------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 11 - Notes
Footnote 235:
At the Centennial Exhibition in Philadelphia the larger pavilions were
all of iron and glass; and probably the most influential buildings
were the British ones designed by Thomas Harris—no longer a wild
‘Victorian’—in a mode closely approaching Norman Shaw’s ‘Manorial’
mode (see Chapter 12). However, the exhibition stimulated the
publication of several books on the Colonial architecture of
Philadelphia which played their part in preparing the way for a
‘Colonial Revival’ (see Chapters 13 and 15).
Footnote 236:
Separate American editions of vols 2 and 3 did not appear promptly in
1853 in the way that of vol. 1 did in 1851. However, the three-volume
American edition of 1861 was the first of the complete work.
Footnote 237:
See Tunnard, C., ‘Deviation by the Brothers Potter, Collegiate Gothic
at Union College, Schenectady’, _Architectural Review_, CIII (1948),
67.
Footnote 238:
See Note [197], Chapter 8.
Footnote 239:
They had, after all, first met when they were both working for R. M.
Hunt.
Footnote 240:
See Ware, W. R., _The Memorial Hall, Harvard University_, Boston,
1887.
Footnote 241:
In the 1936 edition of my book on Richardson a later Dorsheimer plan
is incorrectly associated with this Buffalo house. The house is
properly identified in Hitchcock, H.-R., ‘Richardson’s American
Express Building: A Note’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians_, IX (1950), 25-30 and in the new 1961 edition.
Footnote 242:
This is also missing from my 1936 Richardson book, but will be found
in the article cited above and in the 1961 edition of the book.
Footnote 243:
See Wight, P. B., ‘Reminiscences of Russell Sturgis’, _Architectural
Record_, XXVI (1909), 123-31. It is perhaps worth pointing out that
Farnam Hall, together with Sturgis’s contiguous Battell Chapel of 1876
and his Durfee Hall at right angles to it, although neither are of at
all comparable excellence, give this corner of the Old Campus at Yale
a consistent High Victorian Gothic character interesting to study both
in relation to the earlier Romantic Gothic of Henry Austin’s library
(now Dwight Chapel) of 1842-4 on the other side of the campus and the
‘traditional’ Collegiate Gothic of James Gamble Rogers’s
twentieth-century Harkness Quadrangle across High Street.
Footnote 244:
See Schuyler, M., ‘The Work of William Appleton Potter’,
_Architectural Record_, XXVI (1909), 176-96.
Footnote 245:
See Holly, H. H., _Church Architecture Illustrated_, Hartford, 1871.
Much more extreme models can be found in general compendia of
architectural design published in the late sixties and early
seventies.
Footnote 246:
See Campbell, W., ‘Frank Furness, an American Pioneer’, _Architectural
Review_, CX (1951), 310-15.
Footnote 247:
See ‘Another Furness Building: Provident Life and Trust Company
Building, Philadelphia’, _Architectural Review_, CXII (1952), 196,
‘Provident Trust Company Banking Room, Philadelphia’, _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians_, XI (1952), 31; and Massy, J. C.,
‘The Provident Trust Buildings’, _Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians_, XIX (1960), 79-80.
Footnote 248:
See Withers, F. C., _Church Architecture_, New York, 1871.
Footnote 249:
See Upjohn, R. M., _The State Capitol, Hartford, Conn._, Boston, 1886.
Footnote 250:
It was the selection of the old Trinity College property to provide a
site for the new Capitol that led to the rebuilding of the college
elsewhere, for which Burges provided the designs (see Chapter 10).
Footnote 251:
It is worth recalling that much the same could evidently be said of
Fuller & Laver’s San Francisco municipal group; characteristically
enough for the period, this was Second Empire like their Albany
Capitol, not High Victorian Gothic (see Chapter 9).
Footnote 252:
See Viollet-le-Duc, E.-E., _Entretiens sur l’architecture_, 2 vols,
Paris, 1863, 1872; and translations, _Discourses on Architecture_, 2
vols, Boston, 1875, 1881, and _Lectures on Architecture_, 2 vols,
London, 1877, 1881. Originally the _Entretiens_ appeared in parts,
those in the first volume beginning to come out about 1860 and those
in the second some six years later.
Footnote 253:
The two most sumptuously illustrated publications concerning
Viollet-le-Duc offer very few examples of new buildings designed by
him; these must be sought in periodicals and other general
contemporary sources. See _Compositions et dessins de Viollet-le-Duc_,
Paris, 1884, and Baudot, A. de, and Roussel, J., _Dessins inédits de
Viollet-le-Duc_, 3 vols, Paris [n.d.]
Footnote 254:
The most extravagant compilation of idiosyncratic detail in
Viollet-le-Duc’s work is to be seen on the tomb of Napoleon III’s
half-brother the Duc de Morny, erected in 1858 in Père Lachaise
Cemetery in Paris. Hardly any element of the ornamentation is clearly
referable to a particular stylistic source, and the whole effect is as
‘Victorian’ as anything the wildest High Victorians ever produced in
England.
Footnote 255:
It should not be forgotten that Street’s Law Courts in London were
completed only a year before Steindl began the Budapest Parliament
House; but the Law Courts were, for England, extremely retardataire.
Footnote 256:
Burges won the competition for this in 1857, but in the end Street
received the commission and built the church in 1864-9.
Footnote 257:
See Meeks, C. L. V., ‘Churches by Street on the Via Nazionale and the
Via del Babuino’, _Art Quarterly_, XVI (1953), 215-27.
