MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2020619595 · doi:10.1353/aq.2006.0060

Educating the Eye: Body Mechanics and Streamlining in the United States, 1925-1950

2006· article· en· W2020619595 sur OpenAlex
Carma Gorman

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

RevueAmerican Quarterly · 2006
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineArts and Humanities
ThématiqueFashion and Cultural Textiles
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBeautyProduct (mathematics)Quarter (Canadian coin)CashAdvertisingVisual artsArt historyEngineeringBusinessArtHistoryAestheticsMathematics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Educating the Eye:Body Mechanics and Streamlining in the United States, 1925-1950 Carma R. Gorman (bio) During the second quarter of the twentieth century, many writers on industrial design noted that, prior to about 1925, attractive appearance was not designers' or consumers' priority, at least not in the product categories that a Fortune magazine writer defined in 1934 as the "formerly artless industries": aluminum manufactures, baby carriages, sleds, railroad cars, cash registers, clocks, electrical appliances, food packaging, automobiles, eyeglasses, pens, refrigerators, scales, sewing machines, stoves, and washing machines. 1 Consultant industrial designer Harold Van Doren, writing in 1940, stated that in contrast to the fields of ceramics, glassware, textiles, silverware, jewelry, wallpaper, and furniture, in which products "are sold, and always have been sold, largely on appearance," "in the manufacture of engineered products like typewriters, utility and price were the prime concerns of manufacturer and purchaser alike until a few years ago." 2 Similarly, Van Doren's contemporary Raymond Loewy, writing in 1951, noted that in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, American consumers had been satisfied with "engineered as you go" mechanical products that were characterized by a "haphazard, disorderly look" (see, for example, fig. 1a). 3 Both period commentators and historians have agreed that after 1925, however, consumers began to demand beauty even in those products for which there had been, as Van Doren put it, a "lack of an educated demand for attractive appearance in years past." 4 In an era when refrigerators or washing machines in a given price range could be expected to work and to wear about equally well, newly professionalized American industrial designers acknowledged that they were "designing for the eye"—trying to lure consumers with products that were distinguishable from one another stylistically more than technologically. 5 Particularly during the Depression, it was widely acknowledged that "the sales curve would not respond to the old forms of pressure . . . [and] the product had to be made to sell itself" through attractive appearance. 6 The clean-lined [End Page 839] style that consultant industrial designers developed to meet consumers' demands for beauty in the formerly artless industries went by the name "streamlining" (for example, fig. 1b). 7 The origins of the term streamlining lie in hydro- and aerodynamics, but most industrial designers—even proponents of scientific streamlining such as Norman Bel Geddes—admitted that in the 1930s, streamlining was primarily an aesthetic device rather than an aerodynamic one, and further claimed that their aesthetic was derived primarily from the form of the human body. 8 Click for larger view View full resolution Figure 1. Raymond Loewy, McCormick-Deering cream separator, before (a) and after (b) Loewy's redesign (1945), from Raymond Loewy, Industrial Design (Woodstock, NY: Overlook Press, 1988), 121. Reproduced with permission of Laurence Loewy. Period observers and historians have both offered many different explanations for how and why this post-1925 shift in tastes and demands occurred, and for the rise of the popularity of streamlining. 9 Many of the well-known explanations are "supply-side" ones, in which particular designers or exhibitions or manufacturers or merchandisers are understood to be the drivers of stylistic change. Consumers, in this paradigm—when they are understood to affect the design of products at all—do so by adopting new styles after seeing them in exhibitions, magazines, movies, and department stores. Designers then are presumed to cater to consumer tastes by making more products that look like [End Page 840] the ones that have already sold well. The problem with this model is that it assumes two things: first, that consumers develop taste preferences primarily through informal means (such as skimming a magazine) rather than through formal ones (such as undergoing a required course of study at school), and second, that consumers develop ideas about and tastes for consumer goods only by looking at other consumer goods. Both assumptions are unwarranted. Between 1925 and 1950, there were at least two important formal mechanisms for the teaching and acquisition of taste that had implications for the appearance of the artless industries: "related art" and "body mechanics" training. These forms of education, which flourished in elementary, high school, and college classrooms, have clear implications for the...

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: Qualitatif
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,424
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,991

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,237
Écart entre enseignants0,224 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle