American and British exhibitions of town planning, dwellings, and home furnishings proliferated during World War II as architects seized an opportunity to rethink housing on a mass scale. “Tomorrow on Display” analyzes a range of these displays to illuminate how wartime planning and modern architecture were inextricably intertwined. The dissertation demonstrates how concepts such as the neighborhood unit and the production of modern dwellings were spurred by the war as architects in the U.S. and Britain envisioned more egalitarian forms of living. But it also illustrates how architects, curators, and institutions promoted such concepts, visualizing postwar housing for non-professional audiences by connecting architectural designs to ideas about democracy during and following the war. As “Tomorrow on Display” shows, with men enlisted in the conflict, many of these new curators and museum personnel were women. Chapter one analyzes the exhibitions Wartime Housing (Museum of Modern Art, 1942) and Rebuilding Britain (Royal Institute of British Architects, 1943) to illustrate how curators framed the war as an opportunity to modernize housing. Chapter two examines Look at Your Neighborhood (MoMA, 1944) and Planning Your Neighborhood (Army Bureau of Current Affairs, 1945) to illuminate the ways in which town-planning displays communicated to visitors the egalitarian potential of the neighborhood unit. Chapter three looks at Integrated Building (MoMA, 1945) and Kitchen Planning (British Gas Industry, 1945) to elucidate how kitchen-planning exhibits encouraged women to think of the postwar future by planning their new homes. Finally, chapter four studies how model housing displays such as Idea House II (Walker Art Center, 1947-48) and 4 Ways of Living (Ministry of Health/Council of Industrial Design, 1949) encouraged postwar audiences to envision themselves living in and furnishing modern homes. Collectively this research reveals how curators and their institutions called upon visitors to advocate, personalize, and consume as democratic duties. Ultimately, the project argues that the exhibitions’ underlying ideological agendas constructed and reinforced a democratic citizenry to combat the totalitarian regimes against which the U.S. and Britain were unified. / 2025-10-31T00:00:00Z

Ian Fleming’s debut novel Casino Royale (2015) introduces the iconic character James Bond. The savvy British spy who must save the world from Soviet villain is a cultural icon the world over. Yet not much is known of his personal political leanings. Fleming once claimed that James Bond’s politics lies just left of center. In this essay I analyze where James Bond lies on the left-right political scale by using Cichoka & Dhont’s (2018) “Big-five personality model”.Research has been made about the contextual, historical and political settings of the Bond novels such as Jeremy Black’s (2001) “The politics of James Bond: from Fleming's novels to the big screen” which serves as a complement to this research. Black’s (2001)claims suggest that Britain struggled for dominance after The Second World War as they were financially in ruin and although Britain lost some of its colonies, they still had many territories under their control. However, with the rising power of the Soviet Union, the nationalistic feeling in Britain grew as their reputation as a powerful empire needed to be upheld. Therefore, a need for a strong British symbol grew, which also acted as a reason for why Fleming created James Bond.The essay concludes that James Bond represents a specific part of Great Britain. The analysis has shown James Bond is a product of his time by symbolizing the longing for the return of the great British empire. This is supported by the fact of him scoring low on categories such as Agreeableness and Openness combined with the fact that he harbors anti-Communist beliefs. The analysis show that he acts in a manner that would highlight the colonial days of Britain where their strength had not yet diminished as opposed to the times after the Second World War. As such, the actions of James Bond, together with his explicit views suggest that he lies slightly more towards the right on the political scale and thus, disputesthe claim of Ian Fleming.