It is not possible to discuss these projects in detail, nor is it
necessary.[16] It is sufficient to consider them here with reference
to the contributions they might make in helping the immigrant
housewife. In the first place, they provide for a toilet and a bath in
every house, and a supply of running water that is both adequate and
convenient. In the matter of kitchen equipment there is an attempt to
provide some of the conveniences. Both provide a sink and set
wash-tubs equipped with covers. They must be set at a minimum of
thirty-six inches from the floor in the United States plans. Both make
provision for gas to be used for cooking, although the coal stove is
accepted. The kitchens in the Massachusetts houses are also provided
with kitchen cabinets, with shelves under the sink, and with a drain
for the refrigerator.
In other ways also consideration for the housewife is evidenced.
Electricity is urged for lighting, passages through which furniture
would not go are avoided, the size of the living room is adapted to
the sizes of the most commonly purchased rugs, etc. Study of the
Massachusetts plans reveals other interesting features, such as the
care given to the location of the bathroom and the attention to the
size of the doors, so that the mother at work in her kitchen can watch
the children at play in other rooms.
Both projects are interesting also in that they realize the necessity
of a "front room" or parlor, and prescribe a minimum number of
bedrooms--three in the Massachusetts, and two in the United States
experiment. Both require closets in every bedroom wide enough to
receive the men's garments on hangers, and rooms of such size that the
bed can stand free of the wall and out of a draught. It is evident
that the plans for houses in both projects provide very definite
improvements in the matter of the conveniences to which the immigrant
is not accustomed in the houses at present available to him.
Some limitations, however, become apparent by comparing them with the
recommendations of the Women's Subcommittee of the Ministry of
Reconstruction Advisory Council, England. That committee emphasizes
the importance of electricity for lighting, and urges "that a cheap
supply of electricity for domestic purposes should be made available
with the least possible delay." The American plans agree that
electricity is the preferred lighting, but gas is accepted by the
United States government, although not by the Massachusetts plan.
There is no suggestion of developing a cheaper supply of electricity.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account