Research paper : McKim, Mead and White

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Research paper : McKim, Mead and White
Physical Description:
Mixed Material
Language:
English
Creator:
Fraga, Robert
Publisher:
Robert Fraga
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, FL
Publication Date:

Notes

General Note:
AFA HP document 382

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All rights reserved by the source institution.
System ID:
AA00001629:00001

Full Text









RESEARCH PAPER: McKIM, MEAD and WHITE


Robert Fraga

AE 676

American Architectual History III


May 25, 1977















INDEX



Introduction

Biographical Sketches

Charles Follen McKim
William Ruherford Mead
Stanford White

Development of the Firm of McKim, Mead, and White

Beaux Art Design and the Firm of McKim, Mead and White

Historical Influences and Importance of the Firm of
McKim, Mead and White

Comment

Footnotes

Bibliography

List of Slides










INTRODUCTION



The following essay explores the work of the firm of

McKim, Mead and White. I have decided to study this architec-

tual firm because of its importance as a major creative force

of the late nineteen century.

I intend to evaluate the work of this firm from a

variety of standpoints. I have organized this essay so as

to deal with the development of the firms their design process

and their historical influences and significance. I have also

included a series of biographical sketches of the lives of

McKim, Mead and White and a final comment so as to conclude

the essay.

The purpose of the following essay is not to shed a new

light upon the work of McKim, Mead and White, but rather, to

document the lives, works and historical importance of these

men with regard to their contribution to the development of

American architecture.































BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES






Charles Follen McKim (1847-1909)


Charles Follen McKim was born in 1847 in Chester County

Pennsylvania. Little is known of his early family life and edu-

cation, except that his father was a resolute abolitionist and

his mother was a Quaker of reputed beauty.

At the age of nineteen, McKim entered Harvard to study

mining engineering, (1866). He intended to spend one year

in the mining department of the Lawerence School of Science

and then two years in Paris pursuing the same subject. He

studied at Harvard for one year and for some unknown reason

changed his selected profession from mining to architecture.

In 1867, he entered the Ecoli des Beaux Art in Paris, where he

remained until 1870. McKim found it hard to reconcile himself

to the methods and outlooks of the Ecoli des Beaux-Art Accord-

ing to Robert Peabody, a college of those days, "McKim was

closer to Rome then to Paris" in his architectural tendencies.

One can only realize the truth of this statement in the light

of McKim's later work.

Upon his return from Paris, McKim went to work for the

office of H.H. Richardson for whom he worked for approximately

two years. Richardsons influence on McKim's architectural

development is not obvious since the later practiced architec-

ture in a completely different style. However, the austerity

and massive forms of McKim's buildings which seem to have an

unbounded strenght are reminiscent of the Richardsonian





Romanesque. The Boston Public Library is a clear example of the

Richardson's influence on McKim's architecture.

After his short apprentiship with Richardson, McKim then

practiced independently until 1878 when the firm of McKim,

Mead and Bigelow was formed, this association lasted only one

year, at the end of which Bigelow left the partnership and was

replaced by Stanford White, therefore the beginning of the firm

of McKim, Mead and White. Of this new association, McKim is said

to have been the main driving force. His character matched his

architecture, he was forceful and formal and he had a peculiarly

inflexible nature that made him win his way on many occasions.

He could be diplomatic and charming, but deep insidehe had

a tenacity of purpose which guided his life and his architecture.

Of all the associates of the firm. McKim was the leader, more

so than the reserved Rutherford Mead and the volatile Stanford

White.

As a designer, McKim was a true eclectic who restricted

himself to the architectural vocabulary of Classical architecture

or Classical Renaissance. His source of creativity was derived

from his ability to be selective and to organize architectural

elements into a well balanced composition. This point is best

illustrated by William Jordy in his book American Buildings

and their Architects where he states, "However exceptional the

quality of the best ol McKim's designs, and imagination pre-

dominantly of a discriminating sort is never an imagination of

the very highest order, especially when encumbered with an aca-

demic point of view which, McKim's case, was at the same time
















the source of his creativity". Thus, his was a scholarly

design, due to the spirit of the past, historically correct.

Throughout his career, McKim was always involved in many

aspects of the architectural profession, not only as a very

successful practitioner but also as a promoter of the atrs and

propagandist for the profession. He was instrumental in found-
ing the American Academy in Rome of which he was president. He

was also president of the American Institute of Architects (1901),

a position which he held almost unwillingly since he was nominated

and elected to it without being consulted. He held this position

for the benifit of the institute which needed a man of McKim's

stature to add to its credibility as a professional organization,
Charles Follen McKim died in September 14, 1909, the undes-

puted leader of his profession, greatly admired by the public

and his fellow architects.





William Rutherford Mead (1846-1928)


William Rutherford Mead was born in Battlebore, Vermont,

on August 20, 1846. He attended Battlebore High School where

he recieved his early academic training. He entered Norwich

University in 1861 where he remained until 1863. At this time,

he enrolled at Amherst College where he continued his education
until 1867 when he graduated from 6his college with a degree

of Bachelor of Arts.

In 1869, he began his architectural career in the office

of Russell Sturgis in New York. However, after a couple of

years, Mead decided that he needed to continue his studies of

architecture in a different environment, thus, he went Florence,

Italy, where he studied architecture for one year. Thereafter,

he traveled all over Europe for a period of approximately six

months.

He returned to New York in 1872, he entered a partnership

with Charles Follen McKim. In 1878, Stanford White became the

new partner in the firm, hence, the firm became. known as McKim,

Mead and White. The role of Rutherford Mead in the firm of McKim,

Mead and White, from the time thar he first entered the partner-

ship until the time of his retirement, was one of business manager

and planning consultant. He did not take an active part in the

design process of most of the buildings done by the firm. How-
ever, it is a fact that he always contributed to the final com-

position of the structures built by the firm with his sound ad-

vice and practical business sense Many architectural historians





believe that Mead's greatest contribution to the firm of McKim,

Mead and White, lay on his ability to act as a mediator between

McKim and White rather than in his administrative tasks. Mead's

character and personality acted as a catalyst between McKim's

austere formality and White"s explosive temperament. He became

the stable force of the firm. "His kindness and courtesy are

always apparent, and a very just comprehension of the relative

value of things is accomplished by a charitable judgement which

often softens the edge of his occasional condemnation. The

cumulative refinement of design of his former associates would

have failed of their full success if deprived of the permanent

background of his good sense". This quote from an article that

appeared in the December, 1915 issue of the Buckbuilder maga-

zine, eulogising the work of Mr. Mead, seems to describe most

appropriately his position in the firm.

Due to his modesty and unobtrusive behavior, Rutherford.

Mead was not the most conspicuous of the principal partners of

the firm. Generally, he would take a secondary position to either

McKim or White, however, his presence was always noted.

After the death of both Mead and White, Mead continued

his practice of architecture with the firm in association with

partners which have grown up with the firm and who have been

admitted to partnership prior to the deaths of any of the

original partners. Mead retired in 1920, and thereafter, he

spent much of his time abroad, travelling through Europe or

acting as president of the American Academy in Rome. Mr. Mead

was greatly admired by his fellow architects who bestowed upon


























him such honors as; the Gold Metal of the Academy of Arts and

Letters, the presidency of the New York Chapter of the American

Institute of Architects plus many other honors and awards. He

died on June 20, 1928 in Paris, France.





Stanford White (1853-1906)


Stanford White was born in New York city on November 9,

1853. His father, Richard Grant White, was a famous scholar

and critic who specialized in Shakesperian literature and speed.

Due to his father's position in the literary world, the young

White came in contact with many artists and intellectuals who

often visited his father and undoubtly influenced his pro-

fessional selections.

Stanford Whites early education was provided by his parents

at home. He spent his summers in Fort Hamilton or in the Hudson

river valley where the beauty of the countryside provided the

young White with many subjects for his sketches and drawings,

a talent which he developed early in his life and would later
contribute to his career.

In 1872, White went to Boston to pursue his career in

architecture in the office of H.H. Richardson, the leading

architect of the day. White worked as a draftman and apprentice

for a period of almost twelve years and during this time he

learned the office of his craft. As a result of his long associ-

ation with Richardson, White developed a great admiration for

the masters' work which consequently influenced his own early

works as an architect.2 While Richardson was involved with the
design of the Trinity Church in Boston, White was put to work

on the drawings of this building, and it is at this time that

he formed two of his closest and most important friendships of

his life. One was with Charles Follen McKim, his future partner,





also employed as a draftman in Richardson's office, the other,

with Augustus St. Gaudens, a sculptor that was working on the

decorations of the chapel and who later became White's favorite

sculptor for whom he designed the architectural settings for

mush of his latter sculpture.

In 1878, White set out on a long desired trip abroad which

was financed by his earnings in Richardson's office. This trip

proved to be highly influential in the artisticdevelopment of

White. He traveled extensively through Europe, specially France,

where he sketched countless buildings.

Shortly after his return from the European trip, he went

into partnership with Charles Follen McKim and William Rutherford

Mead. This partnership proved to be highly successful even though

each of these men had radically different temperments. Of all

these men, White was the most exuberant and restless always full

of vigor and vitality. He was romantic, and his buildings were

charming and graceful often highly decorative. He would not

hestitate to be "architectually incorrect" in order to solve
a problem or achieve an effect.

In 1884, White married Bessie Springs Smith and on their

honeymoon they went to Europe. This trip was also influential

in the artistic development of White since many of the buildings

which he saw on this trip served as an inspiration for much of

his later work.

Even though White designed a great variety of buildings,

he found his forte in the design of residential work, both in

the cityyard in the country. White excelled in the design of















ornaments and interior decoration and he was very fortunate to

have clients which could afford his lavish decorations.

Stanford White lived a very successful life as an architect,

businessman and promoter of the Arts, however, his life was cut

short by a dreadful incident. On the night of June 25, 1906,

Stanford White was shot from behind by a wealthy profligate

named Harry Kendall Thow, while attending a performance at

Madison Square Garden a building of his own design. His death

was associated with a romantic affair. White's violent death

was greatly publicized to the detrement of his reputation. His

assassin Harry Kendall Thow, took advantage of his influence

and wealth to undermine White's reputation so as to better his

chances in the court of law. It can be said that Thow was success-

ful in his attempt to blemish his victim's memory to his advan-

tage, however, Stanford White's reputation has been cleanse in

the light of history.





Development of the Firm of McKin, Mead and White


The firm of McKin, Mead and White was formed in 1878.

During the first few years of its existence, the work of the

firm consisted manily of private residences built in a free

informal style which was inherited from Richardson. These

early works were characterized by open planning, lack of

historicism and shingle texture. The Ricarhson influence

can be seen in the picturesque massing of the forms and

the strength of the cpmpositions. The Robery Goelet House and

the Tiffany House are characteristic examples of this type of

residential work. These early works are said to have been

experimental in nature, not that they contribute to a new form

of architectural expression, but rather, that they helped to the

architectural development and maturity of McKim, Mead and White.

"The ideas which determined the forms used in American architec-

ture were also under modification. During the eighties no one

tendency of design, no single choice of style had been adopted

by any large number of architects. A firm beginning to practice

in that decade found no specific techincal tradition to which it

could conform or from which it could revolt". This quote, from

an article that appeared in the 1906 issue of the Architectual

Record magazine, best examplifies the state of the art of architec-

ture at the time when McKim,,Mead and White first opened their

office. The early works of the firm are evidently an attempt by

these architects to arrive at a style of their own, to define

the architectural concepts which would guide their architecture.




This early period of architectural exploration by the firm of

McKim, Mead, and White lasted for approximately ten years ending

with the construction of the Boston Public Librapy in (1887-1892).

The Boston Public Library marked the turning point for the

firm, whose arcitectual works change from small scale residential

work to monumental, large scale architecture. From this point,

the architecture of the firm differed considerably in cost, scale

and character, usually involving large projects such as; the

Chicago World Fair of 1893 where the firm influenced the overall

scheme and designed the Agriculture and New York State buildings,

and, the design of numerous buildings for the campus of Columbia

University.

This change in scale and character of the architecture of

McKim, Mead and White, was due to many factors which proved to

be influencial in the architectural development of the time, for

once the socio-economic conditions that existed in the north

east of the United States required a new kind of architecture

which would be representative of the wealth and power gained

by the American society of the 1880's. William Tardy describes

this period in the following manner."... a time when nouveau

wealth was becoming comfortably second and third generation,

when American culture was becoming metropolitan and institutiona-

lized, and when the profession itself was becoming an educated

elite cognizant of the"great tradition".5 Thus, the time was

right for the development of a style that would cohesively

express all the many ideas of the young upcoming society. The

style that resulted was based on a classical tradition and Mc

Kim, Mead and White were the forerunners in establishing this




style.