Footnote 258:
See Martinell, C., _La Sagrada Familia_, Barcelona, 1952, and Puig
Boada, I., _El Templo de la Sagrada Familia_, Barcelona, 1952. A
phenomenal number of articles have appeared concerning this church,
all listed up to his date of publication (1952) by Ráfols in the later
edition of his monograph on Gaudí.
Footnote 259:
Mixing the elements of several styles in individual buildings provided
the liveliest aspect of eclecticism at this time; the mere use of
alternative modes had chiefly the effect of blurring the edges of all
the styles of the past.
Footnote 260:
Compare, for example, Sigfried Giedion’s presentation of the period in
_Space, Time, and Architecture_.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 12 - Notes
Footnote 261:
Many serious and conscientious English students of this period would
precede such a list with the name of George Devey (1820-86). Of Devey,
in whose office C. F. A. Voysey, the most original English architect
of the next generation, chose to work after completing his
apprenticeship with Seddon, Voysey later wrote: ‘Providentially an
invitation came to enter the Office of the most extensive practitioner
in homes for the Nobility and Gentry. No domestic practice has
equalled his in extent before or since his death.’ As in the case of
William Burn, whose aristocratic practice of the forties and fifties
Devey’s more than rivalled in the sixties and seventies, neither he
nor his clients cared for publicity, and so none of his work was
published, even to the slight extent that the work of Nesfield and
Webb was illustrated in the professional journals. Still today his
houses are known to posterity chiefly through a few articles: Godfrey,
Walter ‘The Work of George Devey’, _Architectural Review_, XXI (1907),
23-30, 83-8, 293-306; and ‘George Devey, F.R.I.B.A., a Biographical
Essay’, _Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects_, XIII
(1906), 501-25.
But just as the work of Nesfield and Webb was in actuality familiar
from the first to their professional friends and rivals, as also to
prospective country house clients, so was that of Devey. Many of the
stylistic trends so vigorously exploited by Shaw in the seventies can
be traced back to Devey’s houses of the preceding decade—or so such
experts on the period as H. S. Goodhart-Rendel and John Brandon-Jones,
who know Devey’s work intimately, always insist. Foreign students of
this period, from Muthesius to the Editor of this series and this
author, perhaps merely because of lack of direct or even adequate
indirect knowledge of Devey’s houses, have never been ready to grant
him so important a place in the story. Here particularly, where the
story is told in an international context, the evident strength of the
influence of Shaw’s work abroad even more than at home justifies
giving his primacy and referring only incidentally to that of Devey.
Footnote 262:
Shaw did not immediately succeed Webb, since the latter stayed on in
Street’s office until the middle of 1859. There must have been close
contact between them over a period of up to a year, and they remained
in touch from then on. Blomfield, Shaw’s biographer, being himself
prejudiced against Webb, underestimates the reality and the importance
of this relationship. It is only one of the many errors of fact or
emphasis in his book.
To quote from a private communication from Brandon-Jones concerning
Shaw and Webb: ‘Each must have had a good idea of the work the other
was doing. Their two offices, in Gray’s Inn and Bloomsbury Square,
were within a stone’s-throw of one another, and Lethaby while working
for Shaw was in close touch with Webb and was in his spare time
assisting him with the architectural work of Morris & Co. It is quite
obvious from the dates of various executed works that Lethaby was
carrying over Webb’s ideas and details and trying them out in work he
was doing for Shaw. As for the mutual respect and friendship between
Webb and Shaw, I [Brandon-Jones] have recently come across a letter
written at the time of Shaw’s death in which he [Webb] pays a tribute
to his “old friend”, and I have also seen a letter from Sydney
Barnsley to Sydney Cockerell in which Barnsley says that he had called
on Shaw only a few months before his death and that Shaw had been
talking of Webb and saying that he still treasured some photographs
given him by Webb nearly fifty years earlier.’
Footnote 263:
Devey’s incidental work at Penshurst Place in Kent, where that notable
fourteenth-century manor house was restored by him, having been done
more than a decade earlier, probably prepared the way for this. It is
extremely likely that Nesfield was familiar with what Devey had done
there; but the line forward leads, in the late sixties, from Nesfield
to Shaw, not directly from Devey to Shaw.
Footnote 264:
See Pevsner, N., ‘Art Furniture of the Seventies’, _Architectural
Review_, CXI (1952), 23-50.
Footnote 265:
The most famous instance of _japonisme_ in decoration is Whistler’s
‘Peacock Room’, now in the Freer Gallery in Washington. See Ferriday,
P., ‘Peacock Room’, _Architectural Review_, CXXV (1959), 407-14.
Footnote 266:
Once again Devey had prepared the way, in this case at Betteshanger,
Kent, a house built precisely ten years earlier. This will doubtless
have been known both to friends of Devey’s clients and to various
young architects. But the Kew lodge was located where everyone could
see it, even though it was not published until the nineties.
Footnote 267:
For this also there was precedent at Devey’s Betteshanger; but
Betteshanger initiated no popular mode in the way that the conspicuous
London schools by Robson and Stevenson’s highly touted house did at
this point. For the schools, see Jones, D. G., ‘Towers of Learning’,
_Architectural Review_, CXXIII (1958), 393-8.
Footnote 268:
See Harbron, D., ‘Queen Anne Taste and Aestheticism’, _Architectural
Review_, XCLV (1943), 15-18.
Footnote 269:
See Shaw, R. N., _Sketches for Cottages and Other Buildings ..._,
London, 1878.
Footnote 270:
See ‘The Ballad of Bedford Park’, _St James’s Gazette_, 17 December
1881 (reprinted by Blomfield, _Shaw_, 34-6). This is an amusing but
not entirely accurate contemporary description in verse.
Footnote 271:
The handling of this building in section is particularly ingenious,
the area of the service portions at the rear of the flats being much
increased by the use of lower storey heights than in the reception
rooms at the front. This device has been revived since, but its
earlier invention by Shaw has rarely been noted Brandon-Jones pointed
out to me.
Footnote 272:
At least they are now so painted; it is probable they were originally
of ‘white’ Suffolk brick, actually a very pale yellow when newly laid
and unbegrimed, but more likely to be black after a few decades of
exposure to the air of London!
Footnote 273:
Hyde, H. M., ‘Wilde and his Architect’, _Architectural Review_, CIX
(1951), 175-6.
Footnote 274:
It is characteristic of Shaw’s prestige in America and the rapidity
with which architectural ideas crossed the ocean at this time that
Shaw’s handsome perspective of the Alliance was published in America a
few months earlier than in England.
Footnote 275:
White first approached Webb but, finding him too difficult to deal
with, went to Shaw—a significant episode as regards both architects.
Footnote 276:
See Brandon-Jones, J., ‘Notes on the Building of Smeaton Manor’,
_Architectural History_, I (1958), 31-59.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 13 - Notes
Footnote 277:
See Webster, J. C., ‘Richardson’s American Express Building’, _Journal
of the Society of Architectural Historians_, IX (1950), 21-4, and my
article cited in Note 7 to Chapter 11.
Footnote 278:
See Richardson, H. H., _Trinity Church, Boston_, Boston, 1888.
Footnote 279:
3 vols, Paris, 1868-73. It will be noted that the last volume of this
appeared after the original competition drawings for Trinity Church
were prepared.
Footnote 280:
The source was probably the book by Vogüé of which the second volume
appeared only in 1877 (see Note [196], Chapter 8). The motif first
appeared in the North Easton Library, designed and begun in that year.
Footnote 281:
See Richardson, H. H., _The Ames Memorial Building_[197], Boston,
1886.
Footnote 282:
See Olmsted, F. L., and Kimball, T., _Frederick Law Olmsted_, 2 vols,
New York, 1922-8.
Footnote 283:
See Richardson, H. H., _Austin Hall, Harvard Law School_, Boston,
1885.
Footnote 284:
See Richardson, H. H., _Description of Drawings for the Proposed New
County Building for Allegheny County, Penn._, Boston, 1884.
Footnote 285:
See Schuyler, M., ‘The Romanesque Revival in New York’, _Architectural
Record_, I (1891), 7-38, 151-98.
Footnote 286:
See Bragdon, C., ‘Harvey Ellis’, _Architectural Record_, XXV (1908),
173-83.
Footnote 287:
Hunt, of the older generation, was generally recognized as a leader in
this camp also, although his energies in these years were principally
engaged in designing and building a series of _François I_ châteaux
for the Vanderbilts and other millionaires that are anything but
academic in their involved picturesqueness.
This curious episode, which has been given exaggerated importance by
some historians of American architecture, began with the designing of
the W. K. Vanderbilt house in New York in 1879-80 (see Andrews, W.,
_The Vanderbilt Legend_, New York, 1941). Other architects were also
briefly affected by what was hardly more than a recrudescence of a
mode popular in France under Louis Philippe in Hunt’s youth (see
Chapter 3).
A few houses by McKim, Mead & White of the early eighties are
definitely _François I_, and Richardson used _François I_ dormers,
probably independently of Hunt, on the Albany Capitol. Moreover, the
round towers of the ‘Shingle Style’ undoubtedly owe something to
Stanford White’s sketching trips in France. This episode obviously
parallels the interest in revived Northern Renaissance modes of design
in Germany, Holland, and Scandinavia in these decades, and has
analogies also to the contemporary work in England of George & Peto
and Collcutt (see Chapters 9 and 12).
Footnote 288:
In the designing of the Sherman house—particularly in the Shavian
detailing—White had probably played an important part; he was,
moreover, called on by the Shermans to enlarge the house in 1881. The
library, of this date, is one of his finest pieces of interior
decoration.
Footnote 289:
One of the earliest examples of the serious study of Colonial
precedent is Arthur Little’s _Early New England Interiors_, Boston,
1878. However, his own work remained relatively free for some years.
Footnote 290:
See _Building News_, 28 April 1882.
Footnote 291:
These tiles wore out some years ago and have now been replaced. The
smooth black roof seen on Plate 111 lacks the fine scale and rich
texture the pantiles provide.
Footnote 292:
The conceptual organization of the exterior has seemed to most critics
to have been borrowed from a much later monument, Henri Labrouste’s
Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève in Paris of the 1840s, even though McKim
would not admit it. There is certainly none of Labrouste’s exposed
metalwork in the interior; but the extensive use of Guastavino tile
vaults, at this time a real technical innovation, is worth noting.
Footnote 293:
See Burnham, D. H., _World’s Columbian Exposition_, Chicago, 1894, and
Ives, H., _The Dream City_, St Louis, 1893.
Footnote 294:
The area round the ‘Wooded Isle’ was much less regular than that round
the Lagoon in continuance of Olmsted’s earlier and more naturalistic
sort of landscaping. Into this area were shunted most of the buildings
by local architects, doubtless because McKim distrusted their capacity
to conform to the academic standards he was setting.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 14 - Notes
Footnote 295:
See Note [97], Chapter 5.
Footnote 296:
Somewhat fuller accounts of English commercial architecture in this
period will be found in Hitchcock, ‘Victorian Monuments of Commerce’,
_Architectural Review_, CV (1949), 61-74, and in Hitchcock, _Early
Victorian Architecture_, Chapters XI and XII. Most of the English
buildings mentioned in this chapter are illustrated either in the book
or the article.
Footnote 297:
See Weisman, W., ‘Commercial Palaces of New York’, _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians_, XXXVI (1954), 285-302.
Footnote 298:
See Bogardus, J., _Cast Iron Buildings: Construction and Advantages_,
New York, 1856.
Footnote 299:
See Hitchcock, H.-R., ‘Early Cast Iron Façades’, _Architectural
Review_, CIX (1951), 113-16.
Footnote 300:
See Weisman, W., ‘Philadelphia Functionalism and Sullivan’, _Journal
of the Society of Architectural Historians_, XX (1961), 3-19.
Footnote 301:
See Sturges, W. K., ‘Cast Iron in New York’, _Architectural Review_,
CXIV (1953), 233-8.
Footnote 302:
See Peterson, C., ‘Ante-bellum Skyscraper’, _Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians_, IX (1950), 27-9; X (1951), 25. The Jayne
Building, begun by Johnston, was completed by Thomas U. Walter. It has
unfortunately been demolished since 1958.
Footnote 303:
See Woodward, G., ‘Oriel Chambers’, _Architectural Review_, CXIX
(1956), 268-70. Fine measured drawings by students of the University
of Liverpool School of Architecture were published in _Architectural
History_, II (1959), 81-94.
Footnote 304:
See Note [277], Chapter 13.
Footnote 305:
See Weisman, W., ‘New York and the Problem of the First Skyscraper’,
_Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, XII (1953),
13-20. For a rather different opinion, see Webster, J. C., ‘The
Skyscraper: Logical and Historical Considerations’, _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians_, XVIII (1959), 126-39.
Footnote 306:
It is worth noting that neither cast-iron façades nor the vertical
articulation of the Philadelphia buildings of the fifties was used in
either case. Both developments of the mid century proved cul-de-sacs
since the New York architects followed the established modes of the
sixties for monumental buildings in these first two skyscrapers. In
the same years 1873-4, however, Hunt did build the five-storey edifice
at 478-482 Broadway in New York with an all cast-iron front, employing
a sort of attenuated ‘giant order’ subsuming the three middle storeys.
Footnote 307:
Giedion first called attention to the importance of ‘balloon-frame’
construction in _Space, Time and Architecture_ in 1941; but see Field,
W., ‘A Re-examination into the Invention of the Balloon Frame’,
_Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, II (1942), 3-29.
Footnote 308:
See Randall, G., _The Great Fire of Chicago and its Causes_, Chicago
[1871].
Footnote 309:
See Hope, H., ‘Louis Sullivan’s Architectural Ornament’, _Magazine of
Art_, XL (1947), 110-17. Sullivan thought of his early ornament as
somehow ‘Egyptian’, but it is not very easy to see why. A later, so
far unpublished study by Etel Kramer seems to establish, contrary to
his own statements, that Sullivan owed a good deal to the theories of
Owen Jones and that his ornament matured, earlier than has hitherto
been supposed, in 1884-5.
Footnote 310:
This is not the same as the Revell Store.
Footnote 311:
Several more storeys were added later and appear in many of the
published views.
Footnote 312:
One must say ‘metal’, because structural steel was only gradually
replacing cast and wrought iron at this time; all these types of
ferrous material were probably used in the Home Insurance, the
Rookery, and other skyscrapers of the mid eighties. Two books by W.
Birkmire, _Architectural Iron and Steel_, New York, 1891, and
_Skeleton Construction in Buildings_, New York, 1893, best present the
technical aspects of large-scale metal construction as it matured in
the eighties and early nineties.
Footnote 313:
An American edition of this book appeared in 1880. See Note [309],
_supra_.
Footnote 314:
I owe this suggestion to Vincent Scully.
Footnote 315:
Incidentally, the signature Frank L[loyd] Wright on the drawings for a
rather Richardsonian group of three masonry houses in Chicago,
designed in the Adler & Sullivan office in 1888 for Victor L.
Falkenau, suggests that it was Sullivan’s brilliant draughtsman, as it
was Jenney’s assistant on the Leiter Building, who was responsible for
this example of overt Richardsonian influence.
Footnote 316:
The discovery by Condit that this building was begun in 1890 seemed to
lend it a special importance, up until then unrecognized. But the text
gives the correct dating.
Footnote 317:
It is so generally assumed that Sullivan’s mature style is without
historical antecedents that the even more definitely _quattrocento_
character of the entrance here, as well as of those of the Guaranty
Building, is rarely noted.
Footnote 318:
The five southernmost bays are an addition made in 1906 by D. H.
Burnham & Co. They follow, with some slight diminution in the
bay-width, Sullivan’s original design.
The form of the Burnham firm’s name in these years is significant of
the increasing anonymity of architectural practice in America as the
scale of operation increased (see Chapter 24).
Footnote 319:
See _Purcell and Elmslie Architects_ (Walker Art Gallery Exhibition
Catalogue), Minneapolis, 1953, and Gebhard, D., ‘Louis Sullivan and
George Grant Elmslie’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians_, XIX (1960), 62-8, and _A Guide to the Existing
Architecture of Purcell and Elmslie_, Roswell, N. M., 1960.
Footnote 320:
Of more interest than the skyscraper is a smaller and earlier Singer
Building, also by Flagg. Flagg was one American who retained contact
with the French tradition of exposed metal construction as well as
with the academic aspects of ‘Beaux Arts’ design as his first Singer
Building illustrates.
Footnote 321:
See Schuyler, M., ‘The Work of N. LeBrun & Sons’, _Architectural
Record_, XXVII (1910), 365-80. The Metropolitan Tower is, of course,
the work of a firm not of a single architect; LeBrun himself had been
dead for some years.
Footnote 322:
See Schuyler, M., ‘“The Towers of Manhattan” and Notes on the
Woolworth Building’, _Architectural Record_, XXX (1913), 98-122.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 15 - Notes
Footnote 323:
See Note [107], Chapter 6
Footnote 324:
For a remarkable later development of the veranda outside England, see
Robertson, E. G., ‘The Australian Verandah’, _Architectural Review_,
CXXVII (1960), 238-45.
Footnote 325:
There are many examples in various English books of the first third of
the century; characteristic are those offered by T. F. Hunt, J. B.
Papworth, and P. F. Robinson. See Note [134] to Chapter 6.
Footnote 326:
See Note [132], Chapter 6.
Footnote 327:
See Note [128], Chapter 6.
Footnote 328:
See Note [133], Chapter 6.
Footnote 329:
See Note [308], Chapter 14.
Footnote 330:
See Note [132], Chapter 6.
Footnote 331:
In the _Builder_ for 15 January 1859 and in the Supplement to Kerr,
R., _The Gentleman’s House_, 2nd ed., London, 1865.
Footnote 332:
Contemporaries saw this house rather as a reaction towards the ‘Old
English’ after the ‘modernism’ of the High Victorian Gothic and the
Second Empire of the preceding decade. How conscious Shaw himself was
of the significance of his own innovations it is difficult to say.
Footnote 333:
The plan was first published by Muthesius in 1904; this does not mean
that its character was not known to contemporary architects, however.
Footnote 334:
By this time photo-lithographic processes made it possible for Shaw’s
perspectives to appear in the _Building News_ practically as
facsimiles of his originals. Had it been necessary, as in the fifties
and sixties, to ‘translate’ them into wood-engravings the transmission
of the Shavian influence abroad would certainly have been much less
effective.
Footnote 335:
See Note [133], Chapter 6. The term ‘Eastlake’ is sometimes rather
inaccurately used for the Stick Style.
Footnote 336:
See Wheeler, G., _Rural Houses_, New York, 1851, with later editions
to 1868, and his _Homes for the People in Suburb and Country_, New
York, 1855, with later editions to 1867.
Footnote 337:
See Gardner, E. C., _Homes and How to Build Them_, Boston, 1874, and
also his _Illustrated Homes_, Boston, 1875.
Footnote 338:
See Woodward, G. E., _Woodward’s Country Houses_, New York, 1865;
_Woodward’s Architecture, Landscape Gardening and Rural Art_, New
York, 1867; _Woodward’s Cottage and Farm Houses_, New York, 1867; and
_Woodward’s National Architect_, New York, 1868. Of _Woodward’s
Country Houses_ there were eight successive editions within a decade,
thus rivalling in this period the popularity of Downing’s _Cottage
Residences_ in the forties and fifties; however, it is worth noting
that the latter still remained in print.
Footnote 339:
See Sturges, W. K., ‘Long Shadow of Norman Shaw: Queen Anne Revival’,
_Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, IX (1950), 21-5.
Footnote 340:
Scully in _The Shingle Style_ provides evidence that the idea of a
great hall was not unknown in America well before this. It may be
unnecessary to suppose that Richardson knew of the Hinderton plan,
since one or two comparable ones can be found in books appearing in
America in the fifties; see, for example, the Nathan Reeve house in
Newburgh, N.Y., published as ‘Design No. 22’ in Vaux, C., _Villas and
Cottages_, New York, 1857. However that may be, the great hall theme
was rarely exploited in Second Empire or Stick Style houses of the
sixties. It makes a notable appearance or re-appearance, as the case
may be, in Richardson’s planning just after 1870. See Notes VI-4 and
VIII-2 in the 1961 edition of my Richardson book.
Footnote 341:
The term is Vincent Scully’s. Various themes touched on in this and
succeeding paragraphs are discussed at length in his homonymous volume
and provided there with a full roster of illustrations.
Footnote 342:
It is of interest that when the _Monograph of the Work of McKim, Mead
& White_ was prepared in 1915 almost all this early work was omitted.
It has been rediscovered by critics and historians in the last thirty
years, beginning with Mumford in the _Brown Decades_ in 1931.
Footnote 343:
Just how the influence reached American architects so early is not
altogether clear. The first treatise in English on Japanese
architecture is Morse, E. S., _Japanese Homes and Their Surroundings_,
Boston, 1886; new ed., New York, 1961. See Lancaster, C., ‘Japanese
Buildings in the United States before 1900: Their Influence upon
American Domestic Architecture’, _Art Bulletin_, XXXV (1953), 217-24.
Footnote 344:
See Hitchcock, H. R., ‘Frank Lloyd Wright and the “Academic Tradition”
in the Nineties’, _Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes_,
VII (1947), 46-63.
Footnote 345:
For an unsuspected but possible influence on Wright in this façade,
see Gebhard, D., ‘A Note on the Chicago Fair of 1893 and Frank Lloyd
Wright’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, XVIII
(1959), 63-5.
Footnote 346:
Japanese influence was more evident at the Chauncey L. Williams house
at 520 Edgewood Place in River Forest, Ill., of 1895, notably in the
use of rough boulders at the foot of the brick wall and flanking the
entrance. Wright by this time was enthusiastically interested in
Japanese prints; whether he also knew Morse’s book of 1886 (see Note
20 _supra_) is not clear.
Footnote 347:
This was very much extended, but along the original lines, in 1901, as
shown on Plate 128B. The present River Forest Tennis Club, a much
smaller structure, is not the same, though it bears some superficial
resemblance to the Golf Club. The building of 1898-1901 was demolished
in 1905.
Footnote 348:
I am grateful to John Brandon-Jones for allowing me to read the
manuscript of his unpublished monograph on Voysey. Without his
assistance of various sorts this account of Voysey could not have been
written and illustrated.
Footnote 349:
See Note [261], Chapter 12.
Footnote 350:
The ‘House at Doverscourt for A. J. W. Ward’, published in the
_British Architect_, 11 April 1890, was apparently never executed any
more than those illustrated the previous year. It is very like
Perrycroft, built in 1893, the first of Voysey’s important country
houses, thus suggesting that on paper his style had in fact largely
crystallized by this date before his Forster house was begun. It is of
interest that the plan of the Ward project is more open than those of
any of his executed houses; it may well have influenced Baillie Scott
(see below).
Footnote 351:
Brandon-Jones suggests, however, that the very plain Regency villa in
which Voysey was then living in St John’s Wood may have had some
generic influence on the Forster house.
Footnote 352:
At Perrycroft the mullions are of wood, originally painted green. At
the Forster house they were of stone, and that is true of almost all
the later houses. So also the slates here were Welsh and grey; when he
began to work in the Lake District he turned to green slates, earlier
used by Godwin on Whistler’s house. These became standard on his later
houses wherever they were built.
Footnote 353:
For a later tribute to his influence and that of Baillie Scott abroad,
see Fisker, K., ‘Tre pionerer fra aarhundredskiftet’, _Byggmästaren_,
1947, 221-32; the third ‘pioneer’, rather surprisingly, is Tessenow
(see Chapter 20).
Footnote 354:
For a remarkable later work of Lethaby, see Pevsner, N., ‘Lethaby’s
Last’, _Architectural Review_, CXXX (1961), 354-7. This church, at
Brockhampton-by-Ross in Herefordshire, was roofed with pre-cast
concrete slabs at the surprisingly early date of 1900-2; and its
simplified, rather angular, Gothic design is, in effect, already
proto-Expressionist.
Footnote 355:
See Pevsner, N., ‘George Walton, His Life and Work’, _Journal of the
Royal Institute of British Architects_, XLVI (1939), 537-48.
Footnote 356:
Voysey was also a notable designer of wallpapers and chintzes, perhaps
the most notable of his generation in England.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 16 - Notes
Footnote 357:
See Madsen’s _Sources of Art Nouveau_, 75-83.
Footnote 358:
See Schmutzler, R., ‘English Origins of the Art Nouveau’,
_Architectural Review_, CXVII (1955), 108-16. The question is
discussed further at a later point in this chapter (pp. 284-5).
Footnote 359:
See Note [149], Chapter 7.
Footnote 360:
The one large structure built for this exhibition in permanent form,
the Palais du Trocadéro by Davioud, has since been replaced. Vaguely
Saracenic in design, yet not altogether unworthy in silhouette of its
splendid site on the Chaillot heights, this shared none of the
qualities of Eiffel’s temporary pavilion. See Davioud, G., _Le Palais
du Trocadéro_, Paris, 1878. As long as it lasted, however, the
Trocadéro provided a sort of pendant on this side of Paris to Abadie’s
Sacré-Cœur atop Montmartre, begun in the same rather dreary decade of
French architectural production.
Footnote 361:
See Note [265]a, Chapter 12.
Footnote 362:
See Alphand, A., _L’Exposition universelle de Paris de 1889_, Paris,
1892.
Footnote 363:
See Eiffel, G., _La Tour de trois-cents-mètres_, Paris, 1900.
Footnote 364:
Bogardus’s shot-towers of the fifties in New York, which were of
essentially similar construction, received little contemporary or
later publicity. It is still uncertain whether Jenney knew of them
when he built the Home Insurance Building in Chicago in 1883-5. See T.
C. Bannister, ‘Bogardus Revisited, Part II’, _Journal of the Society
of Architectural Historians_, XVI (1957).
Footnote 365:
See Note [253], Chapter 11.
Footnote 366:
See Grady, J., ‘Bibliography of the Art Nouveau’, _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians_, XIV (1955), 18-27 and _Art
Nouveau_ (Museum of Modern Art Exhibition Catalogue), New York [1960].
Footnote 367:
This applies particularly to Art Nouveau decoration; the major
architectural works were frequently very plastically organized,
although most of the detail was linear.
Footnote 368:
See Schmutzler, R., ‘Blake and the Art Nouveau’, _Architectural
Review_, CXVIII (1955), 90-7.
Footnote 369:
See Lancaster, C., ‘Oriental Contributions to Art Nouveau’, _Art
Bulletin_, XXXIV (1952), 297-310.
Footnote 370:
See Grady, J., ‘Nature and the Art Nouveau’, _Art Bulletin_, XXXVII
(1955), 187-92.
Footnote 371:
See Mackmurdo, A. H., _Wren’s City Churches_, Orpington, 1883.
Footnote 372:
Not perhaps impossible: There is something a little analogous to
Impressionism in the work of Shaw, though he probably had no
admiration for the art of Monet and his contemporaries in the
seventies even if he was at all aware of it. The same is true of the
American masters of the Shingle Style. The analogy lies in the casual
looseness of over-all composition and the delicacy of the touch—both
tile-hanging and shingles provide a certain effect of ‘broken colour’
or at least ‘tachiste’ brushwork—even though they are usually
monochrome. On the other hand, Kimball in his _American Architecture_,
written a generation ago, saw an analogy to Cézanne in the return to
architectural order in the mid eighties in America. There is no
evidence that McKim or White then admired any French painters more
advanced than Puvis de Chavannes however.
Footnote 373:
Some studio houses were certainly built in France by leading
architects throughout the second half of the nineteenth century: The
one that Viollet-le-Duc provided for the painter Constant Troyon in
the late fifties was of notable interest—in fact, one of his best
works. Moreover, the more modest _ateliers d’ artiste_ erected by
builders provided much later, in the 1920s, precedents of value to Le
Corbusier and Lurçat. See Banham, R., ‘Ateliers d’artiste’,
_Architectural Review_, CXX (1956), 75-83.
Footnote 374:
See Delhaye, J., ‘Hommage à mon maître; architecte Baron Victor
Horta’, _L’Appartement d’aujourd’hui_, Liège, 1946, 6-17; Maus, O.,
‘Habitations modernes, Victor Horta’, _L’Art moderne_, XX (1900),
221-3; Sedeyn, E., ‘Victor Horta’, _L’Art décoratif_, IX (1902),
230-42; and Madsen, S. T., ‘Horta. Works and Style of Victor Horta
before 1900’, _Architectural Review_, CXVIII (1955), 388-92.
Footnote 375:
See Koch, R., and others, _Louis Comfort Tiffany 1848-1933_, New York,
1958.
Footnote 376:
The wallpaper was probably one of those designed by Heywood Sumner,
possibly his ‘Tulip’ according to Elizabeth Aslin of the Victoria and
Albert Museum. This was one of the considerable range of English
papers shown by Jeffrey & Company at the Salon de l’Association pour
l’Art d’Anvers in Antwerp in the winter of 1892-3. These papers, which
included designs by most of the English leaders in the field of
decorative art, had already been shown at the Paris Exposition of
1889. It is hard to believe that Horta became aware of them only when
the Tassel house was nearly finished and not earlier in Antwerp or in
Paris. For the Antwerp showing, see Van de Velde, H., ‘Artistic
Wallpapers’, _L’Art moderne_, XIII (1893), 193-5. This article was
copied in _L’Emulation_, XVIII (1893), 150-1, the most advanced
Belgian architectural journal, where the Tassel house itself was
published in 1895. It introduces the name of another important Belgian
figure besides Horta in the story of the Art Nouveau.
Footnote 377:
It is of interest, although irrelevant to the inception of the Art
Nouveau, that in this same year Horta became professor of architecture
at the Académie like Balat before him.
Footnote 378:
See Kaufmann, E., ‘224 Avenue Louise’, _Interiors_, 116 (1957), 88-93.
Footnote 379:
For a late tribute to Van de Velde in English, see Shand, P. M.,
_Architectural Review_, CXII (1952), 143-55. It is a major error of
emphasis—and in detail an accumulation of errors of fact—that H.
Lenning offers in his book _The Art Nouveau_ (The Hague, 1951) by
accepting the legend that Van de Velde was the initiator of the Art
Nouveau. There is plenty of evidence that Van de Velde was aware of
English innovations in decoration from the early nineties. On the
other hand, despite the wallpaper in the Tassel dining-room, it should
be noted that Horta’s widow and his disciple Delhaye minimize, to the
point of denying all but absolutely, the dependence of Horta on
English sources at the time he designed the Tassel house.
Footnote 380:
Paul Hankar (1861-1901) was a third Belgian architectural innovator in
this period. His work, however, is so crude and uneven that his name
need be no more than mentioned. He is in no proper sense an exponent
of the Art Nouveau. See Conrady, C., and Thibaux, R., _Paul Hankar_,
[n.p.] 1923.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 17 - Notes
Footnote 381:
See Malton, J., ‘Art Nouveau in Essex’, _Architectural Review_, CXXVI
(1959), 100-4. For a considerably earlier and more extraordinary
example of English work approaching the Art Nouveau, see Beazley, E.,
‘Watts Chapel’, _Architectural Review_, CXXX (1961), 166-72. This
chapel at Compton, Surrey, was designed in 1896 by Mary Watts, the
widow of the painter G. F. Watts. The inspiration seems to have been
predominantly Norse and Celtic.
Footnote 382:
See Gout, P., _L’Architecture au XX^e siècle et l’Art Nouveau_, Paris,
1903.
Footnote 383:
See Hostingue, G. d’, _Le Castel Béranger, œuvre de H. G.,
architecte_, Paris, 1898.
Footnote 384:
Both the main façade and the principal interior are essentially the
work of Deglane. Louvet and Thomas were more responsible for other
elements of the complex structure.
Footnote 385:
See _L’architecture moderne à Paris, concours de façades_, 2 vols,
Paris, 1901, 1902.
Footnote 386:
See Uhry, E., ‘Agrandissements des magasins de la Samaritaine’,
_L’Architecte_, II (1907), 13-14, 20, plates X-XII.
Footnote 387:
I owe my knowledge of this remarkable façade to Martin Kermacy. He was
unable to find out by whom and when it was built; it is very probably
an early work of Josef Urban, Novotny informs me.
Footnote 388:
For another rather independent Scottish architect of this period, see
Walker, D. M., ‘Lamond of Dundee’, _Architectural Review_, CXXIII
(1958), 269-71.
Footnote 389:
See Scheichenbauer, M., _Alfredo Campanini_, Milan, 1958.
Footnote 390:
See Note [259], Chapter 11.
Footnote 391:
Among other things, it is Gaudi’s use of forms inspired by primitive
architecture that has appealed to later twentieth-century taste.
‘Primitivism’ in painting and sculpture has been of recurrent
importance since the days of the Fauves and the Expressionists; a
comparable primitivism in architecture has been much rarer, except for
Gaudí.
Footnote 392:
Except as regards the theories of vaulting exemplified in successive
schemes for the Sagrada Familia and his church at Santa Coloma de
Cervelló, Gaudí’s technical innovations have been until lately little
studied despite the very considerable literature devoted to his work.
Research is proving that he made many important innovations in
structure over and above those so evident in the crypt—the only
portion executed—of the Santa Coloma church. George Collins showed
some of the results, as yet unpublished, of the latest studies in an
exhibition at Columbia University in May 1962.
Footnote 393:
While the mosaic of broken fragments of patterned ceramic on the
benches at the Parc Güell suggests Cubist _collages_ and even Dada
compositions—notably the _Merzbilder_ of Kurt Schwitters—the handling
of the coloured glass on this façade is closer to the paintings of
Jackson Pollock and other New York artists of the 1950s.
Footnote 394:
A curious continuation, or more accurately revival, of Gaudian modes
has of late occurred in Portuguese Africa. See Beinart, J., ‘Amancio
Guedes, Architect of Lourenço Marques’, _Architectural Review_, CXXIX
(1961), 240-51.
Footnote 395:
Even Gaudí after 1910 produced little, being almost wholly occupied
with the slow progress of the Sagrada Familia. Of course, in a sense
Horta is another exception; but his success after 1910 was of purely
local significance and dependent on his total rejection of the Art
Nouveau of his youth. One can only think of the later career of
Giorgio de Chirico, still today a success in Italy but ignored by the
outside world except when he imitates his earlier work.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 18 - Notes
Footnote 396:
See _Concrete and Constructional Engineering_, II (January 1956),
special anniversary number reviewing the history of concrete. More
important later studies are: Raafat, A. A., _Reinforced Concrete in
Architecture_, New York [1958]; and Collins, P., _Concrete, The Vision
of a New Architecture_, New York [1959]. See also Kramer, E. W., and
Raafat, A. A., ‘The Ward House, Pioneer Structure of Reinforced
Concrete’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, XX
(1961), 34-7.
Footnote 397:
See Baudot, A. de, _L’Architecture, le passé, le présent_, Paris,
1916, and Baudot, J. de, _L’Architecture et le béton armé_, Paris,
1916.
Footnote 398:
See Huxtable, A. L., ‘Progressive Architecture in America: Reinforced
Concrete Construction. The work of Ernest L. Ransome,
Engineer—1884-1911’ and ‘Factory for Packard Motor Car Company—1905,
Detroit, Michigan, Albert Kahn, Architect. Ernest Wilby, Associate’,
_Progressive Architecture_, 38 (1957), 139-42 and 121-2.
Such research is revealing that Albert Kahn (1869-1942) was not such a
pioneer in concrete factory construction as has been generally
supposed. However, the ‘Kahn Bar’ developed by his brothers’
engineering firm was a major technical contribution, and undoubtedly
his motor-car factories were among the earliest major industrial works
in the new material. For the alternative use of steel in American
warehouse and factory construction, see Eaton, L. K., ‘Frame of
Steel’, _Architectural Review_, CXXVI (1959), 289-90.
Footnote 399:
The detailed history of the concrete grain elevator cannot be given
here. The prototypes for the great monuments of Buffalo, Minneapolis,
and Duluth were certainly French. These monolithic cylinders are, of
course, very different from the motor-car factories with their
post-and-lintel construction, but the history of the elevator
undoubtedly runs nearly parallel to that of the factory. See [Torbert,
D. R.] _A Century of Minnesota Architecture_, Minneapolis, 1958,
unpaged.
Footnote 400:
In the last few years the innovations of such engineers as Pierluigi
Nervi (b. 1891) in Italy, Eduardo Torroja (1899-1961) in Spain, and
Felix Candela (b. 1910) in Mexico have revolutionized earlier
conceptions of the possibilities of ferro-concrete (see Chapter 25).
For Torroja, see _The Structures of Eduardo Torroja_, New York [1960],
and Torroja, E., _The Philosophy of Structures_, Berkeley, 1958. (See
Epilogue.)
Footnote 401:
See Pfammatter, P., _Betonkirchen_, Cologne and Zurich, 1948.
Footnote 402:
By reaction many of the same architects, notably Le Corbusier, have in
the last few years consciously sought the brutality of industrial
concrete finish—he calls it _béton brut_—even in monumental work (see
Chapter 25 and Epilogue).
Footnote 403:
The atelier was founded in 1928.
Footnote 404:
The team that worked with Perret on Le Havre consisted of P. Branche,
P. Dubouillon, P. Feuillebