قراءة كتاب Convenient Houses With Fifty Plans for the Housekeeper, Architect and Housewife

تنويه: تعرض هنا نبذة من اول ١٠ صفحات فقط من الكتاب الالكتروني، لقراءة الكتاب كاملا اضغط على الزر “اشتر الآن"

‏اللغة: English
Convenient Houses
With Fifty Plans for the Housekeeper, Architect and Housewife

Convenient Houses With Fifty Plans for the Housekeeper, Architect and Housewife

تقييمك:
0
No votes yet
المؤلف:
دار النشر: Project Gutenberg
الصفحة رقم: 5

side of the house. Altogether, the idea of the old house and that of the new are in direct opposition to each other. In one instance they were crowded; in the other they have plenty of room. There can be no doubt about the abundance of room.

The building is finished; they move into it. Almost the first person to leave it is the servant whom they had in the old house. She sees the amount of work which she will have to do. It was easy enough to sweep the old house, with its small, compact plan. Housekeeping was relatively a small matter; but with the habits of economy, which rendered the new home possible, they will not employ additional help. The work which is left over by the servant falls to the mistress. Strange as it may appear under such circumstances, it takes the mistress a long time to find the cause of the trouble. It is the house. It was planned with an entire disregard for the work which was to be done. It had not been thought of. The idea was merely to get something which was different from the disagreeable features of the old home. They thought that everything would be easier and pleasanter and more agreeable in every way. The only trouble with the old home was that they were too much crowded. In the new they are not, but have an impossible amount of work to do every day. The difference between what they wish to do and what is done, is represented by fretfulness in addition to the natural weariness at the end of the day.

What has this to do with architecture and economical house-building? Simply this. The house which is economically planned is economical as to money, carpets, sweeping, and strength. The architect may do a great deal for housekeepers by keeping this thought in mind.

To recur to the idea of economical house-building in a direct sense, it may be borne in mind that economy and good construction go hand in hand; that none of the conditions of permanency are sacrificed for the sake of cheapness. Of two houses which cost the same, one may be far more convenient and roomy by an avoidance of waste space and unnecessary material. Evidently one flue-stack will cost less than four. Therefore, if a house can be constructed which has only one flue-stack, it will cost less than one which has four; but the demands of the housekeeper, and those who live in the house, are that the one stack afford the conveniences of four. People do not like compromises in house-building, especially when they are building a home. The compromises come easier when one is planning property for rental. Evidently a house in which one-fifth of the floor space is given up to halls is more expensive than one which contains a smaller proportion of such space. According as one is able to diminish the amount of passage room, and yet meet all of the conditions of good and economical house-keeping, he can reduce the cost of the house as to its building, its furnishing, and the amount of labor required in caring for it. Thus economy in construction, and convenience and ease in general housekeeping movements, go hand in hand. Parallel illustrations might be carried forward, so as to include each detail of the house.

The architect may do a great deal for the housekeeper by making his mouldings and interior wood-work so that they will not catch dust, and can be readily cleaned. Some of our friends, who have studied the artistic qualities of house-building to the exclusion of all other considerations, will say that a regard for housekeeping requirements, in the matter of interior decorations and construction, is placing too great a limit upon their work. They will say that beauty and general artistic qualities are not always consonant with the means which will make easy housekeeping,—that they are limited by such considerations. This need not be so; it is simply a question of ingenuity and thoughtfulness. One may be careless of utility, and make very beautiful things. Another may be thoughtful and careful as to housekeeping requirements, and design something quite as beautiful and attractive as the former.

In the above statements will be found the guiding principles which affect all of the work of this book.


CHAPTER II.

HOUSEKEEPING OPERATIONS.—THE WORK OF THE HOUSEKEEPER.—THE AVERAGE HOUSEWORK OF A WEEK.—THE ARCHITECT’S LESSON THEREFROM.

With the architect a house has been too often considered as something to be looked at. No one is disposed to criticise an architect for making houses pretty and attractive. It is true, however, that many houses are nothing more than pretty; they are not convenient. They are not built with a regard to the requirements of housekeeping. A lady once said to the writer, that an architect would never live up to his opportunities until he had associated himself with a housekeeper, who would be strong enough, in her control over him, to see that the housekeeping conditions and conveniences were kept constantly in mind.

In order fully to reach the housekeeping idea, it will be convenient to consider in detail what is meant by housekeeping. Primarily, a house is a place in which to eat and sleep. The present requirements of comfort and luxury suggest that all should not eat and sleep in the same room. Originally this was the case. The primitive man needed only a hut or a cave, or the protection of a rude shed. Later on, he was satisfied with a hut with one or two rooms. If the weather was cold, the occupants would huddle around the fire, and eat and sleep without regard to other surroundings. A bath in cold weather was unnecessary. During the summer this was regarded more as a matter of recreation than of necessity. A neighboring stream served the purpose of more modern arrangements. Housekeeping operations under such conditions were light indeed.

There are many homes of this kind in America to-day. If we take the case of our Indians, we find that the squaws have time for much else than the absolute duties of camp-life and the care of children. There is much other labor which falls to their lot, house-work being regarded, as it is, insignificant. This is one extreme. There are various gradations which come with the instincts of a higher civilization. Education, and other conditions which go with it, increase housekeeping requirements, and thus far have not furnished to the majority compensating conditions in labor-saving devices. At the present time, the natural and affected requirements of housekeeping make the life of many a woman one of the extremest drudgery and hardship. Her condition is almost that of a slave; and this at a time when she is surrounded by many of the elements of a higher civilization. Her children and those around her frequently live under the shadow of her uncomfortable condition. The Indian’s home, in the rest and peace which it affords, is often preferable. This condition is brought about by the increasing requirements upon the housekeeper, without the presence of other compensating conditions.

Assuming that an architect may do something to make the care of a house lighter, it remains to call attention to the modern requirements of a housekeeper, with a view of simplifying her work. Let us watch her work for a week; we will begin on Monday morning during the month of January, and assume that there is one servant in the house to help,—bearing in mind, at the same time, that it often happens that the work which is here outlined is done by the housekeeper herself, with possibly only the help of a wash-woman. First, the house is to be warmed, the kitchen fire to be kindled, the living-rooms to be swept and dusted, the washing to be started, the children to be dressed, breakfast to be cooked and put on the table, and, in many

Pages