Author: Alexandra Rusu
As early as the second half of the 19th century, Western European social reformers, including doctors, architects, and philosophers, drew attention to the importance of improving the quality of living conditions in urban areas. They claimed that every stage of a house construction, from the exterior to the interior design, had to guarantee the physical, mental, and moral health of the citizens, the goal being the improvement of human nature, implicitly of society. “Houses were no longer only reflections of the people who lived in them: now the right kind of architecture was also thought to imbue its residents with the right kind of thoughts” (Flanders, 2014, 169). The decorative excess practiced in that era, whether we are talking about the facades’ lush decoration, or the eclecticism practiced in the interior decoration of some private residences, begins to be associated with waste, when the only waste allowed in the house of a respectable family was that of space.
In press articles but also through conferences held by established doctors, the public was warned about the dangerous substances that could be hidden in home decoration products, some of them highly valued and very expensive. An eloquent example, which has caused controversy among scientists for almost a century, is that of arseno-cupric pigments, such as Scheele green and its variety, Paris green (copper tri arsenide II acetate), which were used in the production of wallpaper, but also in dyes for textiles, candles, some sweets, or toys (Haslam, 2013, 76-81). In the wallpaper, humidity, abrasion, or heat caused toxic fumes to be released into the home, causing mysterious illnesses and deaths, especially among children. Symptoms of poisoning included headache, fatigue, abdominal pain, vomiting or peripheral neuropathy, and severe effects resembled those produced by diseases such as cholera or tuberculosis. Even the adhesive used to apply the wallpaper was a health hazard, spreading “into the air germs liable to cause inflammation of the stomach and intestines,” (Era Nouă, 1895, 3) especially when the new wallpaper was applied over older layers. Doctors’ testimonies led to the strict regulation of arsenic use in industry (textile, medicine, cosmetics, or food industry). In 1890, the last company producing wallpaper with arsenic-based inks in Europe ceased production.
The Romanian press from the beginning of the 20th century still mentioned “accidental poisonings caused by green arsenical dyes, used more often in the past, less often today, to dye fabrics and wallpapers” (Era Nouă, 1895, 2) and debated the toxicity of aniline dyes, “especially fuchsin and coralline” (Era Nouă, 1895, 3). “Fuchsin is not poisonous in itself, but rosaniline is obtained, the salts of which these coloring matters are, by treating the aniline with oxidizing bodies, two of which are as dangerous as they are frequently used: mercuric nitrate and arsenic acid; for this reason, it rarely happens that fuchsia does not contain a greater or lesser amount of toxic substance. Clothes dyed with this substance and applied immediately to the body may cause local vesicular eruptions as well as general symptoms.” (Era Nouă, 1895, 3)
Above the danger of poisoning stood the fear of “poisoned air” (Sima, 1889, 41), a fear amplified by the epidemics that wreaked havoc in that era. Campaigns against miasma transformed home hygiene from a status indicator into a public health issue (Flanders, 2017, 256), so that the fulfillment of hygienic requirements could no longer be sacrificed to aesthetic reasons.
From the design stage of the building, the owners were advised to consider the protection of the house from moisture, by strategically placing it and providing it with large windows, facing east and/or west (Bonami, 1888, 460-463). “Airing” (Albina Carpaților, 1878, 440; Sima, 1889, 41) was done by ventilating the home as often as possible and preventing dampness from setting in. Moreover, in the first year after the completion of construction, the family was encouraged to live upstairs (Albina Carpaților, 1878, 440). Exposure to the west or southwest was recommended for the rooms where the tenants spend most of their time (bedroom, study, living room), thus benefiting from heat and light for most of the day, being ventilated in the morning. Conversely, the east or northeast orientation was considered more suitable for the reception hall, dining room or kitchen, areas where family members did not linger much (Sima, 1889, 42). In terms of space heating, 16 degrees was thought to be the optimal, “healthiest” temperature. (Sima, 1889, 43)
“The code of customs of good society or the art of behaving pleasantly in society” (Nicu Filipescu-Dubău) from 1889 dedicated a chapter to the perfect order that should characterize the home of a good citizen. Among other things, the rules of conduct in the household administration stipulated, that “furniture will not be found badly maintained and unkempt because without such care, luxury and good assortment only produces disgust and criticism” (Filipescu-Dubău, 1884, 30-31). Other works, veritable encyclopedias of “hygiene stories” listed recipes for eliminating insects and rodents, removing mold, disinfecting floors, protecting furniture from decay, preparing soap or various solutions for cleaning objects, dyeing, washing, and maintaining clothes and other house furnishings, etc. (Filipescu-Dubău, 1884; Sima, 1889)
Moreover, the first hygienic regulations for buildings were formulated during this era, a coordinated effort between doctors and the local administration, playing a significant role in preventing the spread of tuberculosis. In addition, starting from 1908, the Bucharest city hall obliged city residents who wanted to build a house to present plans signed by architects, who thus became responsible for the quality of the construction.
Text: Alexandra Rusu
Photo: The drawing room of Emanoil Porumbaru’s house, at 4 Piața Amzei Street, before 1914. The photo is part of the Bucharest Municipality Museum heritage, Photography Collection.
Bibliography:
Albina Carpaților, (1878). Nr.37, Anul 11.
Bonami, P. (1888). Dictionnaire de médecine domestique a l’usage des familles, Paris, Librairie J.-B. Baillière et fils.
Era Nouă, (1895). 6, 296.
Flanders, J. (2014). The making of home, London, Atlantic Books.
Haslam, J. C. (2013) Deadly décor: a short history of arsenic poisoning in the nineteenth century in Res Medica Journal of the Royal Medical Society, Volume 21, Issue 1, pp.76-81.
Neț, M. (2021). Au fost odată două orașe. New York și București la 1900, București, Editura Corint.
Sima, G. (1889). Isvor de bunăstare sau mai multe sute de îndreptări și povețe scurte și practice din Economia de casă, grădinărit, higienă, economia de câmp și vite, viierit, conservarea vinului și vinuri de poame, pomărit, albinărit și alte multe terene de deprindere, Sibiu, Tipografia W. Krafft.
