Not sure if this is properly sourced or not - but I am not aware of a ton of in depth books by historians on the color choices of the decade. Most of this is based on a book called "70s Style and Design" by Lutyens and Hislop, and "70s House" by Heathcote.

I am also going to come at this from a interior design/architecture perspective.

The first thing to understand is that the 70s design choices did not appear out of nowhere. They were largely a reaction to the sleek and minimal midcentury modernism of before. According to Lutyens, the 70s are defined by "playful embellishment and radical experimentalism with form." You can see this in many of the more famous designs from the decade - like Saarinen's work. It was also a reaction to the "psychedelic" and unnatural design and colors. Another interesting way to look at it, would to follow the philosophies of groups like Archigram, which went from creating big brash stark and modern structures, to favoring ideas with more subtle ways to integrate into the environment.

Secondly, there was a return to nature movement that grew out of the "hippies" of the 60s as well. Lutyens also cites the oil crisis of 1973 as encouraging design that rejected consumerism, and embraced early energy efficient design. It also led to a design philosphy that focused on creating architecture that melded with nature. Mixed with plastics were natural materials of stone and wood. You see a lot of large windows, skylights, interior gardens etc.

On top of this, we have the popularization of the open floor plan. While you can find earlier examples, the 70s is when it arrived to the masses. And it was a radical departure from earlier residential design layout and philosophy. Bigger kitchens, more shared family space, double height rooms etc.

So the color choices are one way this all came together. Color in general was very popular, and used everywhere - vs. the 'white' minimalism of before. And colors found in nature were especially popular, with the rise in the part-of-nature philosophy of design at the time. And lastly - the residential design approach became mainstream. So it was EVERYWHERE. This is pure speculation on my part, but decorators (and homeowners) can overdo themes and trends. So while some terracotta tile by itself could be seen as natural and design friendly, the tile next to some plants, dark wood paneled walls and burnt orange carpet is overwhelming. Hence why designers joke that the 70s is the decade design forgot.

Finnish graphic designer and design student chiming in. Interior design isn't my specialty, but I will try to elaborate what trends, societal happenings & phenomena might have lead to the ugly palette of 70s, or the perception of. I have to note that the following text will be based on material I've studied, but because of art's subjective nature in order to paint a full picture I will not refrain from making some subjective statements, but majority of the text should be widely accepted history. The red line of the writing is about public perception.

In order to understand why some colors or any design decisions are popular, I think it's fundamental to lay down some groundwork about the nature of fashion. I base alot of my thinking to writings of Herbert Blumer, american sociologist and a pedantic observer & writer, who well in his sixties attended women's fashion week in Paris and theorised extensively about fashion's role in society and collective selection. He considered fashion to be kind of a coping mechanism that lets us move forward as society, using collective taste to reach and grope for what's ahead. To paraphrase him "In order to understand fashion, one must understand what it means to be in fashion", with which I believe he tries to underline how integral collective acceptance and forward thinking are as mechanics of fashion. The collective taste takes inspiration very freely from cultural events and societal happenings that touch the lives of us all, and the creation of furniture/clothes by designers and following acceptance (or lackthereof) by consumers is the dialogue that is the core of fashion. When something is in fashion, it is part of the zeitgeist.

Part of fashion is also decade-, or sometimes several, spanning movements and lines of thinking. Before we can dive into what was in fashion during the 70s, I think it's good to look what preceded it because the movements are often reactionary and built upon what was before. From the ashes and abject suffering of WWII the time that followed is what I like to call back on track. It was a time of rebuilding homes and finding comfort in familiarity, and in art the further refinement of modernism. If you look at the prevailing color schemes of midcentury modern, you will find muted and warm tones that convey a message of friendliness and conventionality. Form was as important as function, and there was underlying feeling of democracy in design. Nordic design became influential which can partly be attributed to the Helsinki Olympics of '52, which brought on the wind of lifting yourself back up as Finland was the only country to fully repay war reparations, and did so without the need of Marshall Aid. The cold war tensions were at their highest and perhaps this added to the fascination of the country that resided between the east and the west. So in spite of the ease of mind being brought on upon by the end of the war, the tensions of McCarthyism and Iron Curtain added to the mix a dose of conservatism. It was time to move on, but not move ahead.

Some select works of the period:

Arne Jacobsen - Grand Prix ('57) Futuristic shape speaks of trust in technology yet wood as material choice speaks of familiarity and homeliness.

Eero Saarinen - Tulip Chair ('56) A modern classic of industrial design, the shape is space age but the inspiration is a classical and familiar plant of love!

Pierre Koenig - Stahl House('60) Clearly set grid of lines come together to form modernist home of exclusivity, which is brought on by the location, but the unimposingly low roof adds to the comfort.

Helsinki Olympics '52 logo Colors representing the country and setpiece architectural structure on background, that was originally built for 1940 olympics combine into pretty tame modernist look.

A paradigm shift happens when a event is so massive it touches us all, and thus I would set starting time for the period following back on track to be in '61 when Juri Gagarin became the first man in space. The space race launched an era of radicalism as battle between communism and capitalism accelerated. In many other aspects Europe and it's post-war traumas weren't on top of people's minds anymore. What happened elsewere was far more mindshaking. Request for racial equity in the USA and Vietnam War radicalized the atmosphere also in Europe. This was the era of protest cultures and international awareness. New left, rising awareness, hippie movement and finally oil crisis led to criticism of consumption.

How this radical era had a flame that burned brightest at the start of 60s, but continued to do so up until late of 70s until it was superceded by the yuppie 80s. Between these years is the rise and eventual decline of psychedelic hippie era, that was so utopistic and radical that it also evoked a very strong pro-government counter-movement. It's start is characterised and inspired alot by the already existing space age design that continued to evolve and was brought into people's homes as everyday objects, such as Lava lamp (1963). It's a every home's design object that speaks for the positive outlook that was so prevalent that it was mainstream in early sixties. The vibrancy of colors speak for liveliness and optimism.

Eero Aarnio - Ball Chair ('63) Compare this and the Tulip Chair above. Both are modern, but the ball chair is just otherworldly. It also came in transparent design that hung from a chain from roof. It's wild, unconventional and futuristic.

Gaetano Pesce - Serie Up ('69) Speaking of radical designs, I think it's pretty safe to say that both sexual liberation and women's rights were topics that design commented upon. Remember that in modern capitalist society it is not just designer who makes an impactful design, but it also has to resonate within the consumers, be adopted by them.

Mexico Olympics '68 logo (poster) Typically people refer to Woodstock as the plateau of hippie age, but I think Mexico's olympics are in many ways more impactful and symbolic of the upheavals on the time. The black power salute, south-Africa lack of attendance due apartheid protests, Tlatelolco massacre, Vera Cáslavská's anti-soviet protest, this one had it all. And that crazy design, it's so hypnotic you can't turn your gaze away, it seems to be undulating with restless energy!

Remember that part in the start about fashion? Thing about fashion is that it ebbs and flows, peaks and recedes. The society had a wild night behind them, filled with partying and fighting, singing and yelling, fucking and punching. But now it was time to calm down. Alas, the mainstream is slow to react, so late-adapters still considered for a longer time that hippie movement was still in fashion. It was a movement that was meant to provoke with bright colors, while the brown tones represented the earth, but it all became passé when it was adopted by moms and dads. It was all very experimental what started in the early 60s, it came out of nowhere, and it wanted to stomp its foot down, make some noise and punch the government in face. But the trajectory of fashion object is always to be first adopted by visionaries, gain the momentum of widespread youth appeal, refine it into full blown young adult trend and eventually fade into the obscurity of anonymous masses.

So as society moved towards '70s the public mentality was marked by need to process what just happened, deal with morningafteresque confusion of high flying ideals and just calm down a bit. I think it's the awkward juxtaposition of this radical experimentalism and it's inevitable mainstream status that makes it seem so odd and at unease with itself. Part of what makes a particular ideal or fashion appealing is it's elusivity and mystique, so because of this appreciation of intangibility hippie movement was born as a ideological response to a world that was moving on but had severe traumas to deal with. This way of thinking slowly made its way to societal existance as normatisation of progressive movements, ie. 2nd wave feminism and black power, that had an impact until conversation shifted to something else. Commodification however continues and though Woodstock once was the gathering of forward thinking or dreaming young people, people began questioning it's topicality when middle aged fashion designers began designing clothes for teenagers who wanted to be like people in their twenties who had been in those yesteryears' festivals. At the end of the road all that's left of once vibrant movement is some gaudy tapestry and carpetry in the living room of middle class apartment where a happy but bored couple is talking about quitting smoking while ABBA's Money Money Money is playing on the stereo with wood panel finish.

Hey all,

If you frequent the sub, you know the drill. If you're here from /r/all, or browse only occasionally, please be aware we have strict rules here intended to enforce the very high bar we expect from comments, so before posting, please read our rules. We remove comments which don't comply, and consider everyone forewarned. If you have feedback or commentary about how things are run here, please don't post it in this thread. We'll just remove it. We love to hear thoughtful, constructive feedback via modmail however.

It can take time for an answer to show up, so we thank you for your patience. We know you're here because the question sounds interesting, and we eagerly await an answer just like you! While you wait though, there is tons of great content already written, which you can find through our Twitter, the Sunday Digest, the Monthly "Best Of" feature, and Facebook. If you don't want to forget to check back late, consider a Private Message to the Remind-Me bot, or use RES' 'Subscription' feature.

Again though, please remember the rules, and keep them in mind while you browse. If you don't like how this subreddit is run, keep in mind that this method has seen us continue to succeed and grow for years, and isn't going to change, so at least try and make your complaint original. /r/AskHistory exists, so complaining about the rules to us is like going into a fancy restaurant to complain they don't sell chicken nuggets, even though Chick-fil-A is nextdoor.

For anyone as infatuated with this era and design as me, you may like to check out my Flickr account. https://www.flickr.com/photos/sixtyseventies/favorites

They were not awful colors. These things are in the eye of the beholder. Just like music, If you were raised without country music , you probably don't like it as an adult. The whole analysis is wrong and bad. I personally like oak colored hardwood floor. The "new" and improved a few years ago was dark wood and dark cabinets. I found it disgusting. I don't like granite counter tops. Lots of people do. etc etc etc. It is what you were exposed to at a certain age that determines what you like or don't like . simple