Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNumérosXII-2Entretiens et leçonsWomen, technology and rationaliza...

Entretiens et leçons

Women, technology and rationalization

The beginnings of a new applied domestic science in France (1915-1940)
Women, technology and rationalization: the beginnings of a new applied domestic science in France (1915-1940)
Aurélie Brayet et Luc Rojas

Résumés

Publié en 1928 par Paulette Bernège, De la méthode ménagère représente l’aboutissement du travail d’un groupe de femmes qui a créé une nouvelle science appliquée en France, pendant l'entre-deux-guerres. Inspirées par la rationalisation technique aux États-Unis, ces femmes théorisent un tout nouveau sujet : la science domestique. Elles militent activement pour la rationalisation et l'édification des activités ménagères en tant que science. Au-delà de cette construction, il convient de s'interroger sur le rôle des femmes dans la diffusion de la rationalisation technique durant l'entre-deux-guerres. Comment parviennent-elles à légitimer cette science ? Comment l’ont-elles édifié et sur quelles théories se sont-elles appuyées ? Eriger ce champ de connaissances en science et le revendiquer aux yeux de tous n’est pas chose évidente. Ainsi, cette recherche offre une fenêtre sur leur travail, en soulignant les difficultés, les succès et les théories, de et sur ces femmes, qui par leurs actions donnent accès à toutes les femmes à la technique.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

1In the year 1928, a book entitled De la méthode ménagère has drawn attention and made its way to many leading scientific journals. Published by Dunod, it is the result of eight years of hard work and research, carried out by a woman named Paulette Bernège. De la méthode ménagère illustrates how a group of ladies, headed by Paulette Bernège, has managed to create a new field of applied sciences in France, during the inter-war period. Inspired by the technical rationalization in the United States, these women have theorized a whole new subject: domestic science. In the following text, it will be our goal to focus on these women, who were active campaigners for the rationalization and the establishment of householding as a science. The point of this research is to question the role of women in the spread of technical rationalization during the inter-war period. How did they manage to legitimize this establishment as a science? And what was this science they worked at? On which theories have they relied on? Finally, how can we see within their discourse a portrait of women and applied sciences? To legitimize this field of knowledge as scientifical is far from straightforward. This research offers a window into their work, pointing to the difficulties, the success and the theories, of and about these women, who managed to provide access to technical field to all women through their actions.

  • 1 French organisationalists, notably Henry le Chatelier, defined organisation as a science. The field (...)
  • 2 In this article we decided to focus our study on French archives and French perception of the domes (...)

2In the year 1928, a book entitled De la méthode ménagère (Bernège 1928) had drawn attention of French women and technical rationalization experts and made its way to many leading scientific journals. Published by Dunod, it was the result of eight years of hard work and research, carried out by a woman named Paulette Bernège. De la méthode ménagère illustrated how a group of ladies, headed by Paulette Bernège, had managed to create a new field of « applied sciences »1 in France, during the inter-war period. Inspired by the technical rationalization in the United States, these women had theorized a whole new subject: domestic science (De Grazia 2009). A movement also important with some different forms not only in United States but also in United Kingdom, Canada and others countries in Europe (Blakestad 1997, Dyhouse 2021, Rossiter 1998, Leavitt 2002, Stage and Vincent, Oldenziel & Zachmann 2009, Bix 2013, Furlough 1993 Reagin 2007, Parr 1999)2.

  • 3 The Taylorism was a concept of work organization developed by Taylor. After giving up on Harvard Un (...)
  • 4 Henry Le Chatelier became in 1907 the official translator of Taylorism in France. Trained at the Ec (...)

3In the early twentieth century, the influence of the United States began to grow in Europe, especially in France. This phenomenon leaded some historians, such as Patrick Fridenson, to talk about the start of the Americanization of French society (Fridenson 1987: 1031-1060). Recently, other historians, such as Ludovic Tournès, had shown that, if the Americanization encompassed all areas of society, this phenomenon was a matter of intercontinental interbreeding (Tournès 2020). One of the first indicator of this Americanization was the entry of rationalization in France with Taylorism3: the American engineer’s theory spread rapidly from one continent to another, through intellectual and commercial exchanges – such as travels, publications, exchange of letters, trade of patents, installation of American firms in France… Engineers, generally in the service of the State, were the most active propagandists of Taylorism. Headed by Henry Le Chatelier4, they launched La Revue de métallurgie in 1904, a French journal who became during the start of the century a true support of Taylorism (Letté 2004: 138-145). If engineers were the firsts concerned, Taylorism also started to spread in all groups of French society, one after another: scholars, head of public administration, military officers, politicians, and even some groups of women open to this line of thought as well as journalists.

4But taylorism was not actually the beginning of rationalization in France. This theory had emerged many years before the early twentieth century, and was already partly formalized, as we could see for instance with the work of Gustave Ply on weapons factory in 1888 (Ply 1888).

  • 5 Henri Fayol was trained at the Saint-Etienne School of Mines. He began his career as a civil engine (...)
  • 6 This committee was created in 1926 by the merger of the Centre d’Etudes Administratives and the Con (...)

5The real turning point of the theory of rationalization in France came in 1916, with the new insights provided by Henri Fayol in his book Administration industrielle et générale (Fayol 1916: 5-162)5. When Fayol died in 1925, a national committee was made up: the CNOF (Comité national de l’organisation française), organized around several divisions, had the ambition to transfer the concepts of Taylorism from the factory to all economic sectors6. In 1929, the CNOF added a new division to its organization, dedicated to home economics. This division, predominantly female but not all feminine (Clarke 2011: 70), would be driven by the Ligue d’organisation ménagère, chaired by Paulette Bernège.

  • 7 In spite of an important bibliographic production, this organisation was in reality a group of wome (...)
  • 8 Unfortunately we did not have any information about the number of association members.

6Bernège was a leading figure of home economics in France during the inter-war period. Bachelor-holder in French Literature, she joined the work organization movement in the 1920’s, by becoming executive secretary for the French journal Mon bureau. The managing editor of this journal, Ponthière, was a member of the CNOF. Her will was to apply the concept of taylorism in the world of household, as she would explain in her manifesto in 1928 (Bernège 1928). The turning point in her career occurred when she created the Institut d’Organisation ménagère in 1923, that would become the Ligue d’organisation ménagère7 in 1925. From this day, she would be the referring figure and the organizer of a group of women, whose desire was to institutionalize householding as an applied science. This League was mostly composed of managers of the household teaching, with one division in Lyon and another in Orléans8. Between 1923 et 1930, the group had its own popularization review, Mon chez moi, in which the members of the League could diffuse their actions and their theories to the readers, who were for the most part housewives (Martin 1987: 89-106). They published an important advice literature, hetero-normative in its emphasis.

7The French women involved in domestic science wanted to gain a scientific recognition for their work, research and reflections, to legitimize the methods and results achieved. During the interwar period, science was the ultimate answer in a world obsessed by progress and technology. Adopting the scientific habits and following the lead of great scientifical figures, these women had started to establish between 1915 and 1940 a whole new domestic science. Despite being mocked and criticized as a parody of science, their methods were largely adopted after the war, in education, but also more largely in women’s life, who discovered thanks to them a technical (Brayet 2019), administrative and ergonomic culture. In a sense, we emphasize in this study, the importance of male-female interactions for the advancement of women’s careers as well as the scientific disciplines analyzed.

8Our goal is to focus on these women, who were active campaigners for the rationalization and the institutionalization of householding as a science. The point of this research is to question the role of women in the spread of technical rationalization during the inter-war period. How did they manage to legitimize this field as a science? And what was this science they worked at? Which school of organizational thought did they fit into? The way they legitimized this field of knowledge as scientifical was far from straightforward. To legitimize themselves as stakeholders of rationalization, women around Bernège would lobby together at the recognition of their subject area in the scientific community. Thus, they have helped to shape a new social identity for women.

9This research offers a window into their work, pointing to the difficulties, the success and the theories, of and about these women, who managed to provide access to technical field to all women through their actions. It shows how the institutionalization of a disciplinary field was used for the emancipation of women, but a restricted one as it concerned only the private space. No wonder they ‘chose’ domestic science as that was considered a ‘womanly’ field, territorially segregated as Rossiter demonstrated (Rossiter, 1998). The analysis is essentially based on the numerous publications of Bernège and the CNOF, but also on the journals dealing with organization which had developed since the end of the XIXth century.

A favorable background to domestic science

  • 9 Annales des Mines ; Bulletin de la société de l’industrie minérale ; Mémoires des travaux de la soc (...)

10During the 19th century the idea of organization appeared in several industries such as coal mining or the manufacture of weapons of war. People like the mining engineer Brard or the artillery captain Ply wrote treatises in which this idea was asserted. These were the beginnings of organizational science. Thus these studies had been an underlying idea for French industrialists and scientists for many decades. However, this theme would become important in the public debate from the 1910s. The work of these women therefore took place at a time of general interest in applied science. The first to launch this debate were the heavy industry engineers, who showed their interest in a lot of technical reviews9. Civilian engineers also developed their thoughts on the subject in their own journals since many years (Rojas 2018: 185-201), the same thoughts that we could find in the development of scientifical organization research in the United States or in Germany at this time. All of these theories combined, putting forward engineers’ experiments and industrials productions, would legitimize the emergency and the recognition of a new applied science.

  • 10 August Bebel was a German craftsman turned politician who wrote, among other things, "Women and Soc (...)

11In such background, the idea of science applied to all social activities made its way and soon overflew the industrial community. The will to adapt the scientifical process to household could be found for instance in August Bebel’s work10. He explained how appropriate he thought the combination of science and domestic matters, such as food or household equipment, could be (Bebel 1891). The idea of domestic science also tended to grow in strength at the end of the nineteenth century, but with a clear separation: on one side, there were the domestic matters that relate to science, such as food chemistry, health and hygiene of the domestic life, domestic architecture, or scientifical application on technical objects like refrigeration. On the other side, there was what remained: cleaning, everyday-life organization, etc. These were yet considered as domestic economy, not as science. This was clearly a gendered frontier, as studies conducted by Cynthia Cockburn, Susan Ormrod and Danielle Chabaud-Rychter, men used to deal with domestic matters as a science when women dealed with domestic economy not considered as science (Cockburn and Ormrod 1993; Chabaud-Rychter 1994).

  • 11 Records of Association Arts Ménagers. L’Art ménager (Feb. 1933) ; Breton, J-L. La science et l’Art (...)

12For the founder of the Salon des Arts ménagers Jules-Louis Breton, the link between science and household was highly relevant. That was why he placed his exhibition under the leadership of the ONRSII (Office national des recherches scientifiques et industrielles et des inventions), known now as the CNRS (Centre national de la recherche scientifique) (Brayet 2017). In February 1933, he introduced the domestic science in France with these words (Breton 1933): « The most daring scientific theories, the discoveries multiplied by the obstinate research of the laboratories are applied without delay in the order of the household activity »11.

  • 12 Records of Pasteur Institute, Fonds René Dujarric de la Rivière (1885-1969), Mémoire du Docteur Ren (...)

13Pasteur Institute’s records also harbored many testimonies of Scientists involvement in the institutionalization of domestic science. With research on hygiene improvement, nutrition, food chemistry or applied cooking physics, Pasteur Institute’s members were directly involved in the development of domestic science12. In Records of René Dujarric de la Rivière (1885-1969), we could read in his thesis introduced in the Congrès International d’Enseignement Ménager in Paris in 1922 (Dujarric 1922 : 1) :

  • 13 Records of René Dujarric de la Rivière (1885-1969), Archives of Pasteur Institute. Thesis, 1922, p. (...)

Household education has considerable practical advantages and moral benefits. It answers a deep social need, particularly at a time when the progress of depopulation makes a good organization of the French family indispensable. Science can and must come to the rescue of such an interesting cause13.

14To create the Ligue d’organisation ménagère in this context was not incongruous. However, League’s campaigners would have to implement a discourse and practiced in order to legitimize domestic science.

To follow in the footsteps of a scientific discourse

15Paradoxically, the true start of domestic science legitimization did not come from Bernège and the Ligue d’organisation ménagère, but from Henry Le Chatelier in the Revue de métallurgie in 1915. On the passing of Taylor, the 21 March 1915, the journal published a special edition to pay tribute to the industrial’s feats of arms, but also to the application of his theories. As part of this idea, Le Chatelier published some extracts of La tenue scientifique de la maison, by Christine Frederik. These extracts were preceded by an introduction written by Le Chatelier, where he explained how in his opinion Frederik’s text highlights Taylor’s principles, showing the universal aspect of his doctrine. He was also convinced of Frederik’s text importance for young girls’ education, because it could prove them that ruling a house was as scientific as men industrial activities are. At the end of his introduction, he talked about domestic science as an emerging scientific area:

16In past centuries, the arts and crafts, i.e. industry, were a domain reserved for slaves. Today, scientists and technicians consider themselves members of an aristocracy that is second to none. Men's feelings change from century to century. Culinary science will have its days of glory. (Frederik 1915: 351-382)

  • 14 Reception de Madame Gilbreth (1927). Bulletin du CNOF, 7-8.

17Like Christine Frederik, women working at householding scientifical recognition tended to justify their action by putting themselves under the leadership of great scientists. Frederik openly declared herself inspired by the approach developed by Claude Bernard in his Introduction à la médecine expérimentale (Frederik 1915: 351-382). Members of the Ligue d’organisation ménagère also legitimized themselves under the auspices of well-known organizers. Madame Lassalle, a Charleville School teacher, wanted to apply Taylor, Emerson and Fayol methods on domestic science (Lassale 1931: 180-182). Same for Bernège, who introduced Taylor and Fayol in her book (Bernège 1928). The League also presented these great organizers work in their division of the CNOF. They refered for instance to Lillian Moller Gilbreth, and her book Scientific management and the Home, who would be regarded as a world authority on the subject and who would serve as an example in the 192014. To sum up, many references to the work of scientists were made, like Bernège who used in her book Harvey’s research on bloodstream (Bernège 1928).

  • 15 See for instance Paulette Bernège in Bulletin du CNOF (Nov 1928), De la Méthode ménagère, p. 1.

18If household started to be recognized as a scientific subject by some researchers and politicians, it continued to be mocked and presented as a parody of science. That was why many of these women’s books began with the need to explain and justified their research interest15.

To adopt and to adapt American theories

19American theories were one of the most important influence on domestic science as edified by the Ligue d’organisation ménagère. It had to be remembered that the main inspirations for the group were Christine Frederik and Lillian Moller Gilbreth. These two women made the American approach their own and managed to transfer the industrial theories to the domestic world. As they shared this goal with Bernège and the women around her, it was not surprising to find the same aspect of the Taylorism in their approach.

20It was mainly the mechanistic vision of work that drew attention. Therefore, Taylor was largely summoned by members of the League, and more specifically for his ergonomic approach. Mrs Lassalle used Taylors’ writings in her teaching at Charleville Practical School. The main point of her pedagogy was to teach the perfect technical gesture, resulting from an ergonomical study with an emphasis on the measurement (Lassalle 1931: 1980-1982). Same went for Bernège, who preached the virtues of analyzing every gesture. Lilian Gilbreth, who was one of the main inspiration for the League, was also married to a MIT-trained engineer, Franck Gilbreth, who had collaborated for a while with Taylor. They determined an ideal model, in which movements were limited to the minimum in order to work as fastly as possible. He described 17 combinations of simple movements, that he called therbligs.

21Bernège transfered the American methods by using Jules Marey’s chronophotograph: with his technique, she filmed dishwashing, decomposing every gesture to define « movement unit » (Bernège 1934), in order to get quick and continuous movements (Brayet 2020).

22Beyond Taylor’s standardization, the workplace spatial organization was a central focus for the League’s organizers. A lot of activists insisted on the importance of the rational layout of the house. For Paulette Bernège, the layout was supposed to facilitate domestic work (Bernège 1928b: 1-5). It may recollected Taylor’s workshop organization, but this logic was not specific to the metallurgist from Philadelphia. It was more an American tradition of organization, that could be found in writings before Taylor’s doctrine.

23With the rational layout of the house came the idea of the mechanical improvement of the household tools. Tooling had to be ergonomic in the opinion of the League’s members. Therefore, the trash that could be opened with the foot served as an example to follow and to imitate more largely. Mechanization and standardization of household tools were thereby advocated. If Taylor's influence was present in this idea of mechanization, it was also visible when the members of the league militated for the creation of a laboratory. Indeed, they support the creation of a national laboratory dedicated to household experiments. Thus Bernège wrote in 1928: « France must create a national laboratory from which all housewives and all schools will draw the information they need. We have begun the draft with the help of the league of household organisation (...) »(Bernège 1928b: 1-5). In the domestic science edified by the League, Taylor’s influence was under no question, but it was not the only doctrine to influence them. It had to be remembered that one of the movement’s inspirer was Christine Frederik, a main figure of the Emerson school. Le Chatelier could try to minimize this idea in his introduction in 1915 (Le Chatelier 1915: 348-350) by pretending she offered nothing new to Taylor’s principles, the idea of efficiency still showed through the League’s research. This theory was the key point of Emerson’s work: it questioned the used resources consumption in the result of one product, in other words, the relationship between production and action (Emerson 1912). Efficiency was therefore a main concern for educated middle-class women who had limited resources. These women were the prime audience of the League for household efficiency. So, the point in standardizing gestures, timing and the number of actions was to help these women to obtain a maximum benefit from the resources they had at their disposal. This efficiency was demanded in 1929 by Waveren, who suggested creating an international center for the training of efficiency’s specialists (Bernège 1929: 13). If the American influence was obviously there in the domestic science that started to be edified at the time, it also had its own specificities.

To pick up traditional scientific habits

  • 16 See the Bulletin du CNOF (1928-1929).

24These activists tried to prove that their action took part in a worldwide scientific movement. In this idea, they often reported research on domestic science from other countries: Italy, Germany, England, Czechoslovakia, United States… Members of the League were very involved and went to national and international congress16, where they could transmit the result of their work, participating this way at the edification of a new science. Their work dealed with domestic tooling, dusts (Vèzes 1929), tiredness in householding (Trouard-Riolle 1929).

25Their research was also illustrated with schemes, geometrical curves, sketches, and two types of charts: popularization illustration (as we will see later) and methodical articulation of the thought.

  • 17 Records of Association Arts ménagers. Fonds Nicole Braive, note sur l’épluchage des pommes de terre

26Theories were elaborated based on these analyzes to gain more time, and afterwards taught to young ladies. Nothing was left to chance in the kitchens, which soon became laboratories. Based on this model, Paulette Bernège wanted to arrange domestic work. No more wasted step, no more useless gesture, everything was timed. Answers to the questions « Where, when, how, how many, why? » delivered a domestic procedure. An example could be found in the Association for Domestic Art’s records very detailed sheets on potatoes’ peeling, written by the journalist Nicole Braive. She described the methodic analysis of every gesture, the timing, and a comparison between the different methods depending on each tool17.

To lay the groundwork of a science of synthesis between Taylorism and Fayolism

27The mechanistic approach of the traditional Taylorism impacted largely thought and practice of the League’s members. However, they claimed other influences too. Therefore, Paulette Bernège compared the house to a wide living organism whose every element, supporting each other, constituted many specialized systems governed by regulating laws (Bernège 1928: 31). It could recollect Henry Fayol first speech about organization in 1901. On this occasion, the French engineer compared the administrative system of a company to the human nervous system (Fayol 1901). Paulette Bernège seemed to take hold the « bio-social » conception of human relationships as thought by Fayol, who highlighted how the same principles govern different social classes (Rojas 2019: 117-128). She and Fayol were influenced by the same cultural and intellectual context, from the late nineteenth century and the early 20th century. She also took up the idea of Gabriel Tardes (Tarde 1890: 447) and Jean Izoulet (Izoulet 1894: 691), who compared the human body functionality to the organization of social bodies.

28Despite her claimed affiliation between her own practice and Fayol theories, that we could see for instance in her 1928 book, it would be hard to talk about Bernège’s work as part of the Fayolism. The French engineer organicist vision was mostly about human relationships within the social bodies. Moreover, that was the reason why he was known as the father of management. Bernège, however, had to deal with a structural limitation in her will to transfer the factory organization to the house. If the social body of a factory was made from many individuals filling multiple roles (worker, foreman, common engineer, main engineer, accountant), the social body of the house, on the opposite, was most of the time composed of only one individual, the housewife. She had to fulfill all functions: she had to be the worker, but also the chief, the methods office responsible… In her own time, Odile Henry (Henry 2003: 119-134) and Martine Martin (Martin1987: 89-106) had already highlighted this specificity in Bernège’s theories.

To initiate an experimental and applied science

29So, the housewife was not submitted to the organicist logic: she did not have to give information, to coordinate actions, in other words, to organize a management. However, there was indeed one affiliation between Fayol’s theories and the League’s work, even if it was not claimed by the League’s members. This link between them was the importance of training: it was the main concern of the French engineer, and more largely of the French organicist school. Household education as advocated by the League’s activists changed this conception of training. It was not about technical aspects anymore, but about applying a science:

(…), however, if we want to train real housewives, it is not so much the technique of a point to be perfected that is important, but rather a spirit of observation and criticism allowing to foresee, calculate, modify and improve. (Bernège 1928b : 4)

30The idea was to train housewives who would then be able to develop their own work methods, made from experiments. In other words, the point was to educate them to scientifical approach. The League for Household Efficiency wanted to publish books with exercises for students, to help them develop observation, judgement, personal experiment and practical sense (Bernège 1937: 44-46). Some teachers, such as Mrs Lassalle, tried to normalize future housewives’ behavior, for example with a notebook where every girl had to write about domestic observations, personal critics, or collective reflections after doing experiments. Thus Mme Lassalle imposed this practice in her own classes at the practical school in Charleville. (Lassalle 1931: 180-182). Like Mrs. Lassalle, the league therefore played a role in education and training through the courses given by its members.

  • 18 Despite the gap between Taylor’s work theories and an education psychology concerned by the child f (...)

31One of Bernège’s inspiration was the « active pedagogy » (Brayet 2010: 49-68) theorized by Maria Montessori (Houssaye 1994). This movement for a new education system was a 1930’s critic of the theorical learning and the teacher’s authority in traditional schools. Montessori School put the child at the center of the reflection and claimed the benefits of activities and practice in the learning process, blurring the limits between playing game and working (Montessori 1936: 88)18.

32Experiment was therefore highlighted and seemed to be the source of this new science institutionalization. Some researchers were made upon thousands of experiments, such as Miss Trouard-Riolle study on tiredness (Trouard-Riolle 1929). The use of figures and mathematics was also very important, as it offerd more credit to their work and allowed them to gain an undeniable scientifical aspect. It also showed how had to effort this group of female researchers had done to legitimize domestic science. Bernège published in the Bulletin du CNOF her colleague’s results: Cordillot, Lassalle and Charvet (Bernège 1937: 44-46). They also used schemes and charts in this idea, generally to demonstrate an evolution (Lassalle 1931).

Conclusion

33The domestic science work of Frederik and Bernège built upon the ideas of earlier works by male theorists, in particular, those of Taylor, Fayol, Bedel, Breton, Dujarric de la Rivière, and Le Chatelier. The women’s initiatives were strategically attached to broader national campaigns, a strategy adopted to legitimate the women theorists’ own initiatives. At the end, with this study of domestic science we could amply observe the dynamics and work of gender: these were not simply « her-stories ».

34Governance showed up in the matter of managing households through domestic science, as well as the role of a women’s League to advance the cause of domestic science as a science, even while political forces diminished its legitimacy. Several aspects contributed to its legitimation: structuration, regulation and publication.

35One of the wills of the experiments made for housewives’ trainees was to sensitize them to consumption, but also to the cost of food and all household chores (Bernège 1937). Domestic science implied to develop a whole administrative work, symbolized by the housewife’s office. This new household work required a large technical culture, in the dissemination of which women had to take an active part, by transmitting knowledge on household tooling and how to improve living conditions (Martin 1987). Therefore, they had an intimate link to the house mechanization. In this idea, the League for Household Efficiency’s publications showed the American way of life as an example to follow. For Henry, the middle-class houses mechanization offered a new social identity to women, opposed to the well-to-do woman served by many domestic workers (Henry 2003). With domestic science, a society was also portrayed.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

BEBEL, August. La femme dans le passé, le présent et l’avenir. Carré, 1891.

BERNEGE, Paulette, CORDILLOT, Marie-Louise. Guide de l’enseignement ménager. Librairie de l’Académie d’Agriculture, 1947.

BERNEGE, Paulette. De la méthode ménagère. Bulletin du CNOF, 1928b, p. 1-5.

BERNEGE, Paulette. Compte-rendu de la cinquième section économie domestique. Bulletin du CNOF, 1929, p. 13.

BERNEGE, Paulette. L’arithmétique et l’organisation du travail. Bulletin du CNOF, 1937, p. 44-46.

BERNEGE, Paulette. De la méthode ménagère. Dunod, 1928.

BERNEGE, Paulette. De la méthode ménagère. Dunod, 1934.

BIX, Amy. Girls Coming to Tech!: A History of American Engineering Education for Women. MIT Press, 2013.

BLAKESTAD, Nancy L. King's College of Household and Social Science and the Origins of Dietetics Education. Nutrition in Britain: Science, Scientists and Politics in the Twentieth Century. Routledge, 1997, p. 75-98.

BRAYET, Aurélie. L'image et la ménagère : former les femmes à devenir de bonnes ménagères. Images et formation des adultes. L’Harmattan, 2010, p. 49-68.

BRAYET, Aurélie. Un esprit nouveau pour une culture de l’objet technique. IN : BRAYET, Aurélie, Un Frigidaire et nous serons heureux ! Histoire technique et culturelle du réfrigérateur. Presses de l’Université de Technologie de Belfort-Montbéliard, 2019, p. 80-94.

BRAYET, Aurélie. 2020. Gestes techniques culinaires et rationalisation domestique : l’art de ménager la vie quotidienne. IN : LAMARD, Pierre, LEQUIN, Yves-Claude. Démocratie Technique. Presses de l’Université de Technologie de Belfort-Montbéliard, 2020, p. 57-74.

BRAYET, Aurélie. Des modes d’appropriation des objets techniques de la vie quotidienne, le cas des Arts ménagers culinaires. Thèse, Université de Technologie Belfort-Montbéliard – IRTES / RECITS, Belfort, France, 2017.

BRETON, Jules-Louis. La science et l’Art ménager. L’Art ménager, Février 1933.

CHABAUD-RYCHTER, Danielle. Women users in the design process of a food robot: Innovation in a French domestic appliance company. In: COCKBURN, Cynthia, FIRST-DILIC, RUZA (dir.), Bringing Technology Home. Gender and Technology in a Changing Europe. Open University Press Philadelphia, 1994.

CLARKEL, Jackie. France in the Age of Organization: Factory, Home and Nation from the 1920s to Vichy. Berghahn Books, 2011.

COCKBURN, Cynthia, ORMROD, Susan. Gender and Technology in the Making. SAGE Publications Ltd, 1993.

De GRAZIA, Victoria. Irresistible Empire: America's Advance Through Twentieth Century Europe. Harvard University Press, 2009.

DUJARRIC, René. Introduction au Congrès International d’Enseignement Ménager. Conference. Paris, 1922.

DYHOUSE, Carol. Love Lives From Cinderella to Frozen. Oxford University Press, 2021.

EMERSON, Harrington. The Twelve principles of efficiency. Engineering magazine edition, 1912.

FAYOL, Henri. Communication orale d’Henri Fayol lors de la séance solennelle de clôture. Bulletin de la société de l’industrie minérale, 1901.

FAYOL, Henri. Administration industrielle et générale. Bulletin de la société de l’industrie minérale, 1916, p. 5-162.

FREDERIK, Christine. La tenue scientifique de la maison. Revue de métallurgie, 1915, p. 351-382.

FRIDENSON, Patrick. Un tournant taylorien de la société française (1904-1918). Annales, Économies, Sociétés, Civilisations, 1987, p. 1031-1060.

FURLOUGH, Ellen. Consumer Cooperation in France: The Politics of Consumption, 1834-1930. Cornell University Press, 1991.

HENRY, Odile. Femmes et taylorisme : la rationalisation du travail domestique. Agone, 2003, no 28, , p. 119-134.

HOUSSAYE, Jean. Quinze pédagogues, leur influence aujourd’hui. Armand Colin, 1994.

IZOULET, Jean. La cité moderne. Métaphysique de la sociologie. Alcan, 1894.

LASSALLE, Marcelle. L’enseignement ménager. Bulletin du CNOF, June 1931, p. 180-182.

LE CHATELIER, Henry. Introduction au texte de Christine Frederik. Revue de métallurgie, 1915, p. 348-350.

LEAVITT, Sarah Abigail. From Catharine Beecher to Martha Stewart: a cultural history of domestic advice. University of North Carolina Press, 2002.

LETTE, Michel. Henry le Chatelier (1850-1936) ou la science appliquée à l’industrie. Presses Universitaires de Rennes, 2004.

MARTIN, Martine. Ménagère : une profession ? Les dilemmes de l’entre-deux-guerres. Le mouvement social, 1987, no 140, p. 89-106. https://0-doi-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/10.2307/3778678.

MONTESSORI, Maria. The Montessori Method. Scientific Pedagogy as Applied to Child Education. Frederick A. Stokes, 1912.

OLDENZIELL, Ruth, ZACHMANN, Karin. Cold War Kitchen. Americanization, technology and European users. The MIT Press, 2009.

PARR, Joy. Domestic goods: the material, the moral and the economic in the postwar years, University of Toronto Press, 1999.

PLY, Gustave. Étude sur l’organisation du service technique dans les manufactures d’armes. Berger-Levrault, 1888.

REAGIN, Nancy Ruth. Sweeping the German nation: domesticity and national identity in Germany, 1870-1945. Cambridge University Press, 2007.

ROJAS, Luc. Construire et diffuser le savoir des ingénieurs civils des mines : le Bulletin de la Société de l’industrie minérale (1855-1914). Philosophia Scientiæ, 2018, no 22-1, p. 185-201. https://0-doi-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/10.4000/philosophiascientiae.1334.

ROJAS, Luc. Entre l’École, le milieu et le temps : Henri Fayol ou la méthode du scientifique de l’industrie. IN : BERTILORENZI, Marco, DUBRUC, Nadine, PASSAQUI Jean-Phillipe (dir.). Henri Fayol les multiples facettes d’un manager. Presses des Mines, 2019, p. 117-128.

ROSSITER, Margaret W. Women scientists in America: before affirmative action, 1940-1972. JHU Press, 1998.

TARDE, Gabriel. Les lois de l’imitation : étude sociologique. Alcan, 1890.

TOURNES, Ludovic. Américanisation. Fayard, 2020.

TROUARD-RIOLLE, Yvonne. La fatigue dans les travaux ménagers. Bulletin du CNOF, 1929.

VEZES. De l’étude sur les poussières. Bulletin du CNOF, 1929.

Haut de page

Notes

1 French organisationalists, notably Henry le Chatelier, defined organisation as a science. The fields that embody the scientific principles of organisation were therefore defined as applied sciences.

2 In this article we decided to focus our study on French archives and French perception of the domestic sciences in order to emphasis on the specificity of the women governance sciencific approach of this subject. There was a lot of important works about the « servant problem » and the American influence on domestic sciences in various countries.

3 The Taylorism was a concept of work organization developed by Taylor. After giving up on Harvard University, Taylor turned to a career as a mechanic. In 1878 he worked as a simple laborer in a steelwork and in 1884 became chief engineer. He was therefore not trained as an engineer in a school but directly in the workshop. However, he supplemented this work at the factory with evening classes. This experience greatly influenced Taylor's concepts of work organization. In the 1880s, influenced by Dewey's decimal classification and the work of Frank B. and Lillian M. Gilbreth, he began experiments in work organization. He wanted to change the traditional, artisanal view of the profession to a more scientific view. This was quickly expressed in his ergonomic work on the gestures of metal workers. In 1890, he was hired by Bethlehem Iron Steel as an engineer and began to write articles on work organization. In 1912, he wrote a book summarizing his thinking : the principles of scientific management. He died in 1915 and left many disciples and authors who claimed his work.

4 Henry Le Chatelier became in 1907 the official translator of Taylorism in France. Trained at the Ecole Polytechnique and the School of Mines of Paris, Henry le Chatelier became a state engineer. He would never work for industry and prefered a career as a research teacher in chemistry. Nevertheless, his scientific work focused on the problems of the metallurgical and construction industries. He had a very scientific view of the industry. Thus, he was attracted to Taylor's thinking and translated several texts by the American engineer into French. In 1904 he founded the Revue de Métallurgie. With this magazine, Le Chatelier wanted to spread Taylor's ideas in French industry. Several years after Taylor's death, Henry le Chatelier published a book summarizing the American engineer's thinking in 1928.

5 Henri Fayol was trained at the Saint-Etienne School of Mines. He began his career as a civil engineer at the Commentry collieries in 1860. This colliery was part of a metallurgical and mining group : the Société de Commentry, Fourchambault et Decazeville. In 1866, he became director of this mine until 1888. During this period, he created his first management tools, which he described in his administrative doctrine in 1916. In 1888, he was appointed general manager of the Commentry, Fourchambault and Decazeville company. He held this position until his retirement in 1918. As early as 1900, he presented his ideas on company organization to the engineering community. But it was in 1916, with the publication of his administrative doctrine, that he gained wider recognition. Between 1916 and his death in 1925, he publicly shared his ideas on business organization.

6 This committee was created in 1926 by the merger of the Centre d’Etudes Administratives and the Conférence pour l’organisation française. It was the meeting of the two main organisational currents. Indeed, the Centre d'études administratives was founded by Henri Fayol, while the Conférence pour l'organisation française brought together the French disciples of Taylor.

7 In spite of an important bibliographic production, this organisation was in reality a group of women around the figure of Paulette Bernège. The league was structured in a pyramidal manner around Paulette Bernège and the Parisian section. However, the league was being emulated in the rest of France. Thus, a section was founded in 1919 in the Lyon region with Jeanne Grillet as president. This Lyon section created its own magazine ("Foyer-magazine") which became the official organ of the household organisation league in January 1935.

8 Unfortunately we did not have any information about the number of association members.

9 Annales des Mines ; Bulletin de la société de l’industrie minérale ; Mémoires des travaux de la société des ingénieurs civils de France ; La technique moderne ; Revue de métallurgie.

10 August Bebel was a German craftsman turned politician who wrote, among other things, "Women and Socialism" in 1879. In this work he advocated the equality of the sexes.

11 Records of Association Arts Ménagers. L’Art ménager (Feb. 1933) ; Breton, J-L. La science et l’Art ménager ; “Les Arts ménagers.

12 Records of Pasteur Institute, Fonds René Dujarric de la Rivière (1885-1969), Mémoire du Docteur René Dujarric introduced in the Congrès International d’Enseignement Ménager, Paris (1922), p. 1.

13 Records of René Dujarric de la Rivière (1885-1969), Archives of Pasteur Institute. Thesis, 1922, p. 1.

14 Reception de Madame Gilbreth (1927). Bulletin du CNOF, 7-8.

15 See for instance Paulette Bernège in Bulletin du CNOF (Nov 1928), De la Méthode ménagère, p. 1.

16 See the Bulletin du CNOF (1928-1929).

17 Records of Association Arts ménagers. Fonds Nicole Braive, note sur l’épluchage des pommes de terre.

18 Despite the gap between Taylor’s work theories and an education psychology concerned by the child feelings, Montessori influence appeared clearly in the Guide d’enseignement ménager written by Paulette Bernège, published right after the war (Bernège, Cordillot 1947).

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Aurélie Brayet et Luc Rojas, « Women, technology and rationalization »e-Phaïstos [En ligne], XII-2 | 2024, mis en ligne le 26 novembre 2024, consulté le 16 février 2025. URL : http://0-journals-openedition-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/ephaistos/13517 ; DOI : https://0-doi-org.catalogue.libraries.london.ac.uk/10.4000/12rzl

Haut de page

Auteurs

Aurélie Brayet

Aurélie Brayet est chercheure associée au laboratoire RÉCITS Femto-St (UMR 6174) de l’UTBM. Docteure en histoire des techniques, elle s’intéresse à l’histoire des Arts ménagers et aux patrimoines culinaires et alimentaires. Membre du comité scientifique sur l’histoire du Casino (étude de cas sur le café et le chocolat), elle est l’auteure d’articles et d’ouvrages sur le patrimoine de la cuisine dont Un Frigidaire et nous serons heureux ! (Presses de UTBM, 2019) et La cuisine, de la marmite au patrimoine (PUSE, 2021).

Articles du même auteur

  • Replacer le corps au centre de l’histoire technique de la cuisine
    Essay of a Culinary Technical Gesture Historical Cartography. Repositioning the Body at the Heart of History of Cooking Technology
    Paru dans e-Phaïstos, X-1 | 2022
  • Entretien avec Imke Plinta, urbano-graphiste allemande, consultante en design, commissaire de l’exposition « Déjà vu. Le design dans notre quotidien »
    Eight questions to Imke Plinta. Interview with Imke Plinta, German urban designer, design consultant and curator of the exhibition "Déjà vu. Design in our daily lives"
    Paru dans e-Phaïstos, X-1 | 2022
  • Introduction
    Culinary and Domestic Arts, Culture and Technology. Introduction
    Paru dans e-Phaïstos, X-1 | 2022
  • Retour sur un pan de l’histoire technique et culturelle du réfrigérateur
    The War of Cold has Indeed Taken Place... A Part of the Technical and Cultural History of the Refrigerator
    Paru dans e-Phaïstos, IX-2 | 2021

Luc Rojas

Luc Rojas est chercheur associé à l’Institut d’Histoire Moderne et Contemporaine (IHMC, UMR CNRS 8066). Ses préoccupations scientifiques portent sur les mutations et les changements technologiques entre les XVIIIe et XXe siècles. À travers ce champ d’investigation, il aborde de nombreux thèmes de recherche dont les principaux sont : les pratiques et les pensées des ingénieurs civils, les traces et mémoires de la civilisation industrielle et l’organisation du travail et des entreprises. Il se concentre désormais sur le rapport entre technique et environnement dans les travaux miniers. Dernièrement, il a publié un article sur l’adaptation de la doctrine Fayol aux entreprises Casino (« Adapter la doctrine Fayol ou le projet d’organisation de Geoffroy Guichard (1898-1940) », Les métamorphoses du commerce. L’entreprise Casino au miroir de la branche depuis la fin du XIXe siècle, PUSE, 2024).

Articles du même auteur

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search