• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Figures and photographs
 A system of architectural...
 Progressive architecture in...
 Chronological list of building...






Title: Louis H. Sullivan
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00098818/00001
 Material Information
Title: Louis H. Sullivan
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Creator: Seale, Donnie Gaston
Publisher: Donnie Gaston Seale
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Copyright Date: 1975
 Subjects
Subject: Architecture -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Architecture -- Caribbean Area   ( lcsh )
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00098818
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title page
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
    Figures and photographs
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
    A system of architectural ornament
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
    Progressive architecture in America
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
    Chronological list of buildings
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
Full Text
.
Louis H. Sullivan
A.E. 682
Architectural History-Winter 1975 Donnie G. Seale


On Sept. 3, 1856 at 22 South Bennett Street, Boston, Louis Henry Sullivan was born. Louis was the second son of Patrick and Andrienne Sullivan. Patrick was a dancing instructor, and amautor pastorial artist, Anndrienne, his mother, was skilled in playing the piano, and like Patrick an amautor artist.
Louis at age of four was started in grammer school, his summers were spent vacationing with his grandparents in South Reading, Mass. where he learned a love for the outdoors.
In June, 1870 he graduated from Latin High School in Boston this was to be his first and last diploma. In Sept. of I872 Louis entered Mass. Institute of Technology at the age of sixteen to study Architecture. (M.I.T. frist Architectural school to be established in the country) Louis was at M.I.T. only one year, he learned how to draw and the classic orders as the fundamentls of architectural design. When Sullivan began to discover that M.I.T. was a pale reflection of the Ecole dis Beanx Arts, so he was determined to go to the Beanx Arts ..'

Before starting in the Beanx Arts Sullivan wanted to get a years experence, and when to Philadelphia where he worked for a short time in the office of Frank Furness. After leaving : the office of Furness, Sullivan went to Chicago where his parents now lived. He inquired for position at the office of William LeBaron Jenney and immediately taken on. After a few months Louis "decided that his experience in the office of Furness and of Jenny had given him that taste of architecture as it is practiced which he had desired as a part of his training, and that it was now time for him to fulfil his resolve to go to the fountain-head of architectural education-the Ecole des Beaux Arts. He took, the train East, and on July 10, 187^, sailed from New York on the Britannic."
Upon arriving in Paris Sullivan had six weeks to prepare himself for the entrance examination which covered a three week period. He passed the exam successfully and entered the Ecole des Beaux Arts. After the first project was given out Sullivan took of for Roma and Florence; he felt the need for relaxation after the stress of the Examinations.
"Louis remained on Paris about two years. He studied carefully all the monuments and museums


of Paris, followed all the architectural exhibitions at the Ecole, and thoroughly familiarized himself with the theory of its training. But like the architectural school at M.I.T., he soon found it merely academic. The problem it set were not the real problems of architecture."
Louis returned to Chicago, where he spent a series of brief engagements in architectural offices. By 1877 Louis had gained the reputation of a hard worker amd a clever draftsman, with each move Sullivan's sallary increased.
In 1879 John Edelmann informed Sullivan that Adler had broken with his partnership with Burling. (Edelmann had introduced Sullivan to Adler before this time.) Edelmann know that Adler would welcome a competent designer, and that this was Sullivan opportunity.
Sullivan went to work for Adler. Adler was found to be a"most congenial co-worker, open-minded, generous-minded, quick to preceive, thorough-going, warm in his enthusiasms, opening to Louis every opportunity to go ahead on his own responsibility, posting him on matters of building technique of which he had a complete grasp." ,- % ., .
On the first of May. 1880, Adler and ;Co. moved into a suite of offices on the top floor


of the Borden Block ( the first building Adler and Sullivan had worked on together). On this day the firm of Adler and Co. changed to Adler and Sullivan Architects. At the age of twenty four Sullivan had become a partner in one of the important architectural firms of Chicago.


Sullivan's work with Adler
Auditorium Building
A great opera festival'in the 1885 inspired, Ferdinand W. Peck, with the idea of a great permanent opers house. Peck thought of the idea of adding to the "cultural" part of the building a "commerical" part which could provide revenue for the maintenance of the whole. Peck found supporters of his idea in the Commercial Club and the Chicago Auditorium Association was formed; $3,000,000 worth of stock were sold for the building.
Although every Architect sought this commission the previous success of the Exposition Opera Hall By Adler landed the commission for Adler & Sullivan.
Adler & Sullivan spent over $60,000 in preliminary studies. The first studies were ornate with its elaborate terra cotta decoration. But 1887 when the final design was under way, Richardson had just finished the Marshall Field Wholesale Building. Richardson was the new and elemental force in american architecture, at this time and Sullivan "built creatively on what Richardson gave him, never merely imitating


but assimilating and going beyond Richardson.
Modifications were made in the prelimimary design and the final design had much simplified the exterior.
ONe of the problems with the Auditorium was in constructing the foundation of the tower concurrently with the wall foundation in parportion to their ultimate loads to achieve an even settlement throughout. Adler solved this problem by artificial loading the tower with pig-iron and brick in vast quantities to the lower stories and basement. Gradually as the height of the walls and tower approached the tenth story, but always maintaining a constant mathematical equation between the relative weight of the tower to its foundation-capacity, and the relative weight of the adjacent wall to its foundation-capacity. Thus the settlement proceeded absolutely uniformly. After reaching the tenth story the full settlement of all the foundations had been reached. Above this, as the tower rose above the adjacent wall, the problem was merely to translate artificial load into real load, and this was done by gradually removing the pig-iron and bricks as the tower grew to its full height and weight. When the tower reached the top, ninety-five feet higher


than the adjacent walls, all the artificial load was gone, but the total weight was just the same as it had been at the tenth-story level."
Above the foundation, the construction was of no important innovations. "The walls were of solid masonry consisting of brick faced by cut stone. The rusticated facing of the three lower stories was of granitej the ashlar facing of the remaining stories was of gray-buff Indiana limestone. Although iron was not used as a supporting framework in the walls, many of the larger interior spaces were spanned by iron girders bearing on the masonry walls."
The form of the ceiling in the Auditorium was determined by acoustic principles although it was not structural but hung from huge horizontal iron trusses. This arched ceiling served also as ventilating ducts, earring conditioned air for heating in winter and colling in the summer.
Sullivan said years after the project that:
The problems that Mr. Adler had to meet in that building were simply heart-breaking. In those days there were very few consulting engineers, and these few were employed mostly by the railroads, iron companies, and mines. There was one man who gave some attention to sanitary and heating


matters, but that was almost all the professional advice Mr. Adler could call to his aid. He practically-had to dig out his information for himself, and it was a tremendous proposition."


Wainwright Tomb
The classical Wainwright tomb represents the most sensitive and graceful example of Sullivan's tombs. Constructed in I892 of finely jointed gray limestone in the Beliefontaine Cemetery, St. Louis. Designed in the classical mood of a pantheon with ,its dome covering a sanctuary decorated with dark- blue masaic.
' "' v- . ; -.; / ;. ; .' _. j
5"


Transportation Building
Amoung the nightmare of the ""White City" of the Worlds Columbian Exposition in I893 stood Sullivan's ultramarine blue,' red, orange, yellow, and dark green Transportation Building. "If the White City was a dream of beauty, it was a dangerous and spurious kind of beauty, spurious because it appropriated the forms of a culture not its own, dangerous because it seemed to do this so successfully. It represented the acme of all that Sullivan had fought against during his whole life." Although Sullivan; was not perfect his building for it was designed in the classic mode. ,
The cornice line of all major buildings of the fair were fixed at sixty feet; the rhythm of the openings were determined by the Roman arcades of the other buildings of the Fair. Sullivan within this restrictive frame differs from the other buildings simply in his temporary nature of the materials. His building was essentially a piece of show architecture; he did not attempt to make the material of his building look like white marble; "the material of the wall was plaster. Instead of attempting to give it architectural authority by moulding it into the traditional forms of a masonry style of the


past, Sullivan decided to leave it in the form in which it was most cheaply used, that is, the flat surface, and to enliven this necessarily dead surface by ornament moulded in low relief or by color, or both."


The Skyscraper and Theory
With the development of the high speed elevators for vertical transportaion,growth of population in big cities, consezuent congestion of centers and rise in value of ground has stimulated the need for an increase in the number of stories of buildings. This reaction t to the problem has come about in the form of the "mordern office building." Sullivan serched for a true normal type of solution for the conditions of the tall office building. "Beginning with the first story, we give this a main entrance that attracts the eye to its location, and the remainder of the story we treat in a more or less liberal, expansive, sumptuous way-a way based exactly on the practical necessities, but expressed with a sentiment of largeness and freedom. The second story we treat in a similar way, but usually with milder pretension. Above this, throughout the indefinite number of typical office tiers, we take our cue from the individual cell, which requires a window with its separating pier, its sill and lintel, and we, without more ado, make them all look alike because they all are alike. This brings us to the attic, which having no


division into office cells, and no special re-quireraent for lighting, gives us the power to show by means of its broad expanse of wall, and its dominating weight and character, that which is the fact, namely that the series of office tiers has come definitely to an end...the attic, specific and conclusive as it is in its very nature, its function shall equally be so in force, in significance, in continuity, in conclusiveness of outward expression."
The charestistic of the skycraper theory should be noted in the Wainwright Building althought Sullivan did not write the theory until the artical "The Tall Office Building Aristically Considered" until I896.
Before looking at Sullivan buildings a brief look at works of other Architects should be taken. 1. Jenny, Home Insurance Building 1885
2. Post, Pulitzer New York World Building 1891
3. McKim Mead & White, N.Y. Life Building 1890 4-. Burnham & Root, Woman's Temple 1891


Wainwright Building
"The Wainwright Building was the frist Adler & Sullivan structure of skycraper construction. The metal frame of riveted steel columns and beams encased in fireproof materials rises from a reinforced concrete foundation.' Spandrel .beams carry the exterior walls on shelves at each floor level."
Alternating piers of the facade enclose no steel columns and are the same exterior: treatment and size of those of the steel bearing piers. Sullivans idea behind this was that the steel frame was square in form giving neither vertical nor horizontal dominates but by adding these false piers Sullivan could achieve a vertical emphasis a primary quality of the building.
"The street fronts of the building are a harmonious yet colorful combination of tawny red tones above a two foot base of Missouri red granite, there are Two stories of finely jointed reddish brown sandstone ashlar. Rising from this are piers of a dull red pressed brick. Ornamental terr-cotta panels, deep red in color, mask the


floor and separate the windows. At the top there is a full floor of the same dark red ornamental terra-cotta."
The building faces south and east with an open court on the north admitting light and air to the rear offices.
The ground floor is primarily for shops and large offices. Second through ninth floor for offices are of the same plan. The top floor contains a large open area in each wing, intended for rental to firms in need of specialized spaces.
The Wainwright Building "is the first tall building anywhere to be designed in a modern style and the first to be conceived as a visually unified


Schiller & Union Trust Building
The second of Adler & Sullivans skycrapers was the Schiller Building. The most important
of this building was the construction
of the foundation. The building set orfa small lot with buildings adjecent to the Schiller Building, their foundations were not strong enough to support both buildings. So Adler used a pile and mattress foundation and cantilevered foundations for the support of wall next to existing walls.
The Union Trust Building was the next skycraper built by Adler & Sullivan. The plan is very much like the Wainwright Building except it is turned 180 degrees, an creates an open court entrance.


The largest of Adler & Sullivan skycrapers was next the Stack Exchange Building. We should also look to the foundation of this building for an important design solution. Adler could (i not us the standard pile foundation due to the lawsuits that might incur from the vibrations of driving the piles. Adler, after the advise of a William Smith, decided to carry the foundations to bedrock. Bedrock was seventy five feet below the surface and in order to excavate to such a depth a shaft had to be water proofed to prevent ground water seepage, this was the first use of caisson foundations used for building in Chicago.


Guaranty Building
The Last- skycraper and last work of the firm was the Guaranty Building in Buffalo,N.Y. The program of the Guarnaty Building and The
-
Wainwright building were essentially similar,
except for minor details the buildings are
the same. Both have open courts in rear, both
on corner lots. The exterior walls of the
Guaranty building are entirely of terra-cotta
and rich in surface ornament. It should be note d
that the exterior ornament was not designed
by Sullivan but by Elmslie, although the interior
ornament was detailed by Sullivan himself.
It is important to note that this was the last of Sullivans skycrapers ans the last work of the partnership of Adler & Sullican. Adler left Sullivan for a better paying job with a friend of his, Richard Crane (Crane Elevator Company). Adler and Crane had a run in and Adler quite; Adler tried to reunite the firm of Adler & Sullivan but Sullivan refused, this was problely one of the biggest mistakes of Sullivan's carrear, It seems that Adler was the complomenting force that drove Sullivan to do better Architecture.


Sullivan's Work Without Adler Carson Pirie Scott & Company,
The Carson Pirie Scott "building originally desinged for the Schlesinger & Mayer Campany is the most important "building the Sullivan designed independently. Schlesinger & Mayer originally had a building at this site, Chicagoans know as "the World's Busiest Corner",but needed enlargement of theri store. The building was erected 'in three parts the first beeing the nine stories high and only three bays wide, constructed in 1899^ The second part started at the section on Madison street, went.to the corner and 150 feet along State Street were added.
The construction was the same as the skycraper type, with steel frame reating on a caisson foundation, and a terra-cotta exterior.
In this building Sullivan, contrary to the dominant verticality of the Wainwright Building, a horizontal scheme is dominant with "broken vertical piers are used to reveal the steel frame.
At the top of the facade, Sullivan felt some kind of accent was needed here as in his


other buildings. Sullivan achieved this by not a real cornice but by recessing the windows on the twelfth story which caused a shadow to be cast giving the impression of a cornice.
The curvilinear corner was designed at the request of Schlesinger & Mayer as a reminiscence of a curved pavilion on the same corner of their old building. -
In Arch. Record, July 190^, H.W. Desmond in reference to the Carson Pirie Scott Building say: "Mr. Sullivan himself is the center of it. He is the first American Arch. To say that he has invented a style would, of course, be to say too much, but he has certainly evolved and elaborated a highly artistic form of superficial decorative expression in logical connection with

the American steed skeleton building. Richardson
is our historical example of American originality
in Architecture, but Richardson's work, permented
as it is with the author's mighty personality, is
not free, is indeed far from free from an archaeological
basis...On the other hand, there is not a vestige
of the past in Sullivan's work. It.is as modern
: I ' ' '' ' t0^iiMfyl^mM^ ''J';V'''
as the calendar itself."
s; ml
1i


National Farmers Bank
The National Farmers Bank in Owatonna, Minn, is the finest example of Sullivans work after the Carson Pirie Scott Building. This hank opened the door for the most extensive field of practice of Sullivan's later years. Eight of the last eleven buildings Sullivan did were small banks in the farming communities of the Middle West.
"Why should Owatonna, a Minnesota farm and dairy center, a small town scarcley six thousand strong-why should Owatonna want this bank building with its new forms telling of new thoughts?"
The owners were not dreamers or artreformers but common sence business men dealing with facts and figures with farmer clientage. They would not have a conventional building with its classical order, but went far out of their way to erect a building in which the Architect would be encouraged to follow the tenets of his well-known individualistic art. Sullivan was found after an determined search, through his articles "What i$ Architecture?a study in the American People of Today."


"The exterior of the bank has a base of reddish brown sandstone ashlar, laid in courses of different heights, and penetrated by simple rectangular door and window openings. Above this the wall is faced by rough shale brick in soft and variegated colors, the general effect being a rich dark red. The walls are opened by two great arched windows, with wide flat archivolts consisting of ten concentric header courses of brick...The windows are of double thickness: plate glass inside, with an hermetically sealed airspace between for protection against extremus of cold and heat."
This, building stands as a product of both th& Architect and client. Sullivan's art is in truth the result of a mans philosophy which has been, created over the years.


Influnces on other Architects
Leonard Eaton in "American Architecture Comes of Age" refers to Sullivan as the programmatic innovator upon Architecture. Examples of his influences can be felt in Glasgow, Scotland where Sullivan's career parallels Glasgow's greatest architect Charles Machintash. Also in Amsterdam an Architect Dr. Hendrik P. Berlage.
Berlage the designer of the Stock Exchange in Amsterdam, was visted by one of Sullivan's former employies, Willian Purcell and invited Berlage to visit the U.S. Upon Berlage visit he met Sullivan and observed with paticular., interest to the Carson Pirie Scott building and the bank in Owatonna, Minnesota. After his return to Europe he began to lecture on American Architecture but more important were his published accounts of his journey.
IN Berlage journey he regarded Sullivan as a man of great sympathy. Berlage dealt perceptively with Sullivan's treatment of the skyscraper and the department, making as one might expect, certain reservation about the famous Sullivan ornament. Sullivan's masterpiece was, in Berlages mind, the bank at Owatonna, which, he observed, "cannot, as


far as I am aware, be matched by anything similar on the European Continent."
In Belage, Holland House in London, the municipality required a steel frame, which Belage used and covered it with glazed terr-cotta. The precedent for this design can be found in a number of Sullivan's multistoried office buildings. The Guaranty Building was also sheated in terra-cotta.
"The most striking evidence of the import that Sullivan had on Berlage occurs in a Christian Science Church designed at The Hague in 1925. Berlage had always been somewhat radical in religious matters and on his visit to the U.S. had greatly admired Sullivan's startling design for St. Paul's Methodist Episcopan Church in Ceder Rapids, Iowa. Observing that the church authorities probably objected to the scheme in some degree, he stated approvingly that Sullivan had deviated completely from the conventional Protestant Church plan, which had never been able to free itself from the form of the original Christian church, namely the Roman Catholic. The similarity of the two churches may be seen in the plans and the massing of the two churches.
Although no bibliography of European writings on Sullivan exist, we know that Andic Bouilhet, a


commissioner of the Union centrale des Arts dicoratifs, was greatly impressed with Sullivan's Transportation Building at the 1893 World's Fair. Bouilhet asked Sullivan for materials for the Musee des Arts decoratifs in Paris and Sullivan donated a model of the Golden Door and cast of the doors of the Getty and Wainwright Tomb. Duplicates wer later made and placed in the art gallery in Moscow. The Union Cenrtale des Arts Decoratifs in 189^ awarded Sullivan three medals in gold, siliver, and bronze for the Transportation Building. Therefore it is appearent
that Sullivan must of had a influence on many

Europeans.