The tremendous success and public acceptance of the Boston

Public Library, the People's Palace as it was called, determine

the direction for the architecture of McKim, Mead and White.

This building located across from Richardson's Trinity Church,

marked the beginning of an era of scholarly and classic design.

At the time of its construction, the building was subject to

a great deal of controversy due to cost and construction

difficulties, however, when the structure was finalized, the

Bostonian public was overwhelm by the elegance and beauty of

this building. Ralph Adams Crom, noted architectural critic of

the times, compared the Boston Public Library with Trinity Church

in the following manner. "No greater contrast could be imagined

than that between Trinity Church and the new Library across the

way. On the one hand, an almost brutal, certainly primative,

boldness, arrogance, power; on the other, a serene Classicism,

reserved, scholarly, delicately conceived in all its parts;

beautiful in that sense in which things have always been beauti-

ful in periods of high human culture.'. Thus, the American public

loved the Boston Public Library because their building represented

the newly found wealth and culture of a young nation.

The next step in re-affirming the Neo-classical revival

in the United States occurred at the Columbian Exposition of

1893. Daniel Burnham of the firm of Burnham amd Root was in

charge of the overall plan for the exposition but due to Root's

death, Burnham decided to relay upon the architectural firms of

the north east for help in the planning and deciding the overall

character of the project. The firm of McKim, Mead and White




had a decisive influence in the exposition, designing the Agri-

culture and the New York State buildings and also contributing

to the planning of the overall scheme. The Columbian Exposition

was seen by millions of Americans,this, becoming a showcase of

Neo-classical architecture. Many Americans, upon their return

to their towns from the Columbian Exposition, demanded of their

local and state governments the same kind of built environment

which they had seen at the exposition Institutions such as; banks,

museums, concert halls which boast of their cultural appreciat-

ion for the arts, immediately accepted the new revival style

as the proper architectural style of expression for the age.

The tremendous success of the Columbian Exposition cata-

pulted the firm of McKin, Mead and White into fame and fortune.

They became nationally recognized as one of the leading firms

in the United States and they enjoyed their status for many

years to come, but the tragic death of Stanford White in 1906
and the death of Charles McKin three years later, left Rutherford

Mead in charge of the office in association with some younger

partners which had been brought up through the ranks in the

firm. Mead himself retired in 1920, leaving the firm without

any of its original members. It can honestly be said that the

quality of the architecture produced by the firm of McKim, Mead
and White after the death of both McKim and White, was not the

same as it had been before their deaths. McKim, Mead and White

were perfect triunivirate, each man needing the other two as a

source of inspiration or guidance. Once this bon was broken,

the quality of the work of the firm declined. The firm continued

to exist without any of its original members until 1961.





Beaux Art Design and the Firm of McKim, Mead and White


Once McKim, Mead and White had established themselves

as the leading architects in the nation, they developed a

new approach to design which allowed them to better handle

the large corporate commissions. They structured their office

in the same fashion as Daniel Burnham's office, whose organi-

zation was based on his experience of supervising a large

number of draftsman for the design of the Columbian Exposit-

ion of 1893. Like Burnham, McKim, Mead and White acted as super-

vising principals whose main job was to organize and direct a

battalion of draftmen. Generally, the design aspects of the

firm would be handled by either Charles McKim or Stanford

White, with Rutherford Mead acting as a design consultant

and usually in charge of the planning and business aspects

of the operation.

In most cases McKim, Mead and White worked closely to-

gether in the conception and execution of their buildings,

however, there are instances when either McKim or White would

undertake a project mostly by themselves, as in the case of Mc

Kim's Boston Public Library and White's Madison Square Garden.

This generally occurred when the firm was busy with many commiss-

ions or when the job was of such magnitude as in the case of the

Boston Public Library, that it required the full attention of

one of the principals. The buildings that resulted from the

individual effort of either Charles McKim or Stanford White

are very easy to identify. This is due to the fact that in these




buildings, the personalities of the individual architect became

evident in the design. Again, the Boston Public Library and

Madison Square Garden are perfect examples to illustrate this

point, The first building was done almost entirely by McKim,

whose academic classicism is very evident in the design. The

second building was designed by White whose favor towards

romaticism also became self evident in the design of the

building.

The design process followed by McKim, Mead and White

was the same as that of most of the Beaux Art designers of

the age. Upon getting the commission, the designer would select

a style by which to design the building, in the case of McKim

Mead, and White, this style would be either Classical or

Classical Renanissance. After the style was selected, the de-

signer would look for a historic precedent for his building, that

is, he would select a particular building or series cf buildings

which would serve as the basis for his design. This building

or series of buildings would provide the main compositional

elements by which the new building would be designed. The next

step in the design process would be to work with the program of

the given building and trying to resolve the functional as-

pects of the design. This wouldusually involve trying to fit

the functions into an already predetermined form. After the func-

tional aspects of the building had been resolved to the designer's

satisfaction, he would then devote himself to the decoration

and ornamentation of the building. The decorative treatment of

the composition would also be selected from a historical pre-

cedent, however, in this part of the design, the individual





designer had a greater liberty to express his personal style,

which he would either invent or adapt from a historical prece-

dent. In many instances, the decorative treatment of a building

would become a sort of a trademark for the architect.

To be able to design a building in the Beaux Art tradition,

a designer of the turn of the century needed a series of plates

of historical buildings from which he could select the precedent

for his new design. the plates which he had were usually done in

some sort of permanent media such as etching or engravings so

as to guarantee the durability of the plates. After all, these

plates would be used many times as a source of reference and in-

spiration. Another source of reference which architects fre-

quently used, were their own personal sketches of historically

important buildings. This was the case in the firm of McKim,

Mead and White, where both McKim and White would travel ex-

tensively throughout Europe doing sketches of famous buildings.

These sketches would later serve as a source of inspiration

for their own design.

In understanding the essence of Beaux Art design, one must

realize that the success of the Beaux Art designer depended mostly

on his ability to use a discriminating judgement in his select-

ion of a historical precedent and his ability to adapt the new

function into the preconcived form. Sometimes, the Beaux Art

designers would use buildings of different styles and different

historical epochs to aid him in his compositional scheme. This

is the case of McKim, Mead and Whites Boston Public Library, where

the source of inspiration can be traced to three different buildings





the Marshall Fields Wholesale Store by H.H. Richardson, Biblio-

theque Sainte Genevieve by Henri Labruste and San Francesco in

Rimini by Leon Battistu Alberti. "Roughly, Richardson provided

the general compositional scheme, a scheme so commanding that

it forced itself on innumerable American designers of the late

eighties. Labrauste furnished a specific composition immediately

applicable to McKim's commission. Alberti suggested motifs for

details and, above all, encouraged McKim in his linear refine-

ment of Labrauste's scheme".7 Thus, we see how a series of build-

ings have served to provide for the basic compositional elements

for a design of a new building.

McKim's genious lies in his ability to select; to be dis-

criminating, to organize, to reshape and compose a new building

using architectural elements from the past. Unlike present day

architects, architects such as McKim, Mead and White, were not

interested in creating new forms nor a new architectural vocabulary.

Their main concern was to fit new functions into old forms and

to select the proper architectural elements which would make their

buildings artistically comparable with that of their most admired

predecessors.

In comparing the Beaux Art methods of design with our

contemporary design methodologies, one can only think of how

restrictive the Beaux Art methods seems to have been. However,

the Beaux Art designer was not as restricted as it may seem. For

example, he was free to select the historical style which he

preferred and to work eclectically with it, (Renaissance, Gothic,

Classic, etc.). Also, he had the freedom to adapt new elements

















within the chosen style and even to invent them if he so desire.

As opposed to the Beaux Art designer of the late nineteen hundreds,

the designers of today have complete freedom to be inventive,

creative and unique, within the restrictions of the budget and

the program. However, they do not have the freedom to be electric

in their designs, since electicism is looked upon as a hinderance

to the development of modern architecture by most contemporary

architects and architectural critics. Consequently, many designers

find themselves re-inventing the wheel everytime they design

since they do not have the perrogative to look for a historical

precedent. In some instances, this restriction upon current design

methodology is just as harmful to the continuing development of

modern architecture as those restrictions imposed by the Beaux

Art methodology.





Historical Influence and Importance of the Firm of McKim,
Mead and White



The work of McKim, Mead and White has been greatly influen-

tial in the architectural development of the United States. Their

first, and possibly most important influence to the American

architectural development occurred in the late nineteen eighties

when the firm established the Classical and the Renassiance

styles as the proper styles for the architectural expression of

their time. They accomplished this feat through their work in

Boston, New York and especially the Columbian Exposition of

1893 in Chicago, which served to promote the Classical and

Renaissance styles and also help to make the firm of McKim,

Mead and White the leading architectural firm in the nation.

Along with their stylistic influences, the firm of McKim,

Mead and White helped to establish a new approach to architectural

design, namely the large scale, architectural factory type of

design approach where a few principals directed and supervised

barracks of draftmen in association with engineering and planning

specialist. This type of organization was truly an American

development which arose from the needs to handle the large

corporate commissions which became one of the main sources for

architectural work at the turn of the century. The concept of the

'large architectural factory" which was partially developed by

the firm of McKim, Mead and White is still very much alive today

in offices such as; S.O.M., Skidmore, Owings and Merrill, and


C.R.S., Caudill, Rowlett, and Scott.





There is still another major influence which the firm of

McKim, Mead and White have had upon the architecture of the United

States. This influence is derived ironically from their early

residential work. These early works which are mainly of small

scale, characterized by open planning, picturesque massing and
8
shingle sheathing. Vincent Scully, the famed architectural

historian and critic, rediscovered the early work of McKim,

lead and White, (and others alike) in his doctural dissertation

and named it Shingle Style. According to Scully, the Shingle Style

was a type of domestic architecture which climax during the

1880's and represented a true American building tradition in

which contemporary European influences had been subordinated.

Scully has personally acknowledged the importance of the work

of McKim, Mead and White to the support of his thesis. "It was

McKim, Mead and White's Low House in Bistol, Rhode Island of 1887,

which seized my imagination when I saw it published in Henry

Russell Hitchcock's Rode Island Architecture".9 According to

Scully, the tradition of the Shingle Style was stopped by

the influx of renewed influence from Europe. The Beaux Art, the

International Style and other movements as such.

The importance of the rediscovery of the Shingle Stly by

Scully lies in the fact that this style represents a true

vernacular American architecture which was free of historicism

and European influence. It represents a tradition which has

been tremendously influencial in the development of a new camp

of architecture which Scully has called the "New Shingle Style".

This new camp is composed of architects such as; Robert Venturi,





Charles Moore and Robert Stern all of whom have been influenced

by the teachings of Louis Kahn. This new breed of architects,

are interested in the development of a rich and meaningful

architecture which is based on an American building tradition.10

The Shingle Style of 1880's has served as the basis for their

architecture. Here again, the early work of McKim, Mead and

White gains new importance with respect to the architecture pro-

duced by the architects of the New Shingle Style. The Low House

in Bistol, Rhode Island, which was so influential in Sculley's

rediscovery of the Shingle Style, has become a model for the

architecture of the New Shingle Style architects. The long

diagnols produced by the slopping gable roof which hubbers over

the house and becomes the main form giver for the structure,

as well as the chimney which breaks the gable in what seems to

be a giant thrust, have become symbolic elements for the archi-

tects of the New Shingle Style; (who see the long slopping roof

as a symbol of the worms of a home). The New Shingle Style

architects have not hestitated from borrowing the forms and the

architectural elements of the Low House for the implementation

of their own projects. In the case of Robert Venturi, his pro-

ject for a beach house(1959) and his own house in Chestnut Hill,

Pennsylvania,(1962-64) seem to be almost a direct copy of McKim

Mead and White's Low House.

Thus, as we have seen, the architecture of McKim, Mead, and

White has greatly influenced the development of the architecture

in the United States, and even today, the work of the architects

of the New Shingle Style, their influence can still be noted.11










Comment


As we have seen in this essay, the firm of McKim, Mead

and White has been instrumental in the architectural develop-

ment of the United States, and their influence is very much alive

today in the work of the architects of the New Shingle Style.

However, it is important to note that no value judgement has

been placed on the influence of their work in this essay. That

is to say, whether or not the architectural influences of

McKim, Mead and White have been good or bad to the continuous

development of modern architecture in the United States. There

are many architectural critics and historians who feel that the

influence of the firm of McKim, Mead and White have worked to

hinder the progress of modern architecture. However, there are

many critics who believe otherwise and are willing to support

and document their position. To evaluate the influences of the

firm of McKim, Mead and White as to its relative benefit to the

development of modern architecture, is an academic question which

is well beyond the scope of this essay. Thus, let us conclude

by saying that, whatever the relative value of the influences

in the development of American architecture are self-evident

and historically noteworthy.







FOOTNOTES


1) Quote from the book, Sketches and Designs of Stanford

White, in reference to Meadis position in the firm. Mckim

was the hull and White was the saila of the ship. Mead was

both rudder and anchor..."

2) White's early work show the characteristics of the

Richardsonian Romanesque. The rugged style that typify the

work of H.H. Richardson.

3) White would not hesitate to use architectural elements

from different styles or periods in order to achieve a

desired setting.

4) This early domestic architecture evolved into a new

tradition in the residential work of Frank Lloyd Wright.

5) From American Buildings and their Architects, William

Jordy. Anchor Books, @ 1976

6) From American Buildings and their Architects, William

Jordy. Anchor Books. @ 1976

7) From American Buildings and their Architects, William

Jordy, Anchor Books. @ 1976

8) In the early houses of Mckim, Mead and White, the roof

always dominated the composition, the walls were often

embroidered with intricate patterns obtained by changing

the outline of the shingles or by inserting colored materials

in the stucco.























9) From The Shingle Style Today, Vincent Schully, George

Barziller, New York. @ 1975.

10) Architects of the New Shingle Style, have reacted to the

frivolous architecture that resulted from the degeneration

of the International Style.Their interest lies in vernacular

architecture, eclecticism and semiology.

11) See the work of; Robert Ventury, Charles Moore, Robert

Stern, Charles Gwathmey.










BIBLIOGRAPHY

Eneyelopedia of Modern Architecture.
Edited by Gerd Hatje. Harry N. Abrams Inc. @ 1964
American Buildings and their Architects.
William H. Jordy, Anchor Books. @ 1976
Architecture Through the Ages.
Talbot Hamlin, G.P. Putnams& Sons, New York @ 1953
American Architecture and Other Writings
Montgomery Schuyler, Harvard University Press. @ 1961
The Shingle Style Today
Vincent Schuly, George Barzillpr, New York. @ 1975
Stanford White
Charles C. Baldwin, Vail Ballou Press Inc. @ !931
The American Spirit in Architecture
Talbot Hamlin, Yale University Press. @ 1926
Sketches and Designs by Stanford White.
Lawrence Grant White, Architectural Book Publishing Co. @ 1920

ARTICLES FROM AMERICAN JOURNALS.

The Brickbuilder. v. 24, pag. 315 Dec. 1915
Architectural Record. v. 64, pag. 264 Sept. 1928
American Architect. v. 164, pag. 12 July 1928
Pencil Point. v. 9 pag. 159 August 1928
Architectural Record. v. 38, pag. 575 Nov. 1915
Architectural Record. v. 35, pag. 463 May 1914
Architectural Record. v. 20, pag 153 Sept. 1906
Architectural Record. v. 17, pag. 50 Jan. 1905






LIST OF SLIDES


Slide Audiov. No.
McKim, Mead and White Act.

1. Boston Public Library 34941
2. Farmington Hill 58975
3. Watts Sherman House 42222
4. Armstrong House 66614
5. R.W. Geolet House 35104
6. Chateau-Sur-Mer 35096
7. W.G. Low House 23905
8. New Port Casino 48218
9. 48219
10. 48228
11. 48220
12. New York Villard House 35058
13. Boston Public Library 8972
14. Plan 41911
15. Plan 23970
16. Interior 23971
17. Chicago Exposition Agriculture Bldg. 8975
18. Gorham Bldg. 26312
19. Providence State Capitor 35114
20. Madison Presbeterian Church 26318
21. Facade 41910
22. Madison Square Garden 41915
23. 26316
24. 42312
25. 26317
26. General Post Office New York 35033
27. Morgan Library 25160
28. New York Railroad St. Penn. Ave. 25161
29. Plan 41919























(cont. List of Slides)

30. New York Railroad St. Penn. Ave. 41919
31. 24014
32. 26319
33. Daniel Burmham 41664
34. G.W. Low House 35095