Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T12:45:33.871Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Interwar Period as a Machine Age: Mechanics, the Machine, Mechanisms, and the Market in Discourse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 September 2018

Richard Staley
Richard Staley*
Affiliation:
Cambridge University Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Argument

This paper examines some of the ways that machines, mechanisms, and the new mechanics were treated in post-World War I discourse. Spengler's 1919 Decline of the West and Hessen's 1931 study of Newton have usually been tied closely to Weimar culture in Germany, and Soviet politics. Linking them also to the writings of Rathenau, Simmel, Chase, Mumford, Hayek, and others, as well as to Dada and film studies of the city will indicate central features of a wide-ranging, international discourse on the machine and mechanization. I argue that machines were so thoroughly integrated into social and economic experience that we can treat this as a distinctive new phase in the cultural history of mechanics, what some contemporaries called the “machine age”: a period in which rather than the hand mill or steam engine, the city stands as an appropriate realization (and sometimes symbol) of the significance but also ambiguities and tensions of mechanical life; and concepts of mechanization were extended to encompass the economy and market mechanisms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Science in Context , Volume 31 , Issue 3: Interactions of Interwar Physics: Technology, Instruments, and Other Sciences , September 2018 , pp. 263 - 292
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agar, Jon. 2003. The Government Machine: A Revolutionary History of the Computer. History of Computing. Cambridge MA and London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ashworth, William J. 2014. “The British Industrial Revolution and the Ideological Revolution: Science, Neoliberalism and History.” History of Science 52 (2):178–199.Google Scholar
Bertoloni Meli, Domenico. 2006. Thinking with Objects: The Transformation of Mechanics in the Seventeenth Century. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Biro, Matthew. 2009. The Dada Cyborg: Visions of the New Human in Weimar Berlin. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Bix, Amy Sue. 2000. Inventing Ourselves out of Jobs? America's Debate over Technological Unemployment, 1929–1981. Studies in Industry and Society. Baltimore and London: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Bukharin, Nikolai I. 1931. “Theory and Practice from the Standpoint of Dialectical Materialism.” In Science at the Cross Roads: Papers Presented to the International Congress of the History of Science and Technology Held in London from June 29th to July 3rd, 1931 by the Delegates of the U.S.S.R., 1–23. London: Kniga.Google Scholar
Caldwell, Bruce. 2016. “F. A. Hayek and the Economic Calculus.” History of Political Economy 48 (1): 151–180.Google Scholar
Caldwell, Bruce. 2004. Hayek's Challenge: An Intellectual Biography of F.A. Hayek. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Callon, Michel, ed. 1998. The Laws of the Markets, Sociological Review Monograph. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Carson, Cathryn, Kojevnikov, Alexei, and Trischler, Helmuth, eds. 2011. Weimar Culture and Quantum Mechanics: Selected Papers by Paul Forman and Contemporary Perspectives on the Forman Thesis. London and Singapore: Imperial College Press, World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar
Chase, Stuart. 1929. Men and Machines. London: J. Cape.Google Scholar
Cook, Simon. 2007. “Our Eyes, Spinning Like Propellers: Wheel of Life, Curve of Velocities, and Dziga Vertov's ‘Theory of the Interval’.” October 121:79–91.Google Scholar
Einstein, Albert. 1917. Über Die spezielle und die allgemeine Relativitätstheorie: Gemeinverständlich. Braunschweig: Vieweg.Google Scholar
Feldman, Seth. [1998]2013. “‘Peace between Man and Machine’: Dziga Vertov's Man with a Movie Camera.” In Documenting the Documentary: Close Readings of Documentary Film and Video, edited by Grant, Barry Keith and Sloniowski, Jeanette, 19–34. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar
Follett, David. 1978. The Rise of the Science Museum under Henry Lyons. London: Science Museum.Google Scholar
Forman, Paul. 1971. “Weimar Culture, Causality and Quantum Theory, 1918–1927: Adaptation by German Physicists and Mathematicians to a Hostile Intellectual Environment.” Historical Studies in the Physical Sciences 3:1–116.Google Scholar
Forman, Paul. 2007. “The Primacy of Science in Modernity, of Technology in Postmodernity, and of Ideology in the History of Technology.” History and Technology 23:1–152.Google Scholar
Freeman, R. Austin. 1921. Social Decay and Regeneration. London: Constable.Google Scholar
Graham, Loren R. 1985. “The Socio-Political Roots of Boris Hessen: Soviet Marxism and the History of Science.” Social Studies of Science 15:705–722.Google Scholar
Grether, Ewald T. 1958. “Edwin Griswold Nourse.” Journal of Marketing 22 (4):417–419.Google Scholar
Hall, Karl. 2015. Unpublished ms. contribution to Global Patent Cultures.Google Scholar
Hård, Mikael. 1998. “German Regulation: The Integration of Modern Technology into National Culture.” In The Intellectual Appropriation of Technology: Discourses on Modernity, 1900–1939, edited by Hård, Mikael and Jamison, Andrew, 33–67. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hård, Mikael, and Jamison, Andrew, eds. 1998. The Intellectual Appropriation of Technology: Discourses on Modernity, 1900–1939. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hart, David M. 1998. Forged Consensus: Science, Technology, and Economic Policy in the United States, 1921–1953. Princeton Studies in American Politics: Historical, International, and Comparative Perspectives. Princeton NJ and Chichester: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich A. 1944. The Road to Serfdom. London: George Routledge and Sons.Google Scholar
Hayek, Friedrich A. 1945. “The Use of Knowledge in Society.” American Economic Review 35:519– 530.Google Scholar
Henderson, Linda Dalrymple. 2008. “Einstein and 20th-Century Art: A Romance of Many Dimensions.” In Einstein for the 21st Century, edited by Galison, Peter, Holton, Gerald, and Schweber, Sam, 101–127. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hentschel, Klaus. 1990. Interpretationen und Fehlinterpretationen der speziellen und der allgemeinen Relativitätstheorie durch Zeitgenossen Albert Einsteins. Science Networks Historical Studies, Vol. 6. Basel and Boston: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Hentschel, Klaus, ed. 1996. Physics and National Socialism: An Anthology of Primary Sources. Basel, Boston, and Berlin: Birkhäuser.Google Scholar
Herf, Jeffrey. 1984. Reactionary Modernism: Technology, Culture, and Politics in Weimar and the Third Reich. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Herskovits, Melville J. 1940. The Economic Life of Primitive Peoples. New York and London: A.A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Hessen, Boris. 1931. “The Social and Economic Roots of Newton's ‘Principia’.” In Science at the Cross Roads: Papers Presented to the International Congress of the History of Science and Technology Held in London from June 29th to July 3rd, 1931 by the Delegates of the U.S.S.R., 1–62. London: Kniga.Google Scholar
Hilliard, Christopher. 2012. English as a Vocation: The Scrutiny Movement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 1994. “Hayek, Evolution, and Spontaneous Order.” In Natural Images in Economic Thought: Markets Read in Tooth and Claw, edited by Mirowski, Philip, 408–448. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jackson, Ben. 2010. “At the Origins of Neo-Liberalism: The Free Economy and the Strong State, 1930–1947.” Historical Journal of Film, Radio and Television 53:129–151.Google Scholar
Jakobsen, Kjetil, Andersen, Ketil G., Halvorson, Tor, and Myklebust, Sissel. 1998. “Engineering Cultures: European Appropriations of Americanism.” In The Intellectual Appropriation of Technology: Discourses on Modernity, 1900–1939, edited by Hård, Mikael and Jamison, Andrew, 101–127. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jamison, Andrew. 1998 “American Anxieties: Technology and the Reshaping of Republican Values.” In The Intellectual Appropriation of Technology: Discourses on Modernity, 1900–1939, edited by Hård, Mikael and Jamison, Andrew, 69–100. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Joffe, A.F. 1931. “Physics and Technology.” In Science at the Cross Roads: Papers Presented to the International Congress of the History of Science and Technology Held in London from June 29th to July 3rd, 1931 by the Delegates of the U.S.S.R., 1–4. London: Kniga.Google Scholar
Joravsky, David. 1961. Soviet Marxism and Natural Science, 1917–1932. Studies of the Russian Institute, Columbia University. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Jordan, John M. 1994. Machine-Age Ideology: Social Engineering and American Liberalism, 1911–1939. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Ketabgian, Tamara. 2011. The Lives of Machines: The Industrial Imaginary in Victorian Literature and Culture. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, digital culture books.Google Scholar
Knight, Frank H. [1921]1933. Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. Series of Reprints of Scarce Tracts in Economic and Political Science. London: London School of Economics and Political Science.Google Scholar
Kojevnikov, Alexei. 2008. “The Phenomenon of Soviet Science.” Osiris 23:115–135.Google Scholar
Kotkin, Stephen. 2001. “Modern Times: The Soviet Union and the Interwar Conjuncture.” Kritika: Explorations in Russian and Eurasian History 2 (1):111–164.Google Scholar
Kuenzli, Rudolf E., ed. 2011. Dada (Themes and Movements). London: Phaidon.Google Scholar
Lenard, Philipp. 1936. Deutsche Physik, 4 vols. München: J.F. Lehmann.Google Scholar
Lewis, Paul. 2016. “The Emergence of ‘Emergence’ in the Work of F. A. Hayek: A Historical Analysis.” History of Political Economy 48 (1):111–150.Google Scholar
Mackay, John. 2007. “Film Energy: Process and Metanarrative in Dziga Vertov's ‘the Eleventh Year’ (1928).” October 121:41–78.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, Donald A., Muniesa, Fabian, and Siu, Lucia. 2007. Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of Economics. Princeton NJ and Woodstock: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Makela, Maria. 1997. “The Misogynist Machine: Images of Technology in the Work of Hannah Höch.” In Women in the Metropolis: Gender and Modernity in Weimar Culture, edited by von Ankum, Katharina, 106–27. Berkeley CA and London: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Malinowski, Bronislaw. 1921. “The Primitive Economics of the Trobriand Islanders.” The Economic Journal 31 (121):1–16.Google Scholar
Maskin, Eric S. 2015. “Friedrich Von Hayek and Mechanism Design.” The Review of Austrian Economics 28:247–252.Google Scholar
Mayer, Eduard von. 1906. Technik und Kultur: Gedanken über die Verstaatlichung des Menschen. Berlin: Hüpeden & Merzyn.Google Scholar
McLaren, Angus. 2012. Reproduction by Design: Sex, Robots, Trees, and Test-Tube Babies in Interwar Britain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip. 1988. Against Mechanism: Protecting Economics from Science. Totowa NJ: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip. 2002. Machine Dreams: Economics Becomes a Cyborg Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mirowski, Philip. 2007. “Naturalizing the Market on the Road to Revisionism: Caldwell on Hayek's Challenge.” Journal of Institutional Economics 3:351–372.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. 1988. Colonising Egypt. Cambridge Middle East Library. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. 2005. “Economics: Economists and the Economy in the Twentieth Century.” In The Politics of Method in the Human Sciences: Positivism and Its Others in the Social Sciences, edited by Steinmetz, George, 126–141. Durham and London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Timothy. 2002. Rule of Experts:Egypt, Techno-Politics, Modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Moellendorff, Wichard von. 1912. “Der Ingenieur.” Die Zukunft 80:425–432.Google Scholar
Moellendorff, Wichard von. 1913. “Das technische Motiv.” Die Zukunft 85:415–420.Google Scholar
Mumford, Lewis. 1934. Technics and Civilization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mumford, Lewis. 2011. Technics and Civilization. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar
Nourse, Edwin Griswold. 1918. The Chicago Produce Market: A Study of Market Mechanism as a Factor in Price Determination. Schaffner, Hart & Essays, Marx Prize, Xxv. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Oldenziel, Ruth. 1999. Making Technology Masculine: Men, Women and Modern Machines in America, 1870–1945. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Omodeo, Pietro D. 2016. “After Nikolai Bukharin.” History of the Human Sciences 29 (4–5):13–34.Google Scholar
Ostwald, Wilhelm. 1909. Energetische Grundlagen der Kulturwissenschaft. Leipzig: Alfred Kröner Verlag.Google Scholar
Rabinbach, Anson. 1990. The Human Motor: Energy, Fatigue, and the Origins of Modernity. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Rathenau, Walther. 1919. Der Kaiser: Eine Betrachtung. Berlin: S. Fischer Verlag.Google Scholar
Rathenau, Walther. [1912]1925. Zur Kritik der Zeit. Berlin: S. Fischer.Google Scholar
Riskin, Jessica. 2015. The Restless Clock: A History of the Centuries-Long Argument over What Makes Living Things Tick. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Rodgers, Daniel T. 1998. Atlantic Crossings: Social Politics in a Progressive Age. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, Michael. 2005. “Darwinism and Mechanism: Metaphor in Science.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 36 (2):285–302.Google Scholar
Ruttmann, Walther. 1928. “The Filming of Berlin.” New York Times, May 20, 108.Google Scholar
Hirzel Verlag, S.. 1919. “S. Hirzel Leipzig, Träger des Nobelpreises für Physik für das Jahr 1918, Dr. Max Planck, für das Jahr 1919, Dr. Johannes Stark.” Physikalische Zeitschrift 20 (23):IV.Google Scholar
Hirzel Verlag, S.. 1920a. “Soeben Erschien in neuer vermehrter Auflage: Über Relativitätsprinzip, Äther, Gravitation, Von P. Lenard, Preis 5 Mark.” Physikalische Zeitschrift 21 (13):II.Google Scholar
Hirzel Verlag, S.. 1920b. “Kollegien-Hefte.” Physikalische Zeitschrift 21 (11):V.Google Scholar
Schatzberg, Eric. 2006. “Technik Comes to America: Changing Meanings of Technology before 1930.” Technology and Culture 47:486–512.Google Scholar
Schatzberg, Eric. 2012. “From Art to Applied Science.” Isis 103 (3):555–563.Google Scholar
Scott, James C. 1998. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Simmel, Georg. [1903]2007. “Extract from ‘the Metropolis and Mental Life’.” Translated by Wolff, Kurt H.. In Modernism, edited by Whitworth, Michael H., 182–189. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sombart, Werner. 1913. Der Bourgeois; Zur Geistesgeschichte des modernen Wirtschaftsmenschen. München: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
Sombart, Werner. 1911. “Technik und Kultur.” Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik 33:305– 347.Google Scholar
Spengler, Oswald. [1918]1919. Der Untergang des Abendlandes: Umrisse einer Morphologie der Weltgeschichte. 1. Band: Gestalt und Wirklichkeit. 4., unveränderte Auflage. München: Oskar Beck.Google Scholar
Spengler, Oswald. [1922]1923. Der Untergang des Abendlandes: Umrisse einer Morphologie der Weltgeschichte. 2. Band: Welthistorische Perspektiven, München: Oskar Beck.Google Scholar
Spengler, Oswald. 1904. Heraklit: Eine Studie über den energetischen Grundgedanken seiner Philosophie. Halle: Hofdruckerei C.A. Kaemmerer & Co.Google Scholar
Spengler, Oswald. 1937. Der metaphysischen Grundgedanke der heraklitischen Philosophie. München: C.H. Beck.Google Scholar
Staley, Richard. 2008. “The Fin De Siècle Thesis.” Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte 31:311– 330.Google Scholar
Tuerck, David G. 1995. “Economics as Mechanism: The Mind as Machine in Hayek's Sensory Order.” Constitutional Political Economy 6 (3):281–292.Google Scholar
Turvey, Malcolm. 2007. “Vertov: Between the Organism and the Machine.” October 121:5–18.Google Scholar
van Dongen, Jeroen. 2007. “Reactionaries and Einstein's Fame: “German Scientists for the Preservation of Pure Science,” Relativity, and the Bad Nauheim Meeting.” Physics in Perspective 9 (2):212–230.Google Scholar
Veblen, Thorstein. [1921]1963. The Engineers and the Price System. New York: Harcourt.Google Scholar
Volkov, Shulamit. 2012. Walther Rathenau: The Life of Weimar's Fallen Statesman. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
von Hayek, F. A. 1933. “The Trend of Economic Thinking.” Economica 13:121–137.Google Scholar
von Hayek, F.A. 1937. “Economics and Knowledge.” Economica 4 (13):33–54.Google Scholar
Wazeck, Milena. 2010. “The 1922 Einstein Film: Cinematic Innovation and Public Controversy.” [In English]. Physics in Perspective 12:163–179.Google Scholar
Wazeck, Milena. 2014. Einstein's Opponents: The Public Controversy About the Theory of Relativity in the 1920s. Translated by Koby, Geoffrey S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wazeck, Milena. 2009. Einsteins Gegner: Die öffentliche Kontroverse um die Relativitätstheorie in den 1920er Jahren. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.Google Scholar
Werskey, Gary. 1971. “Introduction: On the Reception of Science at the Cross Roads in England.” In Science at the Cross Roads: Papers Presented to the International Congress of the History of Science and Technology Held in London from June 29th to July 3rd, 1931 by the Delegates of the U.S.S.R., xi–xxix. London: Frank Cass & Co.Google Scholar
Werskey, Gary. 1988. The Visible College: A Collective Biography of British Scientists and Socialists of the 1930s. London: Free Association Books.Google Scholar
Wilson, Daniel C. S. 2015. “J.A. Hobson and the Machinery Question.” Journal of British Studies 54 (2):377–405.Google Scholar
Wise, M. Norton. 2011. “Forman Reformed, Again.” In Weimar Culture and Quantum Mechanics: Selected Papers by Paul Forman and Contemporary Perspectives on the Forman Thesis, edited by Carson, Cathryn, Kojevnikov, Alexei, and Trischler, Helmuth, 415–432. London and Singapore: Imperial College Press/World Scientific Publishing.Google Scholar
Zavadovsky, B. 1931. “The ‘Physical’ and ‘Biological’ in the Process of Organic Evolution.” In Science at the Cross Roads: Papers Presented to the International Congress of the History of Science and Technology Held in London from June 29th to July 3rd, 1931 by the Delegates of the U.S.S.R., 1–12. London: Kniga.Google Scholar