IN SUMMARY
Louis Sullivan can be characterized as the transition from the classical architect to the modern architect such as Wright. Sullivan was classical in his forms but in his details he was very sympathetic and orginal. But the most important and influential thing in Sullivan's life was not his designes but the writings on his philosophy of architec ture, this above all is the genius of this man.















IM, S R N
Figure 7. Design for a hotel, Chicago. 1891.
! Ill EE 55 E^J
PI
WO
ilk
15
t| us H liri|)i,ra|
- s &c ee briiiiniff[
. ',?____k.____ m
v [ y| cc 55 Gjpf j lei si |i frrrftm
Figure 0. Design foi Seattle Opera House. 1890.












1)9. Bayard Building. Facade detail.
















34










111. Farmers' Union Bank, Columbus. Interior.






A System of Architectural Ornament according with a Philosophy of man's power
Louis H. Sullivan Architect
AIA Press: 192'+ '
I c*? :;
The Germ: The Seat of Power Above is drawn a diagram of a typical seed with two Cotyledona.. The Cotytedons are specialiyed rudimentary leaves containing a.supply of nourishment sufficient for the imitial stage of the development of the germ. The Germ in the real thing; the seat of identity. Within its delicate mechanism lies the will to power: The function which is to seek and eventually to find its full expression in form. The seat of power and the will to live constitute the simple working idea upon which all that follows is based-as to efflorescence.


The Inorganic and the Organic
By the word inorganic is commonly understood
that which is lifeless, or appears to be so; as
stone, the metals, and seasoned wood, clay, or
the like. But nothing s really inorganic to the
creative v/ill of man. His spiritual power masters
the inorganic and causes it to live in forms which
his imagination brings forth from the lifeless ,
the amorphous. He thus transmutes into the image
of his passion that which of itself has no such
power. Thus man in his power brings forth that
which hitherto was non-existent.
For man is power, and this..power is native in
nature with the power of the germ of the seed,
thus he commands at will; for he has the power
to will-it is one of his many powers.
Hence, for the germ of the typical plantseed with
its resident power, he may substitute, in thought,
his own will as the seat of vital power in a figurative
or imagined seed-germ which shall'be the utterly
simple energy-basis of a theory of efflorescence
involving concordantly a theory of plastic control of
the inorganic. These two elements of our premise
are not to be considered separate; conceptions to
be harmanized, but as two phasesof a single impluse
of man's creative imagination and will-the will to
create in the likeness of his emotions and his
intellect; the passion to create companions of


his inmost thought. Kan'.-' power to create is intimately based on his po\ver to sympathize; for sympathy is among man's powers. In discussing man's powers it is here and now postulated that they are congenital; that they are not "gifts" received from any outer source, but, are, more simply, and an reflection more obviously, phases or sub-activities of that integral solitary ego, which, and alone, is the index of racial and individual identity. It is to the man, this ego, precisely, in essence of principle, what the seat of power in the germ is to the future plant from; for it is the power of initiative. All powers are resident therein, these congenital powers of ego are so numerous, so manifold, so varied, and, their delicate action and inter-reactions so hidden to the unobservant or the prejudiced eye, that, their integrity is ignored. They excite no particular comment; they do not amaze us as startling evidence of man-power as such, because we casually regard them as separately imported virtues, faculties-, endowment, gifts, or what not, without clearer thought as to a possible common radiation of them from a definite spiritual center olNbeing and power.
Now the ego is not merely the seat of intellertual consciousness, but, what is of vastly greater importance, it is primordially the seat of instinct; it is instinct-the intellect Is but one of its powers.


So man's powers we are gradually to unfold to view, and to clarify to the intelligence; but surly one of the greatest of these is sympathy. Sympathy implies exguisite vision; the power to receive as well as to give; a power to enter into communion with living and with lifeless things; to enter into a unison with ,nature's power and process; to observe-in a fusion of identities-life everywhere atwork-ceaselessly silently-abysmal in meaning, mystical in its creative urge in myriad pullulution of identities and their outward forms. Sympathy thus understood as a power, is the beginning of understanding. Hence there can be no genuine understanding of the nature of creative art of any kind, or creative activity of any kind, without a clear cision of man's inmmate powers and their latent intensity evoked and aroused to action by the power of his desire-which is an emotion, and therefore instinctive. In a somewhat cursory way, we' have insistently .spoken of man' s_ powers. .as_._oxivgj-.nating and contained within himself; that is, as not "given" from without or from "above" through any process of magic, benevolence, dispensation or special selective choice. In other words, it is desired to be understood that such powers are natural. Even when dormant, suppressed, or inarticulate they are potential.. It is now insisted that genius, is potentially universal.


A serious, costly, and most reactionary, waste-ful and suppressive defect in the education of all of us except the really free spirits, lies in this: that the affirmation j of now as a newly discovered normal selfregulating power has been regarded as little short of heresy; whereas in fact such affirmation is of that truth which shall made actually rather than idealistically for freedom, and is chief factor in the program-"Man, known thyself."
Now; with minds reasonably free from current superstiton, surviving traditional faith in multifarious magical formulas together with a concurrent homage paid to phantasms and miages, let us regard man's power in a simple, informal way. Let us try to visualize, in a measure, the natural man- the seat of genius.
As a convenient fiction man's integral interfluent powers may be grouped separately and isolated, each as physical, emotional, intellectual, moral and spiritual, as though such were the fact. But in pursuing such method it'is ever to be borne in mind that a living powernot an idealistic abstraction, o^nonentity-^iia^tQ.be dealt with. We shall premise this part of our discourse with the affirmatism that the word negative is devoid of valid natural meaning; that the word positive is a universal all-pervading symbol of power as.


to the groups of powers to which we have alluded, they may be outlined as follows t
Group I
The physical powers are well known. Chiefly for our purpose, they are body-growth and conservation, muscular control and locomotion the power to do things, to effect changes, to create situations.
Group II
The intellectual group starts in the power of curiosity and ends in highly sophisticated manipulation. In this group are found the powers of observation, of memory, reflection, and of reasoning! and by reasoning; and by reasoning we mean the construction of a diagram or model purporting to show how curiosity works to satisfy its craving for orderly form.
Group III
The emotional group embraces every impulse, every power of feelingj an enormous volcanic complex- the basis of action, especially of spectacular action, private or public, secret or open. It is of instinct. It is the great power that moves the people of the world-even as they are busy denying it-even as they exalt intellect to the rank of fetich.
Group IV
The moral group: the great stabilizing powerI Much misunderstood and little used by men-turned into trivialities by them; unknowing that its central power of free-will choice is the axis of man's being, the determinant of his character, that, upon the


soundness of his choice individually and collectively, rests the issue whether he shall continue to be tyrannized by fate, of shall assert and stabilize his freedom, his integrity, and thus create and control his destiny. To face this task is the one great adventure of our day and the days to come. It isthe worlds hope: The passionate desire that now stirs the hearts of men. Yet to be free, man's spirit must liberate and organize his instinctive powers. His intellect has held them too long in bondage. He must recognize and utilize the broad truth that fate has ever been himself, that destiny now lies within himself. Hence is choice the most potent of his moral powers. The deepest moral truth is this: that the power of choice resides in all men.
Group V
The spiritual group functions as a super-quality in clarity of vision. It sees as in a dream; it feels as in the depths of instinct. It is a power hidden, calm, quiescent in the wilderness of being, serene in its vast solitude, alert in its piercing intuitions, utterly aware of life, contemplating the mystery, keen to the open power of life; consenting and contented that life is a dream within a greater dream, and man himself a dreamer within the dream of life. Then, as in a dream, spirit contemplates spirit, life contemplates life, man contemplates man.


Especially does spirit contemplate its own vast powers, for it is the veritable ego.
Equally does it concentrate its vision on mankind, on man himself-man physical, intellectual, emotional, moral, spiritual; to awaken man as by the call of a transcendent chanticleer, in the dawning hour, to consciousness of himself, to a realization of his own powers; to evoke his kindness, his faith and his courage-to dispel his fear.
The purpose of setting forth man's powers, in groups, is to show their conjoint power in practical affairs their mutual re-inforcement of each other's power. Thus; The physical man may be called the worker-the artificer. The inquiring man becomes the scientist. The emotional man dramatizes the activities. He colors life.
The contemplative, speculative man becomes the philosopher. The moral power of man urgee~-on--toward democracy (the great dream).
The dreamer-man becomes the seer, the mystic, the poet, the prophet, the pioneer, the affirmer, the proud adventurer. He dreams his dream with open eyes, with clear vision of ralities, with for foreseeing outlook, with intense persistent concentration upon an idea, a purpose. His power utilizes and manipulates all powers-focusing their aim upon a program of genuine'' achievement.
And thus the physical man, the artificer, becomes a stronger by virtue of inquiry-science; stronger still


through added emotion-dramatization} stronger still through the stimulus and support of philosophy; stronger still through the tonic of moral poise"as expressed in human responsibility and accountability; and thus he reaches the summit of his power when all these incremental powers are enfolded in,his dream of creative power, and he rises to the heights of that utterly simple artificer, that supermanipulator who materializes his dreams in the every-day world- for the good of mankind.
For man's powers are not to be taken as abstractions, as separated names or figures of speech in books or talk, but as compelling evidence of man's true nature. For, in this intimate dramatic situation we are confronted in thought by the astounding fact that throughout all history man has been neither really sought nor truly found.
To seek and find man is the modern adventure-an undertaking quite attainable if the method be simple and the spirit free:
The trail to man's simple powers leads with many windings through the jungle of complexities we call civilization. It broadens and straightens as we follow the scent of what man has left behind him in thought and deed, we suddenly side-glimpsing the man of today and what he thinks and does(the man of today in the man of the past-the man of the past in the man of today) and as we trudge onward through the phantasmagorian


obscurantism of our preconceptions, because urged on by the impulsion of discovered facts (or perhaps eagerly-if clear-headed and self-willed), and as illusion after illusion falls from us, and as veil after veil rises from before the apparition of our fears, man the reality suddenly appears-to our utter dismay, or utter joy, that man is not what our kind for so long had believed him to be and still believes him to be.
So the last veil lifts, the reality-man is found
sound to the core, the quintessence of power, the
dreamer of dreams, the creator of realities, the
greatest of artificers-the master craftsman.
The modern dream (obscured, inarticulate as yet) is
to found, on the reality ofman-and his powers, a
civilization befitting him and his powers.
Thus dawns the modern light upon the art of the
world. It reveals that all men in their native powers
are craftsmen, whose destiny it is to create, courageously
wisely and worthily, a fit abiding place,- a sane
and beautiful world.
And thus does the nature of universal art begin to emerge within the glow of this modern light.
With this brief, impressionistic sketch of man's powers constantly to be borne in mind by the student, we shall now begin to set forth a specific aspect, in the technical form, of the application of such powers to material things.
L. H S.
January 2?, 1924


, GRESSIVE ARCHITECTURE IN ^..... ...ICA
HOME INSURANCE BUILDING 1883-85 William LeBaron Jenney, Architect-Engineer Chicago, Illinois
"1
is m &
frf! HE
I
IE:
ri r
:MMm
:JJi^?-..-:./
Bu.mham Architectural Library
Hlillfffif II irtiiyu
,__ mi*.
5855


The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered
by Louis Sullivan
The architects of this land and generation are now brought face to face with something new under the sun namely, that evolution and integration of social conditions, that special grouping of them, that results in a demand for the erection of tall office buildings.
It is not my purpose to discuss the social conditions; I accept them as the fact, and say at once that the design of the tall office building must be recognized and confronted at the outset as a problem to be solved a vital problem, pressing for a true solution.
Let us state the conditions in the plainest manner. Briefly, they are these: offices are necessary for the transaction of business; the invention and perfection of the high-speed elevators make vertical travel, that was once tedious and painful, now safe, rigid, economical constructions rising to a great height; continued growth of population in the great cities, consequent congestion of centers and rise in value of ground, stimulate an increase in number of stories; these successfully piled one upon another, react on ground values and so on, by action and reaction, inter-action and inter-reaction. Thus has come about that form of lofty construction called the "modern office building." It has come in answer to a call, for in it a new grouping of social conditions ha9 found a habitation and a name.
Up to this point all in evidence is materialistic, an exhibition of force, of resolution, of brains in the keen sense of the word. It is the joint product of the speculator, the engineer, the builder.
Problem: How shall we impart to this sterile pile, this crude, harsh, brutal agglomeration, this stark, staring exclamation of eternal strife, the graciousness of those higher forms of sensibility and culture that rest on the lower and fiercer passions? How shall we proclaim from the dizzy height of this strange, weird, modern housetop the peaceful evangel of sentiment, of beauty, the cult of a higher life? . .
As I am here seeking not for an individual or special solution, but for a true normal type, the attention must be confined to those conditions that, in the main, are constant in all tall office buildings, and every mere incidental and accidental variation eliminated from the consideration, as harmful to the clearness of the main inquiry.
The practical horizontal and vertical division or office unit is naturally based on a room of comfortable area and height, and the size of this standard office room as naturally
Tlii em; n rit pnblUhed io Lipfincoltt, M.rch, 1896.
predetermines the standard structural unit, and, approximately, the size of window openings. In turn, these purely arbitrary units of structure form in an equally natural way the truo basis of the artistic development of the exterior. Of course the structural spacings and openings in the first or mercantile story are required to be the largest of all; those in the second or quasi-mercantile story are of a somewhat similar nature. The spacings and openings in the attic are of no importance whatsoever (the windows have no actual value), for light may be taken from the top, and no recognition of a cellular division is necessary in the structural spacing.
Hence it follows inevitably, and in the simplest possible way, that if we follow our natural instincts without thought of books, rules, precedents, or any such educational impedimenta to a spontaneous and "sensible" result, we will in the following manner design the exterior of our tall office building to wit:
Beginning with the first story, we give this a main entrance that attracts the eye to its location, and the remainder of the story we treat in a more or less liberal, expansive, sumptuous way a way based exactly on the practical necessities, but expressed with a sentiment of largeness and freedom. The second story we treat in a similar way, but usually with milder pretension. Above this, throughout the indefinite number of typical office tiers, we take our cue from the individual cell, which requires a window with its separating pier, its sill and lintel, and we, without more ado, make them look all alike because they are all alike. This brings us to the attic, which, having no division into office-cells, and no special requirement for lighting, gives us the power to show by means of its broad expanse of wall and its dominating weight and character, that which is the fact namely, that the series of office tiers has come definitely to an end.
This may perhaps seem a bald result and a heartless, pessimistic way of stating it, but even so we certainly have advanced a most characteristic stage beyond the imagined sinister building of the speculator-cngincer-buildcr combination. For tho hand of the architect is now definitely felt in the decisive position at once taken, and the suggestion of a thoroughly sound, logical, coherent expression of the conditions is becoming apparent.
When I say tho hand of the architect, I do not mean necessarily the accomplished and trained architect. I mean only a man with a strong, natural liking for buildings, and a dis-


