Historical & social context
Rebirth and Regeneration – the 1950s and influences on design
The War ended in 1945 and British society, albeit weary from rationing and bombing, was ready for change. Servicemen began to return home from overseas and children returned to the cities following evacuation. It was evident that change would not be as swift as the population would have liked; cities and towns were damaged, rationing was still in place until 1954, and on the surface, to the majority of the population, that victory had been a very bitter pill. Nothing, it seemed had changed, and society fell back into a pre-war model divided by class and hierarchy. Nonetheless, change was on the way, and later that year the electorate ousted the war-time Conservative Government and Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, in favour of a new Labour Government. The change of government was significant, not merely because it appears to be a rejection of the efforts of Churchill during wartime, but more as an expression of a desire for a new society, one different than the one prior to the War.
The Labour government proposed equity for everyone, but war debts made this somewhat unrealistic and unrealisable. Programmes for regeneration were planned and started to proceed; a necessity that didn’t hurt the ideals of the new Government either. The Welfare State was formed and plans for the National Health Service were penned with the aim of providing free medical treatment, pensions and benefits, funded through National Insurance Contributions, to the population, and secondary education was made compulsory to the age of 15 (1944). Major services were nationalised, i.e. railways and fuel producers, offering the population regulated industry and a share in the nation’s wealth. The health and prosperity of the future nation was central to these progressive moves, creating a government policy to assist the population from cradle to grave.
Although these new nurturing policies and programmes intended to create a culture of safety and rebuilding, global relations and politics challenged the prospect of a rosy future. The role of Britain in the world had changed; India had gained independence, which ultimately was to herald the decline of the Empire, the threat of nuclear war from the Eastern Bloc appeared imminent, and a general distrust of America following the withdrawal of funding, isolated Britain and stifled the mood of the population[1].
The distrust and dislike of America was not merely financial; it was cultural as well. The immediate post-war period was marked by an influx of Americana, from music, films, novels and fashion. Indeed, much of this imported popular culture and general dislike of it, formed the basis of early rebellious youth cultures.
From Austerity to Affluence
By 1959, wages had doubled since the start of the decade. Income Tax had decreased by nearly 2% and virtual full employment made the economy buoyant. Indeed, such economic confidence bore testimony to Prime Minister Harold Macmillan’s 1957 assertion that ‘most of our people have never had it so good..’[2]. This proved to be a rather ambiguous statement, whilst as industry had boomed, it was certainly not comparable with increases in other countries, i.e. Germany. Similarly, even by the end of the 1950s the ravages of war were still evident and housing was still in crisis.
In relation to fashion, affluence became apparent in 1947 with Christian Dior’s unveiling of his ‘New Look’, which included yards of fabric, body-shaping padding and an unashamed embodiment of glamour. Balenciaga followed suit, with waspish waists and equally sculptural form. The uniformity of wartime fashion was to be replaced with volume and excess – a nod to the dreams of the future.
Design Influences
In May 1951, The Festival of Britain opened to the British public on the new South Bank site. Heralded as a ‘pat on the back for the British people’[3] the Festival aimed to promote the greatness of British Design and to mark the centenary of the Great Exhibition. Organised by the Board of Trade and the Council for Industrial Design, the Festival intended to show the world the best of British industry and innovation, whilst communicating a faith in the future to the general population. Essentially, the Festival was a trade show, which became one of its main problems; the goods on display were not available in shops, as many of the products were intended for export only.
The Festival may not have been a consumerist dream, but testimony from visitors were largely positive, referring to the lightening of the national mood as a consequence[4]. Certainly the exhibits displayed were a whole world away from the austerity of wartime design, with new patterns, bold colours and new forms dominating. Education and fun, mixed with futuristic innovation and traditional British whimsy, outlining a cultural fusion of the past with the future. New understandings of national identity were under construction and the Festival articulated Britishness as a force in a future global arena.
The Festival appeared to spawn a new era in British design, and the ‘Festival Style’ became synonymous with the contemporary[5]. The style drew from a variety of themes, but the most prevalent was one which took inspiration from technological development as seen in the textile prints of Lucienne Day and other members of the Festival pattern Group, and the wiry Antelope chairs designed by Ernest Race. The Festival’s totemic emblem, the Skylon, was also indicative of technology and the future, dominating the skyline like a rocket ready to launch.
The Festival style was a short-lived fashion, but it reached the mainstream through textile designs, packaging and some furniture. The public saw the style as a passing fad rather than a design trend with any longevity. Somewhat unfortunately, the Council of Industrial Design didn’t listen to public opinion, promoting the style at home and abroad. The consequence was that British design was dominated for over a decade by unpopular ‘spindly-legged sideboards’[6].
Technology was the perfect vehicle for contemporary design. The period witnessed huge technological advancement. In 1952, the structure of DNA was discovered, the contraceptive pill was invented and the sound barrier was broken by a De Havilland jet fighter. By 1957 the space race was truly underway with the launch of the Russian Sputnik’s closely followed by a US space launch in 1958. By 1959, photographs of the moon taken from space were being circulated via the media. It seemed that the sky was no longer the limit.
New shapes, styles and prints emerged, in all aspects of visual culture. Following from the hysteria surrounding Dior’s New Look (1947), design in general responded with ‘new looks’ which became indicative of the period. In terms of shape, boundaries were literally stretched. Like the elongated forms of the Festival style, design became larger, more sculptural and challenged beliefs surrounding the shape of things. Asymmetry challenged notions of harmony and balance (Clappison in ceramics, Aimes in fashion), whilst traditional notions of the female form were exaggerated beyond glamour model proportions to create curvaceous hour-glass silhouettes and objects (Murano in glass, Balenciaga in fashion).
Shapes were also inspired by nature, and although this was not new, forms were mutated into boundless inflations of the norm, as demonstrated by Knoll’s butterfly chair and Dior’s tulip skirt. Volume was explored and the possibilities for design forms were extended to express the far reaching potential offered by the future. Things were bigger and brighter, transformed and transmuted as a means of communicating newness through technology and questioning the boundaries of the probable. It was a time of experimentation, and design offered a vehicle for this. Equally, the uniformity, discipline and drabness of Modernist forms favoured during wartime (and indeed throughout the 1950s in architecture and in interior design, specifically the kitchen) were seen as depressing and devoid of frivolity, restricting personal expression. New design offered the potential for escape from the rigidity of design doctrines.
The 1950s was an era directed to reject the past, but also to express a fear for the future. Newness often was admired in terms of design, but this didn’t naturally filter into consumer preference, and often consumers opted for traditional styles and products. Similarly, newness also was associated with decline, certainly in terms of standards relating to language, behaviour, and morality, as well as the onslaught of American popular culture into everyday life.
With this in mind, a drive towards the new manifested itself in less explicit ways. Primarily, this was demonstrated in pattern and print design, which frequently referred enough to past and familiar styles to maintain an element of comfort and security, but were new enough to conform to the remits of fashion. New trends in print design incorporated a variety of themes including graphic communication in geometrics (Terence Conran), conversationals (Robert Stewart) and abstract pattern (Mary Duncan); over-sized painterly designs in florals (Susan Collier), and abstracts reminiscent of American Abstract Expressionists (Harold Cohen); technology inspired motifs using elongated forms (June Lyon, Lucienne Day, Jacqueline Gloag) or representations of technological discovery (microscopic slide details; Gerald Holtom), and a return to a Modernist flatness of motif, geometrics, spots and stripes (Sven Markelius)[7].
The period is characterised by an overwhelming faith in the future, which ultimately could never be realised. The future offered a potential which was to stimulate post-war regeneration, social change, and acted as a catalyst for experimental design. New attitudes to femininity, youth and culture emerged which also challenged traditional beliefs. And although newness was abound, remnants of the past remained, albeit in largely changed forms.
[1] Ford B (ed), Modern Britain, Cambridge:Cambridge University Press, 1988 (1992), pp.6-7
[2] Sampson A, Macmillan: A Study in Ambiguity, London:Allen Lane, 1967, p.158.
[3] Home Secretary, Herbert Morrison, quoted in Gardinier J, From the Bomb to the Beatles, London:Collins & Brown, 1999, p.42
[4] Gardiner J, From the Bomb to the Beatles, p.48
[5] Many Design Historians see the Festival of Britain as an important turning point in British design. This is contested by others such as Reyner Banham. See also Woodham J, Twentieth Century Design, Oxford:Oxford University Press, 1997, p.120
[6] Stewart R, Design and British Industry, London:John Murray, 1990
[7] Jackson L, The New Look: Design in the Fifties, London:Thames and Hudson, 1991,pp. 61-84
