory Love

|38.

Fig. 18 - Hine, L, Spinner, yazoo City, Mississippi, 1911 photograph, Viewed 4 May 2013 http://edudemic.com/2012/10/how-children-used-technology-100-years- ago/

Fig. 19 - Hine, L, Child in Carolina Cotton Mill, 1908 photograph, Viewed 4 May 2013 http://edudemic.com/2012/10/how-children-used-technology-100-years- ago/

Fig. 20 - Hine, L, Young Knitter In Tenn. Knit Mill 1912/ 1914- 11 Year Old Girl photograph, Viewed 4 May 2013 http://www.geh.org/ar/strip10/htmlsrc/m198500790028_ful.html #topofi mageFig. 21 - Hine, Bibb Mill No. 1, Macon, Ga. Many youngsters here. Some boys and girls were so small they had to climb up on to the spinning frame to mend broken threads and to put back the empty bobbins, January 1909, U.S National Archives photograph, Viewed 4 May 2013 http://www.fl ickr.com/photos/usnationalarchives/7496099008/in/set- 72157630403221230Fig. 22 - Hine, L, At machine is Stanislaus Beauvais, has worked in spinning room for two years. Salem, Mass, October 1911 photograph, Viewed 4 May 2013 http://www.fl ickr.com/photos/usnationalarchives/7494235328/Fig. 23 - Hine, L,Midnight at the glassworks, 1908 photograph, Viewed 4 May 2013 http://www.boumbang.com/lewis-hine/Fig. 24 - Lowry, L.S, An Industrial Town, 1944, Painting, Viewed 4 may 2013 http://www.lowry.co.uk/lowry-industrialtown.htmlFig. I - Hine, L, Child Labourer, Newberry, South carolina, 1908 photograph Viewed 4 May 2013 http://www.boumbang.com/lewis-hine/

Bibliography

39.|

Robert Bowen.Factory Love

|40.