Guaranty Building, Buffalo, N. Y. Louis Sullivan, Architect. 1894
i Hit
A
111 n
lllfij
li I
111! i
position to shape them in what seems to his unaffected nature a direct and simple way. He will probably tread an innocent patli from his problem to its solution, and therein he will show an enviable gift of logic. If he have some gift for form in detail, some feeling for form purely and simply as form, some love for that, his result in addition to its simple straightforward naturalness and completeness in general statement, will have something of the charm of sentiment.
However, thus far the results are only partial and tentative at best; relatively true, they are but superficial. We are doubtlessly right in our instinct, but we must seek a fuller justification, a finer sanction, for it. . .
We must now heed the imperative voice of emotion. It demands of us, what is the chief characteristic of the tall office building? And at once we answer, it is lofty. This ldftiness is to the artist-nature its thrilling aspect. It is the very open organ-tone in its appeal. It must be in turn the dominant chord in his expression of it, the true excitant of his imagination. It must be tall, every inch of it tall. The force and power of altitude must be in it, the glory and pride of exaltation must be in it. It must be every inch a proud and soaring thing, rising in sheer exultation that from bottom'to top it is a unit without a single dissenting line that it is the new, the unexpected, the eloquent peroration of most bald, most sinister, most forbidden conditions.
The man who designs in this spirit and with the sense of responsibility to the generation he lives in must be no coward, no denier, no bookworm, no dilettante. He must live of his life and for his life in the fullest, most consummate sense. He must realize at once and with the grasp of inspiration that the problem of the tall office building is one of the most stupendous, one of the most magnificent opportunities that the Lord of Nature in His beneficence has ever offered to the proud spirit of man.
That this has not been perceived indeed, has been flatly denied is an exhibition of human perversity that must give us pause.
One more consideration. Let us now lift this question into the region of calm, philosophic observation. Let us seek a comprehensive, a final solution: let the problem dissolve.
Certain critics, and very thoughtful ones, have advanced the theory that the true prototype of the tall office building is the classical column, consisting of base, shaft, and capital the moulded base of the column typical of the lower stories of our building, the plain or fluted shaft suggesting the mo-
notonous, uninterrupted series of office-tiers, and the capital the completing power and luxuriance of the attic.
Other theorizers, assuming a mystical symbolism as a guide, quote the many trinities in nature which indicates the beauty and conclusiveness of such trinities in unity. They aver the beauty of prime numbers, the mysticism of the number three, the beauty of all things that are in three parts to wit; the day, subdividing into morning, noon, and night; the limbs, the thorax, and the head constituting the body. So they say, should the building be in three parts vertically, substantially as before, but for different motives.
Others, of purely intellectual temperament, hold that such a design should be in the nature of a logical statement; it should have a beginning, a middle, and an ending, each clearly defined therefore again a building, as above, in three parts vertically.
Others, seeking their examples and justification in the vegetable kingdom, urge that such a design shall above all things be organic. They quote the suitable flower with its bunch of leaves at the earth, its long graceful stem, carrying the gorgeous single flower. They point to the pine tree, its massy roots, its lithe, uninterrupted trunk, its tuft of green high in the air. Thus, they say, should be the design of the tall office building: again in three parts vertically.
Others still, more susceptible to the power of a unit than to the grace of a trinity, say that such a design should be struck out at a blow, as though by a blacksmith or by mighty Jove, or should be thought-born, as was Minerva, full grown. They accept the notion of a triple division as permissible and welcome, but non-essential. With them it is a subdivision of their unit: the unit does not come from the alliance'of the three; they accept it without murmur, provided the subdivision does not disturb the sense of singleness and repose.
All of these critics and theorists agree, however, positively, unequivocally, in this, that the tall office building should not, must not, be made a field for the display of architectural knowledge in the encyclopaedic sense; that too much learning in litis instance is fully as dangerous, as obnoxious, as too little learning; that mincollttny is abhorrent to their sense; that the sixteen-story building must not consist of sixteen separate, distinct, and unrelated buildings piled one upon the other until the top of the pile is reached.
To this latter folly I would not refer were it not the fact that nine out of every ten tall office buildings are designed in precisely this way in effect, not by the ignorant, but by


the educated. It would seem indeed, as though the "trained" architect, when facing this problem, were beset at every story, or at most, every third or fourth story, by the hysterical dread lest he be in "bad form"; lest he be not bedecking his building with sufficiency of quotation from this, that, or the other "correct" building in some other land and some other time; lest he be not copious enough in the display of his wares; lest he betray, in short, a lack of resource. To loosen up the touch of this cramped and fidgety hand, to allow the nerves to calm, the brain to cool, to reflect equably, to reason naturally, seems beyond him; he lives, as it were, in a waking nightmare filled with the desjecla membra of architecture. The spectacle is not inspiriting.
As to the former and serious views held by discerning and thoughtful critics, I shall, with however much of regret, dissent from them for the purpose of this demonstration, for I regard them as secondary only, non-essential, and as touching not at all upon the vital spot, upon the quick of the entire matter, upon the true, the immovable philosophy of the architectural art.
This view let me now state, for it brings to the solution of the problem a final, comprehensive formula.
All things in nature have a shape, that is to say, a form, an outward semblance, that tells us what they are, that distinguishes them from ourselves and from each other.
Unfailingly in nature these shapes express the inner life, the native quality, of the animal, tree, bird, fish, that they present to us; they are so characteristic, so recognizable, that we say, simply, it is "natural" it should be so. Yet the moment we peer beneath this surface of things, the moment we look through the tranquil reflection of ourselves and the clouds above us, down into the clear, fluent, unfathomable depth of nature, how startling is the silence of it, how amazing the flow of life, how absorbing the mystery. Unceasingly the essence of things is taking shape in the matter of things, and this unspeakable process we call birth and growth. Awhile the spirit and the matter fade away together, and it is this that we call decadence, death. These two happenings seem jointed and interdependent, blended into one like a bubble and its iridescence, and they seem borne along upon a slowly moving air. This air is wonderful past all understanding.
Yet to the steadfast eye of one standing upon the shore of things, looking chiefly and most lovingly upon that side on which the sun shines and that we feel joyously to be life, the heart is ever gladdened by the beauty, the exquisite spontaneity, with which life seeks and takes on its forms in an accord perfectly responsive to its needs. It seems ever as though the life and the form were absolutely one and inseparable, so adequate is the sense of fulfillment.
Whether it be the sweeping eagle in his flight or the open apple-blossom, the toiling work-horse, the blithe swan, the branching oak, tho winding stream at its biisCj the drifting clouds, over all the coursing sun, form ever follows function, and this is the law. Where function does not change, form does not change. The granite rocks, the ever-brooding hills, remain for ages; the lightning lives, comes into shape, and dies in a twinkling.
It is the pervading law of all things organic, and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, of all things human
and all things superhuman, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. This is the law.
Shall we, then, daily violate this law in our art? Are we so decadent, so imbecile, so utterly weak of eyesight, that we cannot perceive this truth so simple, so very simple? Is it indeed a truth so transparent that we see through it but do not see it? Is it really then, a very marvelous thing, or is it rather so commonplace, so everyday, so near a thing to us, that we cannot perceive that the shape, form, outward expression, design or whatever we may choose, of the tall office building should in the very nature of things follow the functions of the building, and that where the function does not change, the form is not to change?
Does this not readily, clearly, and conclusively show that the lower one or two stories will take on a special character suited to the special needs, that the tiers of typical offices, having the same unchanging function, shall continue in the same unchanging form, and that as to the attic, specific and conclusive as it is in its very nature, its function shall equally be so in force, in significance, in continuity, in conclusiveness of outward expression? From this results, naturally, spontaneously, unwittingly, a three-part division, not from any theory, symbol, or fancied logic.
And thus the design of the tall office building takes its place with all other architectural types made when architecture, as has happened once in many years, was a living art. Witness the Greek temple, the Gothic cathedral, the medieval fortress.
And thus, when native instinct and sensibility shall govern the exercise of our beloved art; when the known law, the respected law, shall be that form ever follows function; when our architects shall cease struggling and prattling handcuffed and vainglorious in the asylum of a foreign school; when it is truly felt, cheerfully accepted, that this law opens up the airy sunshine of green fields, and gives to us a freedom that the very beauty and sumptuousness of the outworking of the law itself as exhibited in nature will deter any sane, any sensitive man from changing into license, when it becomes evident that we are merely speaking a foreign language with a noticeable American accent, whereas each and every architect in the land might, under the benign influence of this law, express in the simplest, mo9t modest, most natural way that which it is in him to say; that he might really and would surely develop his own characteristic individuality, and that the architectural art with him would certainly become a living form of speech, a natural form or utterance, giving surcease to him and adding treasures small and great to the growing art of his land; when we know and feel that Nature is our friend, not our implacable enemythat an afternoon in the country, an hour by the sea, a full open view of one single day, through dawn, high noon, and twilight, will suggest to us so much that is rhythmical, deep, and eternal in the vast art of architecture, something so deep, so true, that all the narrow formalities, hard and fast rules, and strangling bonds of schools cannot stifle it in usthen it may be proclaimed that we are on the high-road to a natural and satisfying art, and architecture that will soon become a fine art in the true, the best sense of the word, an art that will live because it will be of the people, for the people, and by the people.
ftiiBirrrrutHB.,AixMfr,tiir>,
- ,. v;.-^,,,,^,-;-.!]" .....-:,ffi:-:f ~r -.i-""i,vn 'rniny/Aattftra^^'tfmrffr^^


P,\c>,- r U|
ILISHED FROM "NORTHWEST ARCHITECT" BY WlLLIAM G R A Y PuRCELl., A.I. A.---JULY, I 944
5ri
3r
... m*#&ir.r:
ARCHITECTURE .... AS A FUNCTION OF DEMOCRACY
OVER THIRTY-EIGHT YEARS have passed since this thesis first modestly appeared in a small Ohio trade journal, simultaneously to be reprinted by Mr. Sullivan as an insignificant looking brochure.
ALTHOUGH ALMOST UNKNOWN to American architects, few of whom would have read it had they seen it, this world moving issue slowly leavened the thought of our building world and by that ironical justice with which Fate has always eventually faced wilfully static privilege, Sullivan s practical thinking reappeared when in 1933 America was in the. depth of her greatest economic despair.
AT LONG LAST, with undated clarity Sullivan's ideas implemented universal design the world around with simple and honest procedures. Unfortunately we seem unable to maintain this creative freedom for even ten short years. Already the living forms are hardening into a lexicon of architectural fashion patter.
THIS ENDURING CHARTER embracing as it does Man's whole relation to his world, is such a unit in idea, so organized in statement, so clear and logical in its development and so free of irrelevant material, that a digest of it is almost impossibleit is already compacted to structural competency.
WE HOWEVER OFFER as an introduction to the full text a special group of selections and acknowledge at once that an egually valid selection could be made under another's view of what is most immediately important to the architect in these hectic times of World War II from which great changes must certainly be expected. W. G. P.
THIS PHOTOGRAPH RIVES Vol' \ ditwi i rom Tin i.oi.M-N llOOKWAVj TRANSPORTATION HUM.DIM! IN Till ( till ALO WORLD'S ( nil Mill.\\ I \ POSITION WHIRL SULLIVAN SIXTY ONI- YEARS \.o SI KI'KINKD AND THRU LED A COSMOPOLITAN I'I'llMi Willi Ills VIRILE HI- PART I'HE IN AMERICAN ARIIIITII I I'M


AN ARCHITECTURAL GLIMPSE INTO THE YEAR 1906
A detail on the frame of the Golden Doorway. Transportation Building, Chicago Columbian Exposition. 1893
On this doorway alone Sullivan developed forty-seven distinct ornamental patterns, each an outstanding example of his creative ability.
In their completeness they exemplify Sullivan's purest concept of a truly American system of ornament.
The F. W. Dodge Co.. through their construction news reporters, distributed Sullivan's sixteen page brochure "WHAT IS ARCHITECTURE" among the building industry, including such architects as might appear receptive to these "radical" ideas.
It was an unsolicited expression of how the contracting world of America appreciated this thinker and master of the technical arts. Accompanying their distribution was a personal letter praising the author's ideas, an astonishing event surelythe contractors doing missionary work in behalf of sound aesthetics and philosophy among the dispensers of architectural "confectionery" of that day.
We can thank those men who recognized the logic, force and value of Sullivan's ideology, for being unafraid to do what they could to indoctrinate his principles throughout the building world.
j' ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We of the Bruce Publishing Company cannot omit a word of sincere appreciation to John lager, A.I.A., Architect, of Minneapolis, who designed and edited this brochure and collaborated with loving care in the typographical details.
He has been a life-long admirer of Louis Sullivan and a loyal practitioner of his principles.
!


The Golden Doorway, Transportation Building World's Columbian Exposition, Chicago, 1893
"LOUIS SULLIVAN, PROPHET OF MODERN ARCHITECTURE"
By HUGH MORRISON
tlMlntniH 1'rofeMnor, Department of \rt mill Arch......lojry, l)iir<-
mouth College. I'iiIiIImIiiiI Iij (he Mimenttl of Modern \r< mid w \\. NortOti A I <> in |>il II >. Inc., 70 Fifth Avenue, > Vork.
No architect's office library should be without this literature, which gives a most complete account of Sullivan's personality and philosophy, his life work and its significance for the profession.
Hfri'ii ith we offer mi e\tnu't of content* iliNcliiMhiK the Mcopc of the uork:
Dedicatory to George Grant Elmslie. pg. VI
Contents........................"VII
List of 87 Illustrations............" XI
Foreword.An essay by the author, HUGH MOIiRISON, disclosing his
vistas in the program..........." XV
Youth and Training.............." 23 )
Early Works....................." 25
The Auditorium.................." 80
Years of Expansion.............." 111
Skyscraper, Form giving to:......." 140
Sullivan Alone..................." 178
Sullivan's Architectural Theory...." 229
A Critical Estimate.............." 2H2
Dankmar Adler, Biography........." 281
List of 124 Sullivan's Buildings.... 294 Bibliography, Sullivan's 31 Works. 306
General Bibliography............." 310
Index .........................." 385
While this is a penetrating and objective book of information about Sullivan, exception might be taken to the author's assumption in his foreword to the effect that Sullivan's expression of hope in a victory of Architecture in our Democracy became blasted during the last two decades of his life. We are convinced that Morrison did not want to create such an impression, nevertheless it appears, although he was writing in the depression of 1934,that even he was inclined to grant the strategists of the old school some undeserved recognition through their grand-scale revival of medievalism and classicism which Sullivan had so logically foreclosed. It shows that even trained scholars of Morrison's type are apt to succumb before the publicity which accompanies the appearance on the architectural stage of grandiose examples of historic styles.
When we ten years later review that spectacular and militant era of our immediate past, we realize that these exertions of our architectural supermen meant nothing but a vain and costly retrogression in National Architecture.
ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES IS REPUBLISHED IN FULL AN AUTHENTIC TEXT OF SULLIVAN'S "WHAT IS ARCHITECTURE." This essay was first printed by the American Contractor, Vol. 27, No. 1, January G, 1906, and at the same time issued also in brochure form by its author. A reprint of this essay by The Craftsman appeared in their numbers of May, June and July, 1906.
KEY NOTES TO ILLUSTRATIONS ol representative buildings by L. H. Sullivan as placed in the flfefci*** text in chronological order to
demonstrate the evolution of his architecture.
Wninwriglit Building, St. Louis. 1890-91. Sullivan defined thereby for first time the principles of architectural form and methods of approach underlying the AniAicnn skyscraper.
OAl-rick (Schiller) Building, Chicago, 1 891-92. Sullivan's second skyscraper, reminiscent of Wain-wright Building, but taller, on a more complex planresulting in novelty of the form.
St. Nicholas Hotel, St. Louis, 1892-93. The axis-forming gable roof, with dining room-disclosing balconies and hostelry-defining upright strips of oriels, reveal the corner piers.
Union Trust Building, St. Louis, 1892-93. Sullivan's third skyscraper discloses as a reversal of the Wainwright plan, a new problem arising from a double-facade block around the open court.
Transportation Building, Chicago World's Columbian Exposition, 1 893, was the turning point In Sullivan's career. Hosts of visitors saw therein new colorful rhythms of forms obtained thro igh materials of temporary nature. Details of the "(olden Dcmrway" are to be found on the front cover and on pages 2 and 3.
Stock Exchange Building:, Chicago, 1 893-94. The largest Sullivan skyscraper, unlike any of his previous. Projecting shafts of oriels appear to corrugate the plane surface walls.
Guaranty Building, Buffalo, 1894-9. Similar to, but taller than. Wainwright Building, this edifice in its lofty totality meant forever a decisive victory against "Vitruvius" in America.
Conflict (Bayard) Building, New York, 1897-98. Compositional directness and basic simplicity of this building freed New York from traditonal conceptions of skyscraper design.
Cnrson-lMrie-Scott Store, Chicago. 1899-1904. The first revolutionary and epoch-making department store design, recognized here and abroad as "practical American liori/.ontalisiii."
National Fanners' Bank, Owatonna, Minn.. 1907-08. Its president had read, "What Is Architecture?"Subsequent engaging of Sullivan, with Elmslie as collaborator, created the first and best of a series of country hanks.
12


