Both Tyler and Paul Krugman say the kitchen hasn’t changed much since the 1950s.
I happen to be an expert on some of those changes, because I live in a house with a late-50s-vintage kitchen, never remodelled. The nonself-defrosting refrigerator, and the gas range with its open pilot lights, are pretty depressing (anyone know a good contractor?) — but when all is said and done it is still a pretty functional kitchen.
And of course back in 1918 nearly half of Americans still lived on farms, most without electricity and many without running water. By any reasonable standard, the change in how America lived between 1918 and 1957 was immensely greater than the change between 1957 and the present.
First, off one doesn’t want to confuse the gains of urbanization with innovation. Unless, the point is that once you have driven the percentage of farm workers to nearly zero, you can’t go in lower. Yes, lots of people gained from moving to the cities. That was big deal in thickening markets and offering people new opportunity. Something that was only replicated by our “Global Village” of the internet.
However, note that Krugman is lamenting Pre-50s innovation. Cowen is lamenting the innovation from the 50s through the 70s.
Could it be that you can’t imagine living without the standard you grew up with but don’t really have as much appreciation of the really new stuff.
My interest in this question is deepened by the fact that I can’t identify with what Krugman or Cowen are saying at all. At least not when it comes to kitchens. Cars might be another story.
I live in a circa 2007 kitchen. To my eyes my grandmother, who raised her kids in the post-war boom, might as well have been keeping chickens in the back and de-feathering them by hand – a suggestion she might have found only mildly unorthodox.
The quality of kitchen appliances is much better: KitchenAids, Le Creusets, 4-Quart Food Processors, emersion blenders, an array of Santokus and Full-tang Chef’s Knives are the basic accoutrements of the home gourmand rather than cherished heirlooms or technological impossibilities.
The structure kitchen itself is also vastly different. My grandmother’s sink was an insult, the dishwasher a joke. The oven, such as it is, was functional enough – but so would a wood stove oven – and the two cook about as evenly. More importantly, being in the Kitchen was a depressing affair.
Here is a 50s era show kitchen, and given the copper pan I am betting a nicer version.

Here is a modern flat-packed kitchen. That is, there is nothing custom or handmade here. Indeed, Ikea has a show kitchen similar to this.

All of that and here is the kicker – people cook far less. That is, the demand side of cooking innovation is lacking.
Indeed, I find it ironic that one could both lament the housing boom and related equity extraction as well as point to our poor kitchens as indicative of our poor living standards.
As Megan McArdle once said the millennial housing boom was about Americans plastering their kitchens with stainless steel and smart appliances as if we were expecting houseguests from Mars. Though, more truthfully, this remodeling impulse was overwhelmed by the number people who felt they wanted to come downstairs each morning to their own private Starbucks. The bistro-style was a favorite of kitchen remodelers.
But, again I say, the reason there wasn’t even more of this is that fewer people actually cook. That’s demand side.

16 comments
Comments feed for this article
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 1:11 pm
iamreddave
How much of the lack of supposed lack of improvement could be explained in terms of more processing happening outside the home?
“About 44 percent of food dollars are spent outside the home – a figure that started rising sharply in the 1970s, as more women joined the work force. Full-service restaurant revenue rose 5 to 7 percent a year in the decade leading up to the Great Recession” * So we are eating out more.
Houses with small numbers of people cook less^$
So if houses have less people due to demographics. If we eat out more (or order in). Why would we have some brand new invention? If the dial up pizza can have a new dough maker that is twice as efficient it makes sense for them. I can ring them up now and get use of their new industrial standard food technology. Has the home technology stagnated and the restaurant/supermarket/TV dinner technology improved?
*http://www.coloradoan.com/article/20110125/LIFESTYLE/101250303/Cooking-s-comeback-Recession-restores-a-lasting-home-cooked-tradition
^http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/recs/cookingtrends/cooking.html
$http://meliac.wordpress.com/2009/03/01/home-cooked-meals-are-they-a-thing-of-the-past/
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 1:26 pm
Roland
I think you are off base here, Karl. I grew up in a kitchen with a solid fuel stove that I fed every day–having gas delivered through a pipe is a huge change. But nothing else from that kitchen (rural, British (!)) is that different to my expensive urban kitchen. The dishwasher loaded from the top, the refrigerator had a very small freezer compartment, but the technology was fundamentally the same. KitchenAids and Le Creusets, of course, have been around for more than half a century.
But your most important point is analytical, and here too I think the argument goes the other way. We cook less because there are so many competing demands on our leisure hours. Many people like to cook (including men, relatively recent consumers of kitchen appliances) but it takes time. Which suggests that if real technological innovation was available we would jump on it.
It occurs to me that we have in the case of domestic kitchens a form of Baumol’s disease. Our tools and appliances can’t make it more *efficient”* to cook at home–making true bearnaise takes a fixed amount of time. But they make it more fun, and with higher quality outputs…
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 1:35 pm
MorallyBankrupt
microwave ovens. induction stoves. convection ovens. energy-star appliances. electric pilots. fridges that make ice and purify water. right, no innovation at all.
I have a coffee machine that grinds and brews fresh coffee every morning. all i have to do is make sure i emptied the old grounds, filled the water tank and the bean canister isn’t empty. That’s pretty nice.
I agree with you 100%. What more do people want? They tried to give us fridges and ovens with IP addresses we could control online and look up recipes on and nobody bought them. I used to work with this old guy that used to have an iPhone, a depression baby, and he always said “I don’t know what you kids are so unhappy about. I got a little machine in my pocket that lets me call my daughter and it plays all the records I have and it gets them from space” Ignoring the fact that cell-phone signals don’t come from space, he’s pretty spot-on. I’ll sacrifice space-age pasta pots for a space-age office.
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 2:10 pm
Roland
Nifty coffee makers and stoves increase quality at the margin (how much better than Mr Coffee coffee makers?) but not time taken to do most core kitchen tasks. And the quality is the result of much greater capital investment. Kitchens are more fun, and the results are far better, but I’m still not persuaded that total factor productivity in domestic cooking has risen that much.
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 4:54 pm
MorallyBankrupt
I wake up and fresh-ground coffee is hot and ready to be poured. i think it’s nice, and you are right, it doesn’t save me hours, but it beats my previous routine which was to set the kettle, grind coffee, use the french press to make it, and then pour it in a thermos so it would stay hot (new coffeemaker has an insulated pot).
time saved at the margin, but time saved nonetheless. its quicker, cheaper, better quality and more convenient than standing in line for the starbucks, even if it’s only for 2 min or so.
but, i mean, we’ve also stagnated in the bathroom. it takes me just as long to use the bathroom and shower, and it takes about as much water as it took my grandfather. I don’t end up any cleaner than he did or emptier of waste.
And what about beds, and chairs and doors and cabinets and couches?!
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 2:21 pm
Zenobia
Well, what about the induction stove? Sure, they’re still pretty rare, but they are faster. And I do think that things are easier overall. Quality cookware and cutlery are more relatively affordable and they do make a difference. The Le Ceruset is was not the large fraction of our income that it would have been 50 years ago. Also, larger refrigerators must make a difference, I mean if we’re talking about time constraints, then cutting out the daily trip to the market had to be a help.
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 3:05 pm
Lord
You need a picture of a 1918 kitchen. Then even cupboards would have been relatively uncommon. Electricity was still a novelty available to early adopters for lighting. A fireplace or stove, a basin or sink, some tables and chairs. Innovation continues, but it is pales in comparison to the vast changes that occurred earlier. It would take a replicator or robot to match the magnitude of changes.
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 3:18 pm
Lord
Here is a state of the art one. It has natural gas, a real rarity for that early.
http://www.archives.kingsimages.net/generated/0101/010153/v001/transform24/cache3461/Kitchen_at_Campden_Hill,_Department_of_Household_and_Social_Science,_King_s_College_for_Women,_c1918_(Ref__Q_PH3_11).jpg
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 6:38 pm
Megan McArdle
Gas was not a rarity in urban environments of the period; every house was wired for it, because that’s how they lit their houses.
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 8:46 pm
Lord
If your city had gas. Quite a range though.
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 3:35 pm
Craig
In the Henry Ford Museum in Michigan, among many other wonders, is a display of four “typical” American kitchens through history–the colonial period, the mid 19th Century, the 1890s, and the 1930s. It’s really something to see: the 1890 kitchen could almost be from the Middle Ages; the 1930s one could almost be from today.
So, yeah, kitchens are basically kitchens. But what about it? I don’t quite apprehend why the design of refrigerators and ovens is a valuable proxy for the rate of innovation in society at large. Telecommunications, just to pull one example out of the air (snicker), has changed radically in the past twenty years, and seems likely to keep doing so. You remember when we used to have travel agents, record stores, and newspapers? And those slick iPhone 4′s are going to look _silly_ in another ten years, you know.
So things move in fits and starts. Even in the kitchen, if we only look at the big appliances, we’ll miss one of the striking changes from the 1950′s. One word: plastics. You’re going to tell me the squeezable ketchup bottle isn’t a giant leap for mankind?
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 4:55 pm
IVV
One thing that should be kept in mind is that the purpose of the kitchen has greatly changed over the years, too. It used to be that the kitchen was a private room of the house, mainly for work (cooking the family meals). As a result, it would be smaller, and in a corner of the house different from the main entertaining areas (next to the dining room, away from the living room).
Nowadays, the kitchen is the central entertainment location. As a result, they have grown prettier, larger, more centrally located in the house, and more open. The kitchen is the new living room, with only the need for a large-screen TV separating the kitchen from the main entertainment area.
No, the kitchen doesn’t perform the task of cooking a meal much easier. But between the new role for the kitchen, and the new purchasing patterns for meals (more prepared directly from the store), it isn’t really expected to get better at cooking.
Monday ~ January 31st, 2011 at 6:41 pm
rjsigmund
50s kitchen of the future: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiACOLuYlJ4
Tuesday ~ February 1st, 2011 at 3:31 am
Lurker
Not sure whether anyone noticed the connection, but the attention span of the average consumer has decreased slowly but surely during the past 20-30 years.
Things are “more instant” these days and people expect things to be more instant: mobile phones, the Internet, TV, etc.
Shorter attention span does not help kitchen activities: cooking food still takes a good 60 minutes and it is physically constrained, so hard to innovate on. Pre-cooked food tastes differently due to chemical constraints, etc.
So inevitably people turned away from cooking and the demand for innovation in the kitchen dropped. Yes, appliances are expected to be more energy efficient and must follow trends of fashion – but that’s it roughly.
Coffee machines are pretty much the only exception – and that really supports my points: it’s a special case where the whole process could be fully automated so people have to spend much less time in the kitchen, cooking coffee – and the resulting coffee is also better (or at least the result is more consistent in quality).
Tuesday ~ February 1st, 2011 at 2:30 pm
daily links 02.01.11 « increasingmu
[...] One obnoxious meme as of late has been respected economists like Krugman and Cowen saying that growth hasn’t really been substantial in the last fifty years for silly reasons like they could plausibly use a 1950s era kitchen and cook just as well as they do today. Karl Smith takes them down a peg. [...]
Tuesday ~ February 1st, 2011 at 4:03 pm
Kitchen innovation « Blunt Object
[...] The Kitchen Table (Modeled Behavior) I live in a circa 2007 kitchen. To my eyes my grandmother, who raised her kids in the post-war boom, might as well have been keeping chickens in the back and de-feathering them by hand – a suggestion she might have found only mildly unorthodox. [...]