ABSTRACT
Nineteenth-century reformist authors argued Victorian design was cluttered, ugly, in bad taste, wasteful, and dishonest. They contended that unsightly, dysfunctional Victorian houses degraded the quality of life and threatened the ethical values of their occupants. In this spirit, design reformers such as Candice Wheeler (1827–1923) raised awareness about household efficiency, hygiene, and aesthetics. To support and justify their public roles activist women sometimes used the “separate spheres” argument to highlight their special, supposedly innate ability as women to judge and rectify bad residential interior design. In criticizing Victorian design, male authors such as Charles Eastlake blamed status-seeking decorating housewives, while female authors like Edith Wharton blamed poorly trained upholsters for all the clutter and disorder. A growing number of commentators, such as H. R. Haweis and Rhoda and Agnes Garrett, suggested that interior decorators should be better trained and educated so they could do more tasteful and professional work.