"WHAT IS ARCHITECTURE"
A Study in the American People of Today.
Bp Louis H. Sullivan, Chicago
5[ The intellectual trend of the hour is toward simplification. The lull powers of the modern scientific mind are now directed, with .1 common consent, toward searching out the few and simple principles that arc believed to underlie the complexity of Nature, and such investigation is steadily revealing a unitary impulse underlying all men and all things.
51 This method of analysis reveals a simple Man. natnely: that as he thinks, so he acts; versely, one may read in his acts what he thinkshis real thoughts, be it understood, not what he avows he thinks. For all men think, all men act. To term a man unthinking in a misuse of words: what really is meant, is. that he does not think with accuracy, fitness and power. If, then, it be true that as a man thinks so must he act in inevitable accordance with his thought, so it is true that society, which is but a summation of individuals, acts precisely as it thinks. Thus are the thoughts of a people to be read in the acts of a people, as clearly as words are read upon the printed page.
aspect of md. con-
51 If. in like manner, we apply this method of analysis to the complex spread of historical and contemporaneous architecture, wc perceive, clearly revealed in their simplicity, its three elementary forms, namely, the pier, the lintel and the arch. These are the three, the only three letters, from which has been expanded the Architectural Art as a great and superb language wherewith Man has expressed, through the generations, the changing drift of his thoughts. Thus, throughout the past and the present, each building stands as a social act. In such act we read that which cannot escape our analysis, for it is indelibly fixed in the building, namely, the nature of the thoughts of the individual and the people whose image the building is or was.
J Perhaps I should not leave the three elements, pier, lintel and arch, thus baldly set forth. It may not appear to the reader that the truth concerning them is as clear and simple as I state it. He may think, for example, that there was a marked difference between the Egyptian and the Greek Architectures, even though both were based on pier and lintel only. There was a marked difference. The difference that existed between the Egyptian and the Greek minds. The Egyptian animated pier and lintel with his thoughthe could not do otherwise; and the Egyptian temple took form as an Egyptian actit could not be otherwise. So Greek thought, clearly defined, took form in the Greek temple, clearly defined, and the Greek temple stood clearly forth as a Creek act. Yet both were as simply picr-and-lintel, as I in setting one brick upon two separated other bricks, simply expose the principle of pier and lintel.
5f Similarly the Roman aqueduct and the medieval cathedral were both in the pier-and-arch form. But what a far cry from Roman thought to medieval thought! And how clearly is that difference in thought ghowri in the differences in form taken on in each case
Wainwright Building St. Louis1890-91
by pier and arch, as each structure in its time stood forth as an act of the people. How eloquently these structures speak to us of the militant and simple power of Roman thought, of the mystic yearning of medieval thought.
But. you may say, these structures were not acts of the people, rather, in one ( ase the act of an emperor, in the other case an act of the church. Very well; but what real! was the emperor but an act of the people expressing the thought of the people; and what was the church but similarly the thought of the people in action? When the thought of the Roman people changed, the vast Roman fabric disintegrated; when the thought of the medieval people changed, the vitality of the church subsided exactly in proportion as the supporting thought of the people was withdrawn. Thus every form of government, every social institution, every undertaking, however gnat, however small, every symbol of enlightenment or degradation, each and all have sprung and are still springing from the life of the people, and have ever formed and are now as surely forming images of their thought. Slowly by centuries, generations, years, days, hours, the thought of the people has changed; so with precision have their acts responsively changed; thus thoughts and acts have flowed and are flowing ever onward, unceasingly onward, involved within the impelling power oi Life. Throughout this stream of human life, and thought, and activity, men have ever felt the need to build; and from the need arose the power to build. So, as they thought, they built; for strange as it may seem, they could build in no other way. As they built, they made, used and left behind them records of their thinking. Then, as through the years new men came with changed thoughts so arose new buildings in consonance with the change of thoughtthe building always the expression of the thinking. Whatever the character of the thinking, just so was the character of the building. Pier, lintel and arch changed in form, purpose and expression, following, with the fidelity of Life, Man's changing thoughts as he moved in the flow of his destinyas he was moved ever onward by a drift unseen and unknownand which is now flowing and is still unseen and unknown.
5J This flow of building we call historical architecture. At no time and in no instance has it been other than an index of the flow of the thought of the peoplean emanation from the inmost life of the people.
5f Perhaps you think this is not so; perhaps you think the feudal lord built the fortified castle. So he did, ostensibly. But where did his need and power so to build come from? From his retainers. And whence came the power of his retainers? From the people. As the people thought, so they acted. And thus the power of the feudal lord rested upon the thought, the belief of the people; upon their need and upon their power. Thus all power rests upon the consent of the people, that is, upon their thought. The instant their thought begins to change, that instant the power, resting upon it and sanctioned by it, begins its waning. Thus the decay of the pld and the formation ol the new are synchronous effects of one cause. That single cause is: Thought. Thus we perceive that the simplest aspect of all human activity is change.
that cause thought to
51 To analyze the influences
13


Garrick (Schiller) Building Chicago1891-92
change would take me, now, too far afield. Suffice it to say that thought, once having undergone change, does not again become the samehowever great the lapse in time. Thus is there ever new birth, never re-birth.
5J It may now become clear to my reader that we ought, in viewing historic Architecture, to cease to regard it under the artificial classification of styles, as is now the accepted way. and to consider (as is more natural and more logical) each building of the past and the present as a prodtict and index of the civilization of its time; and the civilization of the time, also, as the product and index of the thought of the people of the time and place. In this way we shall develop in our minds a much broader, clearer panorama of the actual living flow of Architecture through the ages; and grasp the clear, simple, accurate notion, that Architecture always has been, and still is. a simple impulse of which the manifestation in Varied form is continuously changing.
5| 1 should add, perhaps, that, in speaking of the people, I do not use the word in the unhappy sense of the lower classes, so-called. 1 mean all the people; and I look upon all the people as constituting a social organism.
5J I am quite aware that these arc views not generally held among architects. Indeed you will not find a thesis of this kind set forth in books or taught in schools. For the prevailing view concerning architecture is strangely artificial and fruitless, as indeed are current American ideas concerning almost any phase of the welfare of all the people. That is to say: in our democratic land, ideas, thoughts, are weirdly, indeed destructively -undemocratican aspect of our current civilization which, later, I shall consider.
5f I therefore ask my reader, for the time being at least, to repose sufficient confidence in my statements, that he may lay aside his existing notions concerning Architecture, which arc of necessity traditional, and, as such, acquired habits of thinking, unanalyzed by him; and thus lay his mind open to receive and consider the simple and more natural views which make up my paper, to the end that he may perceive how far astray we are from an Architecture natural, truthful and wholesome, such as should characterize a truly democratic people. I ask this because the welfare of democracy is my chief concern in life; and because I have always regarded Architecture, and still so regard it, as merely one of the activities of a people, and as such, necessarily in harmony with all the otheis ; or as a people thinks^concerning Architecture, so it thinks concerning everything else; and as it thinks concerning any other thing, so it thinks concerning Architecture; for the thought of a people, however, complicated it may appear, is all of-a-piece and represents the balance of heredity and environment at the time.
5[ I trust, further, that a long disquisition is not necessary in order to show that the attempt at imitation, by us, of this day, of the bygone forms of building, is a procedure unworthy of a free people; and that the dictum of the schools, that Architecture is finished and done, is a suggestion humiliating to every active brain, and, therefore, in fact, a puerility and a falsehood when weighed in the scales of truly democratic thought. Such dictum gives the lie, in arrogant fashion, to healthful
human experience. It says, in a word: The American
people are not fit for democracy. Perhaps tiny are not. If so, we shall see how and why. We shall see if this alleged unfitness is really normal and natural, or if it is a feudal condition imposed upon the people by a traditional system of inverted thinking. We shall see if those whom we have entrusted with leadership in our matters educational have or have not misled us. We shall see, in a larger sense, if we, as a people, not only have betrayed each other, but have failed in that trust which the world-spirit of democracy placed in our hands, as we, a new people, emerged to fill a new and spacious land.
5f All of this we shall presently read in our current Architecture, and we shall test the accuracy of that reading by a brief analysis of the thought and activities of the American people as they are expressed in other ways. For, be sure, what we shall find in our Architecture, wc shall as surely find elsewhere and everywhere.
5f If it is assumed that the art of reading is confined to the printed page, we cannot go far. But if we broaden and quicken our sense of reading until it appears to us, in its more vital aspect, as a science, an art of interpretation, wc shall go very far indeed. In truth there will be no ending of our journey; for the broad field of nature, of human thought and endeavor, will open to us as a hook of life, wherein the greatest and the smallest, the most steadfast and the most fleeting, will appear in their true value. Then will our minds have escaped slavery to words and be at liberty in the open air of reality, freely and fully to deal with things.
5] Indeed, most of us'have in less or greater measure, this gift of reading things. We come into it naturally; but, curiously enough, many are ashamed because it does not bear the sanction of authority, because it docs not bear the official stamp of that much misunderstood word scholarship, a stamp, by the way, which gives currency to most of the notions antagonistic to the development of our common thinking powers. It is this same scholastic fetichism, too, that has caused an illogical gap between the theoretical and the practical. In right thinking such gap cannot exist. A true method of education, therefore, should consist in a careful and complete development of our common and natural powers of thinking, which, in reality, are vastly greater, infinitely more susceptible to development than is generally assumed. Indeed the contumacy in which we habitually underrate the latent powers of the average human mind is greatly to our discredit. It constitutes, in fact, a superstition. A superstition whose origin is readily traceable to the scholasticism of past centuries, and to the tenacious notion of social caste. It is definitely the opposite of the modern and enlightened view now steadily gaining ground, that the true spirit of democratic education consists in searching out, liberating and developing the splendid but obscured powers of the average man, and particularly those of his children.
5f It is disquieting to note that the system of education on which wc lavish funds with such generous, even prodigal, hand, falls short of fulfilling its true democratic function; and that particularly in the so-called higher branches its tendency appears daily mote reactionary, more feudal.
5f It is not an agreeable reflection that so manv ol OUf
14


university graduates lack the trained ability to sec clearly, and to think simply, concisely, constructively; that there is perhaps more showing of cynicism than good faith, seemingly more distrust of men than confidence in them, and, withal, no consummate ability to interpret things.
5[ In contrast we have the active-minded hut "uneducated" man. he who has so large a share in our activities. He reads well those things that he believes concern him closely. His mind is active, practical, superficial; and. whether he deals with small things or large, its quality is nearly the same in all cases. His thoughts almost always are concerned with the immediate. His powers of reflection are undeveloped, and thus he ignores those simple, vital things which grow up beside him, and with which, as a destiny, he will some day have to reckon, and will then find himself unprepared. The constructive thinking power of
some such men. the imaginative reach, the incisive intuition, the forceful will, sometimes amaze US. Rut when we examine closely we find that all this is hut brilliant superstructure, that the hidden foundation is weak because the foundation-thought was not sought to he placed broad, deep and secure in the humanities. Thus we have at the poles of our thinking two classes of men, each of which believes it is dealing with realities, but both in fact dealing with phantoms; for between them they have studied everything but the real thoughts and the real hearts of the people. They have not sufficiently reckoned with the true and only source both of social stability and of social change. If, in time, such divergence of thought, as it grows in acute-ness, shall lead to painful readjustments, such will be but the result, natural and inexorable, of a fatal misunderstanding, the outgrowth of that fatal defect in our system of thinking which is leading us away from our fellows.
5| If I say that these aspects of our thoughts arc readable in our current Architecture, I am not saying too much, for acts point surely to the parent thoughts, and in everything that men do they leave the indelible imprint of their minds. If this suggestion be followed out, it will become surprisingly clear how each and every building reveals itself naked to the eye; how its every aspect, to the smallest detail, to the lightest move of the hand, reveals the workings of the mind of the man who made it. and who is responsible to us for it. Everything is tl^erc for us to read, to interpret; and this we may do at our leisure. The building has not means of locomotion, it cannot hide itself, it cannot get away. There it is, and there it will staytelling more truths about him who made it, who thought it, than he in his fatuity imagines; revealing his mind and his heart exactly for what they arc worth, not a whit more, not a whit less: telling plainly, the lies he thinks; telling with almost cruel truthfulness of his bad faith, his feeble, wabbly mind, his impudence, his selfish egoism, his mental irresponsibility, his apathy, his disdain for real things. Is it cruelty to analyze thus clearly? Is it vivisection thus to pursue, step by step, to uncover nerve after nerve, dispassionately to probe and test and weigh act after act, thought after thought, to follow every twist and turn of the mind that made
the building, sifting and judging it, until at last the building says to us: "I am no more a real building than the thing that made me is a real man!"
51 If so, then it must, correspondingly, be a pleasure and a genuine beneficence to recognize and note, in some other building, the honest effort of an honest man, the kindly willingness and frankness of a sincere mind to give expression to simple, direct, natural thinking, to produce a building as real as the man who made it.
5f And is it not, as naturally, helpful to recognize and note in still another building, a mind perhaps not too well trained, perhaps not very sure of itself, hut still courageously seeking a way: the building showing where the mind stumbles and tries again, showing just where the thought is not immanent, not clear, not self-centered?
5f Is it not the part of wisdom to (beer, to encourage such a mind, rather than to dishearten it with ridicule? To say to it: Learn that the mind works best when allowed to work naturally; learn to do what your problem suggests when you have reduced it to its simplest terms; you will thus find all problems, however complex, taking on a simplicity you had not dreamed of; accept this simplicity, boldly, and with confidence, do not lose your nerve and run away from it, or you are lost, for you are here at the point men so heedlessly call geniusas though it were necessarily rare; for you are here at the point no living brain can surpass in essence, the point all truly great minds seek the point of vital simplicitythe point of view which so illuminates thc.Vnind that the art of expression becomes spontaneous, powerful and unerring, and achievement a certainty; so, if you would seek and express the best that is in yourself, you must search out the best that is in your people; for they are your problem, and you are indissolubly a part of them; it is for you to affirm that which they really wish to affirm, namely, the best that is in them, and they as truly wish you to express the best that is in yourself; if the people seem to have but little faith it is because they have been tricked so long; they are weary of dishonesty, more weary than they know, much more wearv than you know, and in their hearts they seek honest and fearless men, men simple and clear of mind, loyal to their own manhood and to the people. The American people are now in a stupor; be on hand at the awakening. The lion is now in the net, or the larva in the cocoontake the simile you prefer.
5f But to simplify the mind is, in fact, not so easy. Everything is against you. You are surrounded by a mist of tradition which you, alone, must dispel. The schools will not help you, for they, too, are in a mist. So, you must develop your mind as best you can. The only safe method is this:- -Take nothing for granted, but analyze, test and examine all things, for yourself, and determine their true values; sift the wheat from the chaff, and reduce all thoughts, all activities to the simple test of honesty. You will he surprised, perhaps, to see, how matters that you once deemed solid, fall apart; and, how things that you once deemed inconsequential, take on a new and momentous significance. But in time your mind will clarify and strengthen, and you will have moved into that domain of intellectual
St. Nicholas Hotel St. Louis1892-93


power, wherein thought discriminates, with justice and clarity, between those things which in.ike for the health, and those which make for the illness of a people. When you have done this, your mind will have reached its balance: you will have something to say, and you will say it with candor.
5J In the light of the preceding statements, the current mannerisms of Architectural criticism must often seem trivial. For ot what avail is it to say that this is too small, that too large, this too thick, that too thin, or to quote this, that or the other precedent, when the real question may be: Is not the entire design a mean evasion? Why magnify this, that or the other little thing, if the entire scheme of thinking, that the building stands for, is false, and puts a mask upon the people, who want true buildings, but do not know how to get them so long as architects betray them with Architectural phrases?
5J Why have we not more of vital Architectural criticism:' Is it because our professional critics lack penetration? Because they lack courage? Is it because they, who should be free, are not tree? Is it because they, who should know, do not know? Do they not see, or will they not? Do they know such buildings to be lies, and refrain from saying so? Or are they, too, inert of mind? Are their minds, too, benumbed with culture, and their hearts, thus, mafic faint?
Make the Architecture and we will publish it; we are but mirrors of the times. If our pages are filled With pretentious ttasb, it is because architects make it. We publish what our critics write, such as it is, and what architects write, such as it is. We give our readers, who are mostly architects, what they give us. If
willing.
they want better they will let us know. We are
5f How are our people to know what, for them, a real and fitting Architecture may mean, if it is not first made clear to them that the current and accepted Architecture with which their minds are rapidly being distortedis false to them! To whom are we to look if not to our trusted critics? And if these fail us, what then?
5[ Butthe cynic may observeWhat if they do fail us! They write merely in the fashion. For everybody else betrays everybody else. We are all false; and why should a false people expect other than a false Architecture? A people always gets what it deserves, neither more nor less. It's up to the people, anyway. If they want a real Architecture, let them become real, themselves. If they do not wish to be betrayed, let them quit betraying. If they really wish loyalty, let them be loyal. If they really wish thinkers, let them so think. If they really do not wish humbug Architecture, let them cease being humbugs themselves. There is so much of truth in this discouraging view, that I shall later clarify it.
5f For the moment, however, in passing, let us consider our Architectural periodicals. They Boat along, aimlessly enough, drifting in the tide of heedless commercialism:- Their pages filled with views of buildings, buildings, buildings, like "words, words, words." Buildings in this "style," that and the other; false always, except now and then and here and there in spots, where the "style" has been dropped in spots, and where, in consequence, the real building appears, in spots; or where the architect, under "compulsion," has had to let the "style" goand do something sensible; or, rarely, where the architect, of his own free will, has chosen to be clean, and has expressed himself with feeling, and simple, direct eloquence. The publishers may well say:
Union Trust Building St. Louis1892-93
5j And a word concerning "Handbooks on Architecture." All that need be said of them is that they are the blind leading the blind.
5j Concerning more ambitious works:While they contain certain, or rather uncertain, attempts at philosophy, such discussion is left in the air as a vapor; it
is not condensed into terms of vital, present
use.
5[ Thus it happens that the would-be searcher after architectural reality, finds no aid, no comfort, lie is led into a jungle within whose depths, his guides are lost, and hr is left without a compass, and without a star. Why is this so? The answer is at hand: Because, it long and tacitly has been assumed by our would-be mentors, and hence, by our amiable selves, that the architectural art is a closed book, that the word finis was written centuries ago, and that all, obviously, that is left for us moderns is the humble privilege to select, copy and adapt. Because it has not been assumed that all buildings have arisen, have stood and stand as physical symbols of the psychic state of a people. Because no distinction has been made between was and is. Andwhat is most dispiritingthis Junacy continues its erratic parade in plain open view of the towering fact that modern science, with devoted patience of research, has evolved, is perfecting and has placed freely at our service the most comprehensive, accurate and high-powered system of organic reasoning that the world has known. These methods and powers, the breadth and fertility of this supreme search for the all-life-process, this most fruitful function of dernocracy, is, by those connected with the Architectural Art and its teaching, today regarded vacantly. Strangely they magnify their little. As strangely they undervalue that, which for us all, in all truth, in the serenity of human hope, heralds a sunrise for the race. Truly, procreant modern thought, clothed in all its radiance of good will, is a poet, a teacher and a prophet not known in the land of these.
5[ Confronting this ignoble apathy of those we have trusted, let us assume, if it be but in fancy, a normal student of Nature and of Man. Let us assume a virile critic, human and humane, sensitive to all, and aw.in-of this modern daybreak. He will have been a life-seeker of realities. His compass, pointing ever to the central fact that all is life; his drink-water, the knowledge that act and thought are fatefully the same: his nourishing food, the conviction that pure democracy i^ the deepest-down, the most persistent, while the most obscured desire within the consciousness of man:- So equipped, he will have traversed the high seas and the lands from poles to equator, all latitudes and longitudes of the prolific world of repressed but aspiring humanity. He will hold history, as a staff, in his hand. He will weigh the Modern Man in a just balance,
lo


wherein he will set against that man his accountability to all the people, lie, as dispassionately, will weigh the people, collectively, against their manifest responsibility and accountability to the child and to the man.
51 Let us suppose him, now, in his wandering, to have come into Our Land. That he views our Architecture, weighs it, evaluates it: then, turning in thought, looks out upon us. as a people, analyzes us, weighs us, takes our measure, appraises us: that he then places People and Architecture in the great balance of History, and thoughtfully weighs, carefully appraises; then places tin people with all their activities, in the new balance of Democracy, again to weigh, again to appraise; and then puts us with our self-called Common Sense into the serene balance of Nature: and, at the last, weighs Us and Our All, in the fateful balance of All-Encompassing Life:and makes the last appraisement! What, think you, will be his revaluing of our valuations of things, of thoughts, of men? What, in the sifting would prove wheat, what, in the weighing would have substance, what, in this refiner's fire would be the dross? After his reflections, what will he say? What will he say, after weighing us against our broad, fertile land, with its many waters, its superb and stimulating air, its sumptuous and placid beauty? How will he define us when he shall have searched our minds and hearts? For we cannot hide! What will he say when he shall come to hold us in a close accounting of our stewardship of the talent, Liberty, the treasure that the world has paid so dear in sorrow, to transmit to us!
5J What he might say, would prove a new and most dramatic story.
5f But surely he might, in part, speak thus: As you are, so are your buildings: and, as are your buildings, so are you. You and your Architecture are the same. Each is the faithful portrait of the other. To read the one is to read the other. To interpret the one is to interpret the other. Arising from both, as a miasma:What falsity! What betrayal of the present and the past! Arising from both, as the most thrilling, the most heart-piercing of refrains, as the murmur of a crowd, I hear the cry:"What is the use?" that cry begun in frivolity, passing into cynicism, and, now, deepening into pessimism. That cry which in all times and in all peoples became the cry of death or of revolution, when, from frivolity it had merged through apathyinto an utterance of despair! Your buildings,*good, bad and indifferent, arise as warning hands in the faces of allfor they are what you are. Take heed! Did you think Architecture a thing of booksof the past? No! Never! It was, always, of its present and its people! It, now, is of the present, and of you! This Architecture is ashamed to be natural, but it is not ashamed to lie; so, you, as a people, are ashamed to be natural but are not ashamed to lie. This Architecture is ashamed to be honest, but it is not ashamed to steal; so, then, by the unanswerable logic of Life, you are ashamed to be honest but arc not ashamed to steal. This Architecture is filled with hypocracy and cant. So, likewise, are you, but you say you are not. This Architecture is neurasthenic; so have you burned the candle at both ends. Is then this Democracv? This Architecture shows, ah, so plainly, the decline
of Democracy and a rank new growth of Feudalism -sure sign of a people in peril! This Architecture has no serenitysure symptom of a people out of balance. This Architecture reveals no lucid guiding principle nor have you yet evolved a lucid guiding principle, sorely though vou now need it! This Architecture shows no love of Natureyou despise Nature. In it is no joy of livingyou know not what the fullness of life signifies you are unhappy, fevered and perturbed. In these buildings the Dollar is vulgarly exalted -and the Dollar you place above Man. You adore it twenty-four hours each day: It is your God! These buildings show lack of great thinkers, real men, among your architects; and, as a people, you arc poor in great thinkers, real men though you now, in your extremity, are in dire need of great thinkers, real men. These buildings show no love of country, no affection for the people. So have you no affection for each other, but secretly will ruin each and any, so much do you love gold, so wantonly will you betray not only your neighbor but yourselves and your own children, for it!
5f Yet, here and there, a building bespeaks integrityso have you that much of integrity. All is not false so are you not wholly false. What leaven is found in your buildings such leaven is found in you. Weight for weight, measure for measure, sign for signas are your buildings, so are you!
5| A colossal energy is in your buildings, but not true powerso, is found in you, a frenzied energy, but not the true power of equipoise. Is this an indictment? Not unless you yourselves are an indictment of yourselves. There stand the buildings, they have their unchanging physiognomy. Look! See! Thus, this is a reading, an interpretation.
5f Here and there are buildings, modest, truthful and sincere; products of a genuine feeling existing in you. They are not truly ashamed where you are not ashamed: they are natural where you are Natural; they are democratic where you are democratic. Side by side they stand against the false and feudalall intermixed. So are your thoughts intermixed, democratic and feudal, in a strange and sinister drift.
5f Your buildings show no philosophy. So have you no philosophy. You pretend a philosophy of common sense. Weighed in the balance of your acts, your common sense is light as folly; a patent medicine folly; an adultcratcd-food folly, a dyspeptic folly, the folly of filth and smoke in your cities, and innumerable every day follies quite the reverse of that common sense which you assume to mean clear-cut and sturdy thinking in the affairs of daily life. You boast a philosophy of Success. It has long been your daily harangue. But, weighed in the balance of Democracv, your successes arc but too clearly, in the main, feudal. They are pessimisms, not optimisms. You did not think to count the cost; but you are beginning now to catch a corner of its masked visage. The sight of the true full cost will stagger youwhen the mask is fully drawn aside, and it stands clearly revealed! You would not Foresee a crisis, but crisis foresaw you, and now is upon you.
5J You tacitly assumed philosophy to be an empty word, not a vital need; you did not inquire; and in so
!
Transportation Building, World's Columbian Exposition, Chicago1893-


blind-folding your minds, you have walked straight to
the edge of an abyss-.
5^ For a Sound Philosophy is the Saving Grace of a Democratic People! It means, very simply, a balanced system of thinking, concerning the vital relations of a people. It is intensely practical. Nothing can he more so. For it saves waste. It looks far b( far ahead. It forestalls Crisis. It nurtures, e and directs the vitality of a people. It has ft and abiding objective, their equilibrium, he happiness.
51 Thus, foibles and follies have usurped in yi the vacant seat of Wisdom. Thus, has your 1 trayed you, as it must. And thus, has not heel the world, that which was and still remains > est oiffice, and vour noblest privilege to give, in return lor that liberty which once was yours, and which the World gave to you: A sane and pure accounting of Democracy; a Philosophy founded upon Man thereby setting forth, in clear and human terms, the integrity, the responsibility and the accountability of the Individualin short, a new, a real Philosophy of the People.
5J It is not too late.
5f Let such philosophy be the spiritual first-fruit of your fair and far-flung land. For you must now think quickly, and with a penetration, concentration and simplicity, the necessity of which you have hitherto belittled and denied. Your one splendid | reserve lies in your resourceful intelligence wh by your distress into a crisis. Your Architecture hints at this in its many-sided practicalities. Your history in this land has proved it. Use this power at once!
5f This Architecture, in the large sense, is barren of poetry; yet, strangely enough, it faintly contains in its physiognomy a latent suggestion, which bespeaks dramatic, lyric, eloquent and appealing possibilities. In fine, it expresses obscurely the most human qualities you as a people possess, and which, such is your awkward mental bashfulness, you arc ashamed to acknowledge, much less to proclaim. One longs to wash from this dirty face its overlay of timidity and abasement; to strip from its form the rags of neglect and contumelv, and to see if indeed there be not, beneath its forlorn aspect, the sweet face and form of unsuspected Cinderella.
5J I surmise:Or is it a hope born of visible possibilities? A sensf* of not negligible probabilities?For, truiy what in all the world is more charming in the last analysis, however fickle and at times childishly cruel, than is the American heart!
51 On this foundation, deeper and stronger than you suspect, I would, if I were you, build a new superstructure, really truer to yourselves, and more enduring, than that which now is crumbling upon its weak support of over-smartness and fundamental untruth.
51 Fortunate, indeed, arc you, that your corruption is so crude; for you can still survive the surgery of its eradication.
51 It is on this sound heart, and that still better part of it as yet unmatured and unrevealed to your own
IK
consciousness, that I would build anew and aright.
51 For he who knows even a genuinely little of Mankind knows this truth: The heart is greater than the head. For. in the heart, is Desire; and, from it, comes forth Courage and Magnanimity.
5[ Poetically considered, as far as the huge, disordered resultant mass of your Architecture is concerned, Intuition and Imagination have not gone forth to illuminate and search the hearts of the people. Thus are its works stone blind. If such works be called masculine, this term will prove but a misuse of neuter. For they are empty of procreant powers. They do not inspirit the thoughtful mind, but much do th^y depress it; they are choked with inarticulate cries which evoke pathos in the hearer.
wr
5| Consider, now, that poetry is not versealthough some verse may be poetic. Consider, now, poetry as apart from words and as resident in things, in thoughts, in acts. For if you persist in regarding print or language as the only readable or hearable thingsyou must, indeed, remain dull interpreters of the voices of Nature, and of the acts and thoughts of the men of the present and the past, in their varied but fundamentally alike activities. No; poetry, rightly.considered, stands for the highest form of intellectual scope and activity. Indeed, it were truer to say psychic activity, if it be known what realities lie behind the mask of that word.
5f And, be it said in passing, most words arc masks. Habit has accustomed you to this company of masks, beautiful some of them, repellant others, but you seldom draw aside a word-mask to see, for yourselves, the countenance of reality which it may both reveal and conceal. For, as 1 have said, you do not inquire, you are prone to take things for granted. You have seen masks since childhood, and have assumed, and still assume them to be real, because, since childhood,
hind and conomizes >r its sole, nee their
>ur minds dollar be-i given to our high-
5f To be sure, you had assumed that poetry meant verses; and that reading such was an unworthy weakness for men of brains and hard-headed business. You have held to a fiction, patterned upon your farcical common sense, that sentiment has no place in affairs. Again you did not inquire; you assumed: took for grantedas is your heedless way. You have not looked into your own hearts. You have looked only at the vacancy of convention from which realities have long since departed. Only the husks remain there, like the shells of beetles upon the bark of :, living tree.
1 \ri\r gllfe
Stock Exchange Building Chicago- 1893-94
m
lower and en forced
5f You have not thought deeply enough to know that the heart iti you is the woman in man. You have derided your femininity, where you have suspected it; whereas, you should have known its power, cherished and utilized it, for it is the hidden well-spring of Intuition and Imagination. What can the brain accomplish without these two! They arc the man's two inner eyes; without them, he is stone blind. For the mind sends forth their powers both together. One carries the light, the other searches; and between them they find treasures. These they bring to the brain which first elaborates them, then says to the will, "Do"and Action follows.


you have been told they were, and are, real, by those to whose selfish interest it was, and is, that you cherish illusion. Latterly, however, you have sufficiently to draw aside the mask-word "Respect-
thc
awakened ability."
5[ You dearly love the mask-word, "Brains," which means physical action: and sniff at the word "Intellect," which stands for clear, powerfully constructive reflection. Therefore, as this is your thought, naturally enough you are the victims of your impulsive acts, and of your apathy toward far-reaching, inevitable, yes, inexorable, consequences.
5J It is vitally with realities that poetry deals. But you say it does not; so that settles the matter as far as you are concerned at least you think it doesin reality it settles youit keeps you sell-bound.
5} You say that poetry deals only with metaphor and figures of speech. What is your daily talk but metaphor and figures of Speech! Every word, genuinely used, is a picture; whether used in conversation or in literary production. Mental life, indeed physical life, is almost entirely a matter of eyesight.
5f Poetry, properly understood, means the most highly efficient form of mental eyesight. That is to say, it is that power of seeing and doing which reveals to Man's inner self the fullness and the subtle power of Life.
if
II
Guaranty (Prudential) Build ing Buffalo1894-95
5| Poetry, as a living thing, therefore, stands for the most telling quality that man can impart to his thoughts. Judged by this test your buildings are dreary, empty places.
5f Further, these buildings reveal no genuine are of expressionand neither have you as a people, genuinely expressed yourselves. You have sniffed at this, too; for you are cynical, and very pert, and very cocksure. The leer is not long absent from your eyes. You have said in substance:"What do we want of an art of expression? Wrc cannot sell it!" Perhaps not. But you can and have sold yourselves.
5[ You have assumed that an art of expression is a fiction, something apart from yourselves;' as you have assumed almost all things, of genuinely preservative value, to be fictions, apart from yourselvesthings negligible, to be put on or off like a coat.
5| Therefore look at your body of lawscomplicated, grotesque and inefficient, spiked with "jokers," as guns arc spiked. Look at your Constitution. Does that now really express the sound life in you, or is there a "joker" in that, too, that is surely strangling you? Look at your business. What is it become but a war of extermination among cannibals? Does it express Democracy? Arc you, as a People, now really a Democracy? Do you still possess the power of self-government of a people, by a people, for a people? Or is it now perished, as your Abraham Lincoln, on the field of Gettysburg, hoped it might not, and as hoped a weary and heartsick people at the close of an awful struggle to preserve Democracy in its integrity, to preserve that fundamental art of expression whereby a people may, unhampered, give voice and form to the aspiration of their lives, their hopes, as they press onward
toward the enjoyment ol their birthright, the birthright of every manthe right to happiness!
5f Do you realize with what caustic, accuracy this stupor is shown in your buildings? They, too, stand for the spiked laws of an art of expression. For what is there to express but the true life of a people? What is there, in a Democracy, but All the People? By what right does any man say: "I am! I own! f am therefore a law unto myself!" How quickly among you is I lead! becomeI possess! I betray! How glibly have you acquiesced. With what awful folly have you assumed greed to be the basis of Democracy!
5f How significant is it, that now, a few rough hands are shaking you, a few sharp, shrill voices calling: "Awake before it is too late!"
5f "But," I hear you say, testily, "we are too young to consider these accomplishments. We have been so busy with our material development that we have not found the time to consider them."
5{ Know then, that, to begin with, they an" not accomplishments but necessaries. And, to end with, you are old enough, and have found the time to succeed in nearly making a fine art ofBetrayal, and a science of
r-'Si& Gra"!
5f Know, that you arc as old as the race. That each man among you has in him the accumulated power of the race, ready at hand for use in the right way, when he shall conclude it better to think straight and hence act straight, rather than, as now, to act crooked and pretend to be straight.
5f Know that, the test, plain, simple honesty (and you all know, every man of you knows, exactly what that means), is always at your hand.
5f Know, that as all complex manifestations have a simple basis of origin, so the vast complexity of your national unrest, ill health, inability to, think clearly and accurately concerning simple things, really vital things, is easily and swiftly traceable to the single, actual active causeDishonesty; and that this points with unescap-able logic and in just measure to each individual man!
5f The Remedy: Individual honesty.
A conclusion as logical and as just!
5[ "But," you may say, "how absurdly simple."
Doubtless it is absurd, if you think it is, and will so remain, as far as you are concerned, just so long as you think it isand no longer. But just so long will your social pains and aches and unrest continue; and these you do not consider absurd.
5J When Newton saw the apple fall, he saw what you might likewise call an absurdly simple thing. Yet with this simple thing he connected up the Universe.
5f Moreover, this simple thing. Honesty, stands in the Universe of Human Thought and Action, as its very Center of Gravity, and is our human mask-word behind which abides all the power of Nature's Integrity, the profoundest fact which modern thinking has persuaded Life to reveal.
51 What folly, then, for Man to buck against the stu-
19


pendous flow of life; instead of voluntarily and gladly placing himself in harmony with it. ami thus transferring to himself Nature's own creative energy and equipoise.
5J "But." you say,
No. it is not! It is ^therein lies its power.
All this is above our heads." close beside your hand!
md
51 Again you say: "How It cannot be enforced!
can honestv be enforced?"
5f ''Then how will the remedy go into effect?"
It cannot go into effect. It can only come into effect.
5| "Then how can it come?"
Ask Nature. 51 "And what will Nature say?"
'I
Nature is always saying: "I center at each man. woman and child. I knock at the door of each heart, and I wait. I wait in patienceready to enter with my gifts."
5f "And is that all that Nature says?"
That is all.
5f "Therl how shall we receive Nature?"
By opening wide your minds! For your greatest crime against yourselves is that you have locked the door in Her face, and have thrown away the key! Now you sav: no kev!"
i " I111 S3 -3
n n n u i
MIIMM
II.., E
gap
Nature and of that Infinite Serenity of which Nature is but a symbol,
5| Thus will you make a Democracy a religionthe only one the world will have developedbefitting freemenfree in the integrity of their bodies, free in the integrity of their thought.
5| So doing, all aspects of your activities will change, because your thoughts will have (hanged. All of your activities will then take on ranic and balanced coherence, because all of your thoughts will have a common center of gravity in the Integrity of the individual Man.
5f As the oak tree is ever true to the acorn from which it sprang, and propagates true acorns in its turn, so will you then give true expression and form to the seed of Democracy that was planted in your soil, and so spread in turn the seeds of true Democracy.
^1
Condict (Bayard) Bldg. New York1897-98
5f Thus, as your thoughts change, will your civilization change. And thus, as Democracy takes living and integral shape within your thought, will the Feudalism, now tainting you, disappear. For its present power rests wholly upon your acquiescent and supporting thought. Its strength lies wholly in you, not in itself. So, inevitably, a- the sustaining power of your thought is withdrawn, this Feudalism will crumble and vanish!
'There is
'The
shall we make a new key?"
First: Care scrupulously for your individual and collective physical health. Beware of those who are undermining it; they are your deadliest danger. Beware of yourselves if you are undermining it, for you are then your own deadliest enemy. Thus will you achieve the vital preliminarya quiet, strong and resilient nervous system. Thus will your five senses become accurate interpreters of your physical surroundings; and thus, quite naturally, will the brain resume in you its normal power to act and react.
Second: Begin at once the establishment of a truly democratic system of education. The basis of this must be character; and the mind must so be trained in the sense of reality that it may reach the fullness of its power to weigh all things, and to realize that the origin and sustenance of its power comes from without, and is Nature's Joounteous, unstinted gift to all men.
5f Such system of education will result in equilibrium of body, mind and heart. It will develop real men and womenas is Nature's desire.
5f It will produce social equilibrium in every aspect of human affairs. It will so clearly reveal the follies that have cursed you, that you will abandon them forever. For you will then recognize and gladly accept the simple, central truth that the individual grows in power only as he grows in integrity, and that the unfailing source of that integrity lies in the eternal integrity of
5f So have you no need of Force, for force is a crude and inefficient instrument. Thought is the fine and powerful instrument. Therefore, have thought for the integrity of your own thought. For all social power, for good, or for ill, rests upon the thought of the People. This is the single lesson in the history of Mankind that is really worth the while.
5f Naturally, then, as your thoughts thus change, your growing Architecture will change. Its falsity will depart; its reality will gradually appear. For the integrity of your thought, as a People, will then have penetrated the minds of your architects.
5| Then, too, as your basic thought changes, will emerge a philosophy, a poetry, and an art of expression in all things; for you will have learned that a characteristic philosophy, poetry and art of expression are vital to the healthful growth and development of a democratic people.
51 As a People you have enormous latent, unused power. Awaken it. Use it.
Use it for the common good. Begin now!
5f For it is as true today as when one of your wise men said it:
"The way to resume is to resume!"
Text In lull an revixril by 20


HAT IIS
C HI I T [ C T U RE
A Study in the American People of Today
An interpretation by William Cray Purckll
by Louis H. Sullivan
T~C~\ r\ A V WE HAVE A MORE ACCURATE IDEA o \J LJrX I the work of LOUIS H. SULLIVAN of Chi
II his nwn timp> who wor<=> V-iritri rrntrrrrnniciti r tn him nr\r\
of the far reaching character of licago than did the architects of his own time, who were both antagonistic to him and feared him. But fifteen years ago when the general public, and men well known in the fine arts began to praise him, the architects also felt obliged to fall in line. The shift thus forced upon them was not so difficult, for with Sullivan's death in 1924 he was, as they mistakenly supposed, no longer a threat to their business or intellectual prestige, and moreover, the token functionalism now rather loosely called "modern,"as a sort of spoiled child of Sullivan's thoughthad not, until 1928, returned with any force from Europe to America where it had been born.
Sullivan had made some memorable speeches at architectural conventions, had done writing on his architectural philosophy as early as 1887, and his views had attracted much newspaper publicity, when he, together with his partner, Dankmar Adler, an equally capable man in his own field, began to produce one startling build-ing after another. Then he struck the first great blow for democracy to be heard around the world, the famous Transportation Building at the Exposition in Chicago, 1893, a glowing polychrome sparkling contrast with the blank white of the surrounding bi
How inaccurately the young American architects from the des Beaux Arts in Paris failed to appraise the clarity and gance of his Gaelic mind, was made evident when the Ffench to the Chicago Fair of 1893 took little notice of all the diploma'd t talent which had graduated from their own great National School of Architecture, but honored Sullivan with three medals of the "Union Central des Arts Decoratifs" for his golden building.
Arch detail Golden Doorway, Transportation Bldg., Chicago
l
OlIS SULLIVAN'S epochal thesis of years ago reacts on us as if it were being addressed to us today. It opens with a remarkably clear statement of the source of architectural power and its relation to the constant ebb and flow of our social life and its destiny. . .
~k ~k ~k Sullivan: Every form of government, every social institution, every undertaking, however great, however small, every symbol of enlightenment or degradation, each and all have sprung and are still springing from the life of the people, and have ever formed and are note as surely forming images of their thought.
"Whatever the character of the thinking, just so was the character of the building. Pier, lintel and arch changed in form, purpose and expression, following, with the fidelity of Life, Man's changing thoughts as he moved in the flow of his destiny-as he was moved ever onward by a drift unseen and unkrmwn and which is now flowing and is still unseen and unknown.
"This floiv of building we call historical architecture. At no time and in no instance has it been other than an index of the, flow of the thought of the people an emanation from the inmost life of the people.
"I should add, perhaps, thai, in speaking of the people, I mean all the people; and I look upon all the people as constituting a social organism.
"Let the reader perceive how far astray we are from an Architecture natural, truthful and wholesome, such as should characterize a truly democratic people. I ask tkis because the welfare of democracy is my chief concern life: and because I have always regarded Architecture, and still so regard it as merely one of the activities of a people, and, as such, necessarily in harmony with all the
others. For as a people thinks concerning Architecture, so it thinks concerning everything else; for the thought of a people, however complicated it may appear, is all of-a-piece and represents the balance of heredity and environment at the time." ~k ~k -k
Enough recognition has so far not been fjiven to Dank-mar Adler who was Sullivan's partner from 1881 to 189"), the period of their most potent productivity. Adler was an able business executive and it is likely that a considerable factor in the success of Adler and Sullivan, Architects, was Sullivan's sincere appreciation of the value of the American Businessman. The firm was the first to divest architectural practice of that superstition the origin of which is readily traceable both to the scholasticism of past centuries and to the tenacious notion of professional social caste.
Adler as engineer and Sullivan as practical planner and both men as able executives met businessmen where their business was operating and granted the value to society of what these men of affairs were doing. Thcv studied the skills and methods under which Business operated, thereby gaining the deep insight necessary to the Solution of the architectural problems. He continues to compare the business executive with the man of book mind:
~k "k it Sullivan: "This active-minded but 'uneducated man, he who has so large a share in our activities, reads well those things that he believes concern him closely. His mind is active, practical, superficial; and, whetlui hi deals ivith small things or large, its quality is nearly the same in all cases. His thoughts almost always are concerned with the immediate. His powers of reflection are


aw
undeveloped, and thus he ignores those simple, vital things which grow Up beside him, and with which .asa destiny, he will some day have to reckon, and will then find himself unprepared. The constructive thinking powt'r of some such nten, lite imaginative reach, the incisive intuition, the forceful trill, sometimes amaze us. But when we examine closely we find that all this is but brilliant superstructure, that the hidden foundation is weak because the foundation-thought was not sought to be placed broad, deep, and secure in the humanities.
'Thus we have at the poles of our thinking two classes of men (the businessman and the book man), each of which believes it is dealing with realities, but both in fact dealing with phantoms; for between them, they have studied everything but the real thoughts and the real hearts of the people. They have not sufficiently reckoned with the true and only source both of social stability and of social change. If, in time, such divergence of thought, shall lead to painful readjustments, such Will be but the. result. natural and inexorable, of a fatal misunderstanding, the outgrowth of that fatal defect in our system of thinking which is leading us away from our fellows." -k ir ir
Is this not a prophetic picture of that leadership which, beginning with our rejection of the League of Nations Pact in 1920 and terminating (we hope) with the appcasers of 1939, brought our nation face to face with portents of worldwide disaster.
Moving his analysis closer to the practical business of producing democratic buildings Sullivan says:
~k -k ~k Sullivan : "Learn that the mind works best when allowed to work naturally; learn to do what your problem suggests when you have reduced it to its simplest terms; for you are here at the point men so heedlessly call genius the point of vital simplicity. You must search out thc^best that is in your you are
ing so rapidly a group of idealists that of our primary function as builders.'' had to open the eyes of the people, architects. But no one in that meet
we are losing sight Some great crisis including those of ng told us who is
Carrie Eliza Getty Tomb Graceland Cemetery. Chicago
people
flu of
y are them;
Vomit is
for
problem, and you are indissolubly a part for you to affirm that which they really wish to affirm.
"If the people seem to have but little faith it is because, they have been tricked so long; they are weary of dishonesty, more weary than they know, and in their hearts they seek honest and fearless men, men simple and clear of mind, loyal to their own manhood and to the people. The American people are now in a stupor; be on hand at the awakening." ir ~k ~k
Only in the last six months (see Octagon of April, 194!$, and Cincinnati A.LA. convention speeches) have Architects at long last wakened up to the fact that they must be really' capable all around businessmen with a
full technological equipment in experienced working order.
Said General Newton at the convention, "We are becom-
now to do the architecture, certainly not the sons of those who misled us. "Demos" pays for the schools and should take a lively interest in preparing an education, the disciples of which will be able to serve all problems of Democracy.
Thus our next Sullivan quotation, referring to education, may in the view of many, be considered "dated," for surely the Architectural Schools are now teaching a logic based on reality. But the schools are in no position to be so self satisfied, in their casual "acknowledgment" that "modern" is a specific label.
The London Illustrated News of 183,r> is filled with pictures and comment about "modern" architecture. Much advanced structural experiment and functional designing
was done in the twenty years preceding the bold engineering and machine-age aesthetics of the London Crystal Palace Exposition of 1851. Then came Viollet le Due and his very modern approach, with a still newer set of technological patterns. For a hundred years each decade has been fascinated by the sound of its own ar-i e.hitectural voice. Each era has been certain it was "up to i date" and that its word was the last word. Today it is no different. But hear This Voice thirty-seven years ago:
***Sullivan: "Modern science, with devoted patience of research, has evolved, is perfecting and has placed freely at our service the most comprehensive. accurate and high-powered system of organic reasoning that the world has known. These methods and powers, the breadth and fertility of this supreme search for the all-I life-process, this most fruitful function of democracy, is. by those connected with the Architectural Art and its today regarded vacantly. They undervalue that, all truth, in the serenity of human hope, heralds for the race. Truly, procreant modern thought
1890
teaching, which in a sunrise
clothed in all its radiance of good and a prophet not known in the
will, is a poet, land of these
teaehei ? ? ?
"Poet," "Teacher," "Prophet," these are terms he wishes to apply to the Architect of the future and we are that future. Or are we? For our "modernists" of the 1940's with their unimaginative, constructivist functional-ism, arc still unable to produce architecture, because these new "style" protagonists do not see clearly the entire people and all the forces that are operating within this people's desire and power to build. For us to have apparently laid aside the specialized eclecticism of the Beaux Arts world of 1900, and at too long last to have seen, in 1930, and after, that there is a relation and needed
7


integrity to be found between the material shape of tilings and the mechanical requirements ol their uses, is certainly a far step. The understanding of this relation which has thus far been gained by the generality of architects is not only very little in advance of sound engineering, as it has been practiced for seventy-five years. They did not even enter the world of spiritual, poetic and prophetic values in which both Sullivan and Wright are Kit home and which represent the only world in which architecture exists if any distinction at all is to be made between it and engineering. "The true Architect" says Sullivan, "student of Nature and Man, virile critic, human and humane, will have been a lifeseckcr of realities."
k: kc Sullivan: "He will weigh the Modern Man in a just balance, wherein he will set against that man his accountability to all the people. He. as dispassionately, will weigh the people, collectively, against their manifest responsibility and accountability to the child and to the man. He views our Architecture, weighs it, evaluates it; then, turning in thought, looks out upon us, as a people, analyzes us, weighs us, takes our measure, appraises us; he then places People and Architecture in the great balance of History, and thoughtfully weighs, carefully appraises; then places the people, with ail their activities, in the new bal-an "He might, in part, speak thus: 'As you are, so are your buildings.
^J'om and your Architecture are the same.
Hmzc h is the faithful portrait of the other.
^^To interpret the one is to interpret the other.
"'Take heed! Did you think Architecture a thing of books of the past? No! Never! It was. always, of its present and its people! It. now, is of the present, and of you!' k: ~k -k
Louis Sullivan at 16 1877.
Thus he leads his analysis to the great issue DEMOCRACY, unappraised in 1906, and again in the perilous times of our present days when gaining so slowly in its true ascendency on the hands of political rivalries between ego and masses.
it it it Sullivan: "Is then this Democracy? This Architecture shows, ah. so plainly, the decline of Democracy and a rank ncy growth of Feudalism sure sign of a people in peril! You now in your extremity, are in dire need of great thinkers, real men. These buildings show no love of country, no affection for the people. So you have no affection for each other.
"A colossal energy is in your buildings, but not true power so, is found in you, a frenzied energy, but not the true power of equipoise. Is this an indictment? Not unless you yourselves are an indictment of yourselves. There stand the buildings, they have their unchanging physiognomy. Look! See! Thus, this is a reading, an interpretation.
^ "Tour buildings show no philosophy. So have you no Whilosophy. Ton pretend a philosophy of common sense. Weighed in the balance of your acts, your common sense is light as ft/lly: quite the reverse of that common sense which you assume to mean clear-cut and sturdy thinking
in tin' affairs of daily life. Ton boast a philosophy of Success, lint, weighed in the balance of Democracy, your successes are but too clearly, in the main, feudal. They are pessimisms, not optimisms. You did not think to count the tost: hut you me beginning now to catch a corner of Us masked visage. The sight of the true full < <>' wil' Stagger you when the mask is fully drawn ana-, and it stands clearly revealed! You would not foresee a i risis, hut crisis foresaw you.and note is upon you." *k k k
A crisis?! ... In Chicago alone, within "the Loop," since World War I, over SEVENTY Class A buildings, all more than twelve stories in height, and all of them erected since that paragraph was written, have been torn down because businessmen, book men, architects and prominent citizens could not "think clearly in the ordinary affairs of life." A staggering cost indeed!
k-k-k Sullivan: "A Sound Philosophy is the Saving Grace of a Democratic People! It means a balanced and practical system of thinking, concerning the vital human relations. It saves waste. It looks far behind and far ahead and forestalls Crisis. It nurtures, economizes and directs the vitality of a people. It has for its sole and abiding objective, their equilibrium, hence their happiness." it it "k
If you thought that Democracy was encompassed by the "Fourteen Points" of World Peace No. 1. or the Four Freedoms of World War No. 2. including of course collecting by vote the essential margin of decision to select an umpire, you have from Sullivan's hand an agenda which the Architect on this new parting of world ways in our day must underwrite. If he does not do it in a propitious time, actually at once, then instead of Architects professionally assuming the composite range of executive engineering and business skills, which the new world of building now insists upon and demands from them, the engineer will do it. ,
Albert Kahn, himself a student of Sullivan's charter, with Henry Ford and others demanding of him the new service, became the poet of advanced architectural trends, responsible for the collective genius of production. He proved himself a great marshal) of building strategy and teacher of great nations, like Russia, where his tremendous five-year factory building program for them started in 1929.
Said Henry Ford fourteen years ago, in 1929 (see Bulletin of Michigan Society of Architects. March 30, 1943, No. 13. page 195). to Albert Kahn. these imperishable words: "I hear (he said) that you have agreed to build factories for the Russian Government. I am very glad of it. I have been thinking that these people should be helped. I could hardly believe my ears, but I think the stabilization of Russia through industry is the hope of the world. It has surely proved to be so. The more industry we can create; the more men and women, the world over, can be made self-sufficient the more everybody will benefit. The Russian people have a right to their destiny and they can only find it through work. Wc arc willing out here to help them all we can.
"So you can tell them for me that anything we have is theirs for the asking free. They can have our designs, our work methods, our steel specificationsanything. He will send ihem our engineers to teach them and they
8


can send their men into our plants to learn."
Mightier, more significant and more eventful words no American had spoken thus far in behalf of the shaping of human liberties through work.
Says Albert Kahn addressing Detroit convention A.I.A. in 1942, "Russians came to Dearborn and finished the negotiations. That broke the ice! They have been building ever since have learned by their mistakes. If they
ARE ABLE TO BEAT HACK THE NAZIS NOW ONE OF THE REASONS WILL BE BECAUSE Mr. FORD PLAYED NO SMALL
part in HE! ihnc. them." And so did Albert Kahn.
This decision of Henry Ford and Albert Kahn made at a time when everyone was damning the U.S.S.R. and any approval of things Russian meant social and business ostracism, was not only humanely right but fundamentally of world importance, as such, projecting itself over the future of the earth's globe and its never heretoforc-dreamed-of destiny. Since Stalingrad, the names of Ford and Kahn will live enshrined enduringly in Russia as the greatest of Americans, friends in their historical need, friends in time.
Thus it was that Albert Kahn. the leader in contemporary architecture with creative imagination combined utility with dignity and beauty by integrating under his leadership the architectural and engineering professions, also the skills of the building trades thereby becoming the
prophet of a new era of architectural practice which was destined to affect the entire World.
In recognition of his achievements the American Institute of Architects honored Kahn as an exponent of organized efficiency, of disciplined energy and broad vi-sioned planning. The expansion of the field of architectural practice to fully meet the demands of today has placed the architectural profession in the forefront.
This citation by his professional contemporaries un-equivocably acknowledges Kahn as a pathbrcaker in the architectural complexities and magnitude of our machine-age. By expressing function and purpose in harmony with massive strength and artistic design his work bears witness to the progress being achieved by American architecture.
It is a sign of bad architectural times that architectural leadership is contested. This contest for the mastership under aesthetics would never have been an issue between the Architect and Engineer if our professional minds had been conscious of their responsibility as to tho true meaning and calling of Architecture. By the force of world events we have been compelled to learn that between those two professions and the building trades there must be co-ordination and that without architectural leadership among all these factors there is no creative fundamental art of expression possible toward the attainment of an epochal fine art in building.
LOUIS SULLIVAN was born in Boston in 1856. His rnother, Andrienne List, was Swiss, his father, Patrick Sullivan, an Irish dancing teacher. For nine yearsuntil he was fourteen, he spent his most impressionable days on a farm with his grandparents. In June, 1870, he graduated from grammar school in Boston and "there he received in pride, as a scholar, his first and last diploma" although he was later to attend the Latin High School, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the Ecole des Beaux Arts, in Paris.
He went to Paris in 1874 after several years' experience in architects' offices of Philadelphia and Chicago. In the Ecole and in the atelier of M. Vaudremer it was the intellectual exercise and the development of a sound philosophy which interested him rather than the superdraughtsmanship of the design competitions.
After two years in Paris he returned to Chicago where he was employed by several architects. In 1879 he went to work for Dankmar Adler with whom he entered a partnership in May, 1881, under the name Adler and Sullivan. Sullivan at that time was nearing his 25th birthday.
One building after another of widely varying type and use showed unusual practical imagination and solved the pressing demands of the new age of steel and industrybut it was the Festival Hall of 1885-1886a remodeled interior of the old "Exposition Building" which definitely set Sullivan's course and lead directly to the great Chicago Auditorium Building, housing a theater, hotel, and offices. This was a history-making work, first sketched in 1886-87 and completed in 1889, marking the beginning of a series of demonstrations in building destined to play a major part in changing the basic creative character of architecture throughout Europe and America. In 1893 his colorful and triumphant Transportation Building at the Chicago World's Columbian Exposition was destined to appear internationally in the limelight.*
An impressive series of office buildings, warehouses, churches, residences, and many other new types of buildings followed, each of which made more clear the comprehensive character and broad humanism of Sullivan's philosophy of Form and-Function. The Wainwright Building in St. Louis, the Schiller Theater, and Stock Exchange Building in Chicago, the Guaranty Building in Buffalo, the Condict Building in New York, the Pueblo, Colorado, Opera House, and so on, taken together, built a revolutionary art form which, although popularly acclaimed, threw the professional architectural mind of America into a turmoil. The immediate result was a widespread self-appraisal by many of his contemporaries of their own works in comparison with the trends of the Adler-Sullivan organization. The beneficiaries of special privilege of that day, however, were bitter in acid recrimination.
The Schlesinger and Mayer Department Store in Chicago, 1903, and the National Farmers Bank of Owatonna, Minnesota, 1907, marked the approximate close of Sullivan's truly dynamic period. A series of minor works, some excellent, but many of them lacking the distinguished quality, if not the vitality and promise of his earlier days, filled the period until his death, in Chicago, in 1924.


Sullivan warned architects forty years ago that this very issue must either lie planned for. and become a part of our professional atmosphere, or be battled for in desperation.
Hear his prophesy that went unheeded by the pre-Pearl Harbor leaders of American Architecture, and is II unheeded:
* Sullivan: "Thus (O Architects) has not been given to the world, that which was and still remains your highest office, and your noblest privilege to give, in return for that liberty which once was yours, and which the
Mmm
rUfr.nCh
mmmM
The Age of Steel Giving Birth to Democratic Tiers of Story-Bands or Spandrels1890
World gave to you: A sane and pure accounting of Democracy; a Philosophy founded upon Man thereby setting forth, in clear and human terms, the integrity, the responsibility and the accountability of the Individual in short, a new, a real Philosophy of the People. "It is not too late.
"This Architecture (of 1906) expresses obscurely the most human qualities you as a people possess, and which, such is your awkward mental bashfulness, you are. ashamed to acknowledge, much less to proclaim. One longs to wash from this dirty face its overlay of timidity and abasement; to strip from its form the rags of neglect and contumely, and to see if indeed there be not, beneath its forlorn aspect, the sweet face and form of unsuspected Cinderella.
"The American heart! On this foundation, deeper and stronger than you Suspect, I would, if I were you, build a new superstructure, really truer to yourselves, and more enduring, than that which now is crumbling upon its weak support of over-smartness and fundamental untruth." it it *
Democracy either reaches or fails to reach the building work of a people. Thus Architecture becomes one of the prime necessities of the nation because it means both physical shelter and spiritual security. The demand for it is as broad as humanity.
We must not think continually about some executive ,-lcs as the conceivcrs and promulgators of building miction. All the people, individually, or organized under political power, or as organized society; all the factors of manufacturing and distribution, enter this pic-
ture. These initiate the demands, asking architects and engineers to assume the necessary creative powers in theory and practice. The so-called "owner" undertakes his project with ft ill confidence in the ability and integral professional qualities of his chosen architectural advisor. Here !>cs the duty of the profession to honestly respect such a confidence.
These circumstances place in our hands the power to make or break the quality of American Architecture. However, our authority under these mandates of the people, like all seeming absolutes is only temporary. Time cycles bring periods when the will and urge to create becomes strong enough to compel us to build in forms representative of our time and worthy of the nation's true genius.
Sullivan saw all these threats clearly and he saw what a struggle would be put upon all of us, worthy and unworthy alike, caught in the swirl of the great social cycle:
k ~k ^k SULLIVAN: "Look at your business. What is it become but a war of extermination among cannibals? Does it express Democracy? Are you, as a people, now really a Democracy? Do you still possess the power of self-government of a people, by a people, for a people? Or is it now perished, as your Abraham Lincoln, on the field of Gettysburg, hoped it might not, and as hoped a weary and heart-sick people at the close of an awful struggle to preserve that fundamental art of expression whereby a people may, unhampered, give voice and form to the aspiration of their lives, their hopes, as they press onward toward the enjoyment of their birthright, the birthright of every man the right to happiness!" it it if
Furthermore in the wrack of this war the entire fabric in the nation is undergoing a change, and as a result the architect of the future must become a national economist, an American sociologist, a high grade engineering expert, and a man of particular Understanding toward the innate aesthetics of materials, and the methods of their usage by advanced skills of trade all under constant observation of underlying laws of national expression, integrating the "genius" of American Art.
-k-k-k Sullivan: "What folly then, for Man to buck against the stupendous flow of life; instead of voluntarily and gladly placing himself in harmony with 'it, and thus transferring to himself Nature's own creative energy and equipoise." it if -k
Democracy an Ideal?
Much more than that! for it is not democracy except it be in action. How are we to attain the necessary right action?
'k ~k ~k Sullivan: "Begin at once the establishment of a truly democratic system of education. The basis of this must be charucti>r;and the mind must so be trained in the sense of reality that it may reach the fullness of its power to weigh all things, and to realize that the origin and sustenance of its power comes from without, and is Nature's bounteous, unstinted gift to all men.
"So doing, all aspects of your activities will change, because your thoughts will have changed. All of your activities will then take an organic and balanced coherence, because all of your thoughts will have a common center of gravity in the Integrity of the individual Man." if if k
One cannot be the leader in technical arts without a great amount of constant following of what is being done in fields, shops, mines, smelters, factories. Well read he must be concerning all factors of human permutation, in economics, in politics, in recreation or what not.
in


k k k Sullivan: "Thus, as your thoughts change, will your civilization change. And thus, as Democracy takes living and integral shape within your thought, will the Feudalism, now tainting you, disappear. For its present power icsts wholly upon your acquiescent and supporting thought. Its strength lies wholly in you, not in itself. So, inevitably, as the sustaining poicer of your thought is withdrawn, this Feudalism will crumble and vanish.
"As the oak tree is ever true to the acorn from which it sprang, and propagates true acorns in its turn, so will you then give true expression and form the seed of Democracy that teas planted in your soil, and so spread in turn the seeds of true Democracy." k k k
The SuHivanS of the world are a unique rare. A great company of them have been headline news in America ever since Gen. John Sullivan beat the Hessians at the Battle of Brandywine and "John I,." retired from active practice Sept. 7, 1892, at the insistence of "Gentleman Jim."
This Architect Sullivan was really a character, making vivid the time that meteor-like he streaked across the smoke-begrimed skies over Chicago. There high aloft in his own beautiful Auditorium Tower he thought and toiled for long years, while below him surged the turmoil of demos under his constant observation. At the same time he enjoyed the hard problems between owner and builder, to Ik- given material expression in the language of serviceable drawings and Specifications, with enthusiasm for every person and thing concerned.
One saw the genius of his philosophy of action, when he met the contracting parties in witty, convincing argument, all ith a touch of humor. They liked him as a thinker, a com; mion, a man of prin iple and imagination, truly creative by deed and word. The so-called clientele enjoys association with such men, as they arc believed able to solve all troubles.
So was he in his great day.
k k k SULLIVAN: "You have no need of Force, for force is a crude and inefficient instrument. Thought is the fine and powerful instrument. Therefore, have thought for the. integrity of your own thought. For all social power, for good, or for ill, rests upon the thought of the people. This is the single lesson in the history of Mankind that is really worth the while.
"Then, too, as your basic-thought changes, will emerge a philosophy, a poetry, and an art of expression in all things: for you will have learned that a characteristic, philosophy, poetry and art of expression are vital to the healthful growth and development of a democratic people.
"As a People you have enormous latent, unused power.
"Use it for the common good. Begin now!".....
".....THEN WILL YOUR MINDS HAVE ESCAPED
SLAVERY TO WORDS AND BE AT LIBERTY, IN THE OPEN AIR OF REALITY, FREELY AND FULLY TO DEAL WITH THINGS." ? ? ?
"The Great i\azarene was the first democrat. Coming into a world crushed under the heel of absolutism, he spoke to the lowly.' he taught that lite individual man possessed his own soul. He outlined the natural duty of selff-cjovernment in the individual anil the correlative duty to his neighbor. For these and other sayincjs equally in opposition to the established spirit of his times he was promptly crucified. But his doe-trine has survived him, because it is the utterance, not of a man, but of the Infinite Creative Spirit, expressing itself through an overwhelming urgency in nature which found through this man, a natural and long sought outlet, an outlet doubtless, which nature, through the ages, also had been preparing for itself, in the evolitfion of those forces which consummated in that man."
"So came the truth of democracy into the world of man." Louis H. Sullivan
In appraising the force (if the accompanying letter, those unfamiliar with the character of the lush Beaux Arts Era in Americaiwirchitccture, at the turn of the century, should know that the American graduate hierarchy of the "school" in those days assumed that they alone were the apostles of all the "architecture" there was. To their elite cult Louis Sullivan was just a "Red"a radical trotihlc maker.
But from Sullivan's description of his own two year--' study at the great French School of Architecture, with its insist-ance upon sound scholarship resting on a broad knowledge of general science and the humanities, we see that the Ecole des Beaux Arts of Paris was a very different thing from its sentimental American imitation with "aleelyays" in every American university and rigged competitions between "patrons" using the supposed students as their stalking draftsmen.
Dec. 6, 1912.
Dear Mr. Sullivan:
Referring back to the conversation I had with you on the train recently in which I mentioned M. Pascal's estimation of your work, I thought it would be a pleasure for you to have in written form the essence of my conversation with Pascal which occurred in one of the Ateliers of the Ecole in Paris, I believe during my first trip in 1900 Coming as I did from Chicago the conversation naturally turned to the World's Fair Group and centered finally on the Transportation Building, lor which M. Pascal expressed great admiration, and upon your work in general as an Architect, with which he seemed to have kept in close touch. Time has dulled my recollection of some of the things said, but one statement M. Pascal made has always clung to my memory. "I consider that Louis H. Sullivan in his work, has exemplified better the real essence of Beaux-Arts teaching than any other American."
It was a very beautiful compliment from a great teacher and impressed me deeply.
I believe you should have this commentary in the form of a letter that you may preserve it, together with the many other similar expressions of appreciation which your work has so richly merited and which you must have received.
Yours very truly,
(Signed) N. MAX DUNNING.
11


CHRONOLOGICAL LIST OF BUILDINGS
Buildings designed by the firm of Adler & Sullivan and Louis Sullivan independently are listed as nearly as possible according to the chronological order of their construction. The iol-lowing data are given for each building: name, address, date o< construction, whether the building is still standing, its present name if atfierent from the original one, dimensions of the ground plan, and cost or approximate cost. Addresses given are the prey ent ones; for many of ilie buildings in downtown Chicago these arr different from addresses given in old accounts, since the ttreU numbers and in many instances the names of the streets have been changed since the buildings were constructed. Except for a feu lists of buildings, no office records of the firm of Adler & Sullivan or of Louis Sullivan have been preserved; this has made the com pilation of a complete list of their works difficult and many hen of information are lacking. All data available through records building permits, descriptions in old periodicals, corresnondene-with former owners, or examination of the buildings them.'" have been included in this list.
1. Central Music Hall. SE corner of Randolph & State Street-Chicago. 1879. Dankmar Adler & Co. Demolished in 10||; Lot: 125'a 151'. Cost: $156,463.
2. Borden Block. NW corner of Randolph & Dearborn Street-Chicago. 1879-80. Dankmar Adler & Co. Demolished if 1910. Lot: 80' x 90'. Cost: ca. $80,000.
294
i
BUILDING LIST 295
[ Grand Opera House (remodelling), 119 North Clark Street! Chicago. 1880. Dankmar Adler & Co. Demolished in 1927. Cost: ca. $55,000.
[4 John Borden residence, 3949 Lake Park Ave. Chicago. 1880. Dankmar Adler & Co. Still standing, now Vincennes Sanitarium.
;,. Rothschild Store, 210 West Monroe Street, Chicago. 1881. Dankmar Adler & Co. Built for Max M. Rothschild, occupied by F. Rothschild & Bros. Wholesale Clothiers. Still standing, now the Milton F. Goodman Building. Lot: 50'x 180'. Cost: $75,811.
6. Rosenfeld Building, SE corner Washington & Halsted Streets, Chicago. Built for Levi Rosenfeld in two sections: three-story section on east side of Halsted Street south to Meridian built in 1881 cost $42,850; five-story section occupying corner of the lot and extending 150' east on Washington Street built in 1882 cost $92,091. Still standing.
7. Brunswick & Balke Factory (1881), Warehouse (1882), and Lumber-Drying-Plant (1883), entire block bounded by Orleans, Huron. Sedgwick & Superior Streets, Chicago. Still standing. Cost: $168,165.
8. Revel] Building, NE corner of Wabash & Adams Streets, Chicago. 1881-83. Built for Martin A. Ryerson; long occupied by A. H. Revell Co. Still standing; lower stories remodelled in 1929. Lot: 116' x 172'. Cost: $321,112.
()- Jewelers' Building. 15-19 South Wabash Ave. Chicago. 1881-82. Built for Martin A. Ryersoa. Still standing. Lot: 58'x 160'. Cost: $90,260.


2%
BUILDING LIST
10. Frankenthal Building, 141 South Wells Street, Chic..-1882. Still standing. Lot: 22'x 72'. Cost: $21,407.
11. Hammond Library. 44 North Ashland Avenue, Chi< 1882. Still standing, now Union Theological College. 43'x 65'. Cost: ca. $15,000
12. Flat-building built for Max M. Rothschild, 3200 Prairie \^, Chicago. 1882. Still standing. Lot: 19* x 74'. Cost: ca. SKi, 000.
13. Henrv Leopold residence. 2516 Indiana Ave. Chicago, ca. 1882. Demolished.
14. Sigmund Hyman residence, 2624 Wabash Ave. Chicago. cd.
1882. Demolished.
15. Knisely Store. Lake Street, Chicago. 1883. Built for Richard Knisely. Lot: 35'x 75'. Cost: ca. $16,000
16. Three residences built for Max M. Rothschild, 320]-0" Indiana Ave. Chicago. 1883. Still standing. Lot: 50' x 6.V. Cost: ca. $17,000.
17. E. L. Brand Store, Jackson Street. Chicago. 1883. Demolished. Cost: $3,000.
18. F. A. Kennedy & Co. Bakery, South Desplaines Street. Chicago. 1883-84. Cost: ca. $70,000.
19. Wright & Lowther Oil & Lead Mfg. Co., Chicago. 1883. Cost: ca. $40,000.
20. C. P. Kimball residence, 22 East Ontario Street, Chicago
1883. Still standing, now "L'Aiglon" restaurant. Cost: ca. $45,000.
21. Sol Bloomenfeld residence. 8 West Chicago Ave. Chicago. 1883. Still standing, now "Cozy Hand Laundry."
.0.
:6.
29.
30
31
32
33
34
BUILDING LIST 297
Morris Selz residence, 1717 South Michigan Ave. Chicago. 1883. Still standing. Cost: ca. $30,000. Charles H. Schwab residence, 1715 South Michigan Ave. Chicago. 1883. Still standing, much remodelled. Cost: ca. $18,000.
A. Halsted residence, Lincoln Avenue, Chicago. 1883. Co : ca. $14,000.
Rubee Store, South Clark Street, Chicago. 1883. Cost: ca. $16,00<
Kauffmann Store, Lincoln Avenue, Chicago. 1883. Cost: ca. $10,000.
Schoolhouse, Marengo, Illinois. 1883. Cost: ca. $20,000. E. L. Brand Building. East Jackson Street, Chicago. 1883. Demolished. Cost: ca. $15,000.
Three residences built for Max M. Rothschild. 32nd Street & Indiana Ave. Chicago. 1884. Still standing. Cost: ca. $12,-000.
Three residences built for Mrs. N. Halsted, North Park Ave. Chicago. 1884. Cost: ca. $12,000.
Martin Barbe residence, 3157 Prairie Ave. Chicago. 1884. Still standing.
Abraham Strauss residence, 3337 Wabash Avenue, Chicago. 1884-85. Still standing. Cost: ca. $16,000. Ryerson Building. 16-20 East Randolph Street, Chicago. 1884. Still standing. Lot: 68'x 171'. Cost: $152,127. Troescher Building, 15-19 South Market Street, Chicago. 1884. Still standing, now the Daily Times Building. Lot: 80'x 80'. Cost: $90,614.


298 BUILDING LIST
BUILDING LIST 299
A Dankmar Adler residence, 3543 Ellis Ave. Chicago. 1885-
86. Still standing. i. Eli B. Felsenthal residence, 3545 Ellis Ave. Chicago. 1885-
86. Still standing.
Hugo Goodman residence, 3333 Wabash Avenue, Chicago.
1885-86. Still standing. 31. Mrs. Eda Holzheimer residence, 3538 Ellis Ave. Chicago.
ca. 1886. Still standing. ',2. Gustav Eliel residence, 4122 Ellis Avenue, Chicago, ca.
1886. Stiii standing.
53. Peck Building, SW corner of LaSalle & Water Streets, Chicago. 1886. Demolished. Cost: $36,312.
>4. West Chicago Club, 119 Throop Street, Chicago. 1886. Still standing, now Chicago Labor Temple.
55. Suburban Station, Illinois Central R. R., 39th Street, Chicago. 1886. Still standing.
56. Suburban Station, Illinois Central R. R., 43d Street, Chicago. 1886. Still standing.
57. Martin Ryerson Charities Trust Building, 318 West Adams Street, Chicago. 1886. Demolished. Cost: $100,282.
58. Selz, Schwab & Company Factory, NE corner of Superior & Roberts Streets, Chicago. 1886-87. Still standing. Lot: 111'x 204'. Cost: $75,773.
59. Wirt Dexter Building. 630 South Wabash Ave. Chicago.
1887. Still standing. Lot: 70'x 160'. Cost: $99,636.
r,0. Joseph Diemal residence, 3143 Calumet Ave. Chicago. 1887. Lot: 25'x27'.
61. Springer Building (remodelling), corner of State & Randolph Streets, Chicago. 1887. Demolished.
35. Knisely Building, 551-557 West Monroe Street Cliir 1884. Still standing. Cost: $86,928.
36. Zion Temple, SE corner Washington & Ogden Streets Qii cago. 1884-85. Demolished. Lot: 65'x 115'. Cost: ca. g 000.
37. J. W. Scoville Building, 619-631 West Washington Str,.; Chicago. 1884-85. Still standing. Cost: $44,444.
I
38. Hooley's Theatre (remodelling), NE corner Randolph 4 f LaSalle Streets, Chicago. 1884-85. Demolished 1927 Cos -
ca. $50,0'>0.
39. Chicago Opera Festival Auditorium, Interstate Exposition j Building, Grant Park, Chicago. 1885. Demolished 1892.
40 'VlcVicker's Theatre (remodelling), Madison Street, Chicago. 1885. Destroyed by fire, 1890. Cost: $95,074.
41. M. C. Stearns residence, Douglas Ave. Chicago. 1885. Demolished. Cost: ca. $8,000.
42. Benjamin Lindauer residence, 3312 Wabash Avenue. Chi cago. 1885. Still standing. Cost: ca. $25,000.
43. Residence, Prairie Avenue & Gano Street, Chicago. 13585 Cost: ca. $13,000.
44. Henry Stern residence, 2915 Prairie Avenue. Chicago. 1885. Still standing. Lot: 25'x 80'. Cost: ca. $13,000.
45. Samuel Stern residence. 2963 Prairie Ave. Chicago. 18B5. Still standing. Cost: ca. $12,000.
46. Abraham Kuh residence, 3141 South Michigan Ave. Chicago. 1885. Demolished. Cost: ca. $10,000.
47. Mrs. Abraham Kohn residence, 3541 Ellis Ave. Chi<-1885-86. Still standing.


m BUILDING LIST
62. John Kranz Building (remodelling), State Street, Chicago 1887.
63. Mrs. Mary M. Lively residence, Oak Ave. Chicago. 1887. Lot: 20' x 45'. Cost: ca. $4,500.
64. Auditorium Building, Chicago. 1887-89. Still standing. Lot: 187' frontage on Michigan Ave., 362' frontage on Congress Street, 162' frontage on Wabash Ave. Cost: $3,.
145.: >i.
65. Standard Club, SW corner of Michigan Ave. & 24th Street, Chicago. 1887-88. Demolished 1931. Lot: 60'x 162'. Cost. $108,139.
66. Walker Warehouse, 200-214 South Market Street, Chicago. 1888-89. Still standing. Cost: $325,942.
67. Felsenthal Building, 63-71 North Canal Street, Chicago. 1889. Demolished 1908. Lot: 38' x 150'. Cost: $32,022.
68. Ira A. Heath residence, 3132 Prairie Ave. Chicago. 1889. Still standing. Cost: ca. $15,000.
69. Wirt Dexter residence (addition), 232 Irving Ave. Chicago.
1889. Lot: 20' x 50'. Cost: ca. $25,000.
70. Martin Ryerson Tomb, Graceland Cemetery, Chicago. 1889. Still standing.
71. Jewish Training School, 554 West 12th Place, Chicago. 1889-90. Still standing. Lot: 60'x 100'. Cost: $48,730.
72. Crane Company Factory, Judd Street, Chicago. 1890. Demolished. Lot: 100'x 203'. Cost: ca. $50,000.
73. Carrie Eliza Getty Tomb, Graceland Cemetery, Chicago.
1890. Still standing.
74. Louis Sullivan Cottages, Ocean Springs, Miss. 1890. Still standing, remodelled. Lot: 300'x 1800'.
BUILDING LIST 301
;5. Three residences built for Victor Falkenau, 3420-24 Wabash Ave. Chicago. 1890. Still standing.
76. Opera House Block, Pueblo, Colorado. 1890. Destroyed by fire 1922.
77. Design for Opera House Block, Seattle, Wash. 1890. Never built.
78. Design for Hotel Ontario, Salt Lake City, Utah. 1890. Never built.
79. Das Deutsche Haus, Milwaukee, Wis. (remodelling). 1890.
80. Dooly Block, 111 West 2nd South Street, Salt Lake City, Utah. 1890-91. Still standing.
81. McVicker's Theatt Madison Street, Chicago (remodelling | 1890-91. Demolished 1925. Cost: $106,120.
82. Wainwright Building, NW corner Seventh & Chestnut Streets, St. Louis. 1890-91. Still standing. Adler & Sullivan; Charles K. Ramsey, Assoc. Lot: 127' x 114'. Cost: $561,-255.
83. Kehilath Anshe Ma'ariv Synagogue, SE corner of 33d Street & Indiana Ave. Chicago. 1890-91. Still standing, now Pilgrim Baptist Church. Cost: $91,005.
84. Chicago Cold Storage Exchange Warehouse, West Water Street between Randolph & Lake Streets, Chicago. 1891. Demolished 1902. Cost: $442,896.
85. Design for a Hotel, Chicago. 1891. Never built.
86. Design for an Apartment-htitel. South Michigan Ave. Chicago. 1891. Never built.
87. Design for Mercantile Club, St. Louis. 1891. Never built.
88. Design for Fraternity Temple, Chicago. 1891. Never built.


302 BUILDING LIST
BUILDING LIST
i ;t)0. Meyer Building, 307 West VanBuren Street, Chicago. 1893.
Still standing, remodelled. Cost: S205.825. ]0l. Transportation Building, World's Columbian Exposition,
Chicago. 1893. Demolished. [02. Stock Exchange Building, 30 North LaSalle Street, Chicago.
1893-94. Still standing. Lot: 101' x 181'. Cost: $1,131,555.
103. Guaranty Building, SW corner Church & Pearl Streets, Buffalo. 1894-95. Still standing, now Prudential Building. Lot: 93'x 116'.
Dissolution of the partnership, July, 1895
104. Bayard Building, 65-69 Bleecker Street, New York. 1897-98. Louis Sullivan; Lyndon P. Smith, Assoc. Still standing, now Condict Building.
105. Gage Building, 18 South Michigan Ave. Chicago. 1898-99. Still standing, remodelled. Louis Sullivan; Holabird & Roche, Assoc.
106. Schlesinger & Mayer Department Store, SE corner of State & Madison Streets, Chicago. Nine-story section on Madison Street, 1899. Twelve-story section on corner of lot and extending 150' south on State Street, 190304. Five southernmost bays on State Street, 1906, by D. H. Burnham & Co. Still standing, now Carson Pirie Scott Store.
107. Euston & Company Linseed Oil Plant. Blaekhawk Street, Chicago, ca. 1899-1900.
108. Euston & Company Linoleum Plant, Chicago, ca. 1899-1900.
109. Crane Company Foundry & Machine Shop, SE corner Canal
89. Schiller Building. 64 West Randolph Street, Chicago. 1891-92. Still standing, now Garrick Theatre Building, remod elled 1935. Lot: 80' x 181'. Cost: $737,099.
90. J. W. Oakley Building. 141-143 West Austin Street, Chi-cago. 1892. Still standing, completely remodelled. Co>i $95,017.
91. James Charnley residence, 1365 Astor Street, Chicago. 1892. Still standing.
92. Albert W. Sullivan residence, 4575 Lake Park Ave. Chicago. 1892. Still standing.
93. Charlotte Dickson Wainwright Tomb, Bellefontaine Cemetery, St. Louis. 1892. Still standing.
94. Sinai Temple, SW corner of Indiana Ave. & 21st Street.
acago. Remodelling. 1892. Demolished.
95. Passenger Station, Illinois Central R. R., New Orleans. 1892. Still standing.
96. Union Trust Building, NW corner of Seventh & Olive Streets, St. Louis. 1892-93. Adler & Sullivan; Charles K. Ramsey, Assoc. Still standing, now Central National Bank Building. Lot: 84'x 127'. Cost: $631,076.
97. Design for Trust & Savings Bank Building, Seventh & Olive Streets, St. Louis. 1892-93. Adler & Sullivan; Charles K. Ramsey, Assoc. Never built.
98. St. Nicholas Hotel, Eighth & Locust Streets, St. Louis. 1892-93. Adler & Sullivan; Charles K. Ramsey, Assoc. Still standing, much remodelled. Cost: $334,187.
99. Victoria Hotel, Chicago Heights, Illinois. 1892-93. Still standing, remodelled.


304 BUILDING LIST
& 12th Streets. Chicago. 1899-1900. Still standing. Co pletely remodelled.
110. Crane Company Office Building, Canal Street & West 1 Place, Chicago. 1903-04. Demolished.
111. Store built for Eli B. Felsenthal, 701-703 East 47th Street Chicago. 1905. Still standing.
112. National Farmers' Bank, NE corner of Broadway & Cedai Streets, Owatonna, Minn. 1907-08. Still standing, now s curity Bank. Lot: 68'x 154'.
113. Henry Babson residence, 230 Riverside Drive, Riverside, 111. 1907. Still standing.
114. Mrs. Josephine Crane Bradley residence, 106 North Pros-pect St., Madison, Wis. 1909. Still standing, now aigma Phi Fraternity House.
115. People's Savings Bank, 3d Ave. S. W. & 1st St. S. W., Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 1911. Still standing. Lot: 50'x 90'.
116. St. Paul's Methodist Episcopal Church, 3d Ave. S. E. & 14th St. S. E., Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 1913-14. Still standing.
117. John D. Van Allen & Son Company Dry-Goods Store, NIX corner 5th Ave. & So. 2nd St., Clinton, Iowa. 1913-15. Still standing.
118. Henry C. Adams Building, NW corner Moore & State Streets. Algona, Iowa. 1913. Still standing, now Druggists' Mutuai Insurance Co.
119. Merchants' National Bank, NW corner 4th Ave. & Broad Street, Grinnell, Iowa. 1914. Still standing, now Poweshiek County National Bank.
120. Home Building Association Bank, NW corner West Main &
BUILDING LIST 305
North 3d Streets, Newark, Ohio. 1914. Still standing, now Union Trust Company.
121. Purdue State Bank, State & Vine Streets, West Lafayette, Ind. 1914. Still standing.
122. People's Savings & Loan Association Bank, SE corner Court Street & Ohio Avenue, Sidney, Ohio. 1917-18. Still standing.
123. Farmers' & Merchants' Union Bank, NW corner James Street & Broadway, Columbus, Wis. 1919. Still standing.
124. William P. Krause Music Store and residence, 4611 Lincoln Ave. Chicago. 1922. Louis Sullivan; William C. Presto, Assoc. Still standing.


W 0 R K I N G BIB LIOGRAPHY
Louis Sullivan, Autobiography of an idea Dover Publication, New York 1958
Louis Sullivan, Democracy A Man Search, Wayne State Univ. Press, Detroit 1961
Louis Sullivan, System of Architectural Ornament, Press of The American Institute of Architects, New York 192^
Louis Sullivan, Kidergarten Chats Wittenborn, Schultz; New York 19^7
Louis Sullican, The Testament of Stone, Northwest Univ. Press, Evanston, 111 1963
Claude Bragdon, Architecture and Democracy, A.A. Knopf, New York 1910
Albert Bush-Brown, Louis Sullivan, Gerrge Braziller Inc. New York i960
Louis Sullivan and the Architecture of Free Enterprise Chicago Art Institute, 1956
Hugh Morrison, Louis Sullivan, Prophet of Modern Architecture, Y/.w. Norton, New York 19^9
tl
"The Guaranty Building" in American Arch. & Building News, Vol. 53, July 11. I896
"House on Lake Avenue, Chicago 111" in American Arch. & Building News, Vol. 91 May 25, 1907
"McCormick Building and a dry goods Store" in Arch Record Vol.8 Apr.-June 1899


"What is Architectur? A Study of the American people of today." in The Craftsman Vol.10 May 1906 June 1906 July 1906
"Chicago's Sullivan in New Photographs" in The Arch. Forum Vol.101 Oct. 195^
"Louis Sullivan" Society of Arch Historians Dec. I967 Rochelle S. Elstein
"The National Farmer's Bank of Owatonna Minn." Arch Record Vol24 Oct. 1908 Louis J. Millett
"Chicago Tribune Competion" Arch Record Vol 53 Feb. 1923
"Auditorium Building" Historical Preservation Vol 10 1958
Architectural Recaord July 1904 "Carson Pirie Scott"
American Arch & Building News "Wainwright Tomb" Junel, 1907
Progressive Architecture June 1957
"The TallOffice Building Artistically Considered"
HIT Pft&S*




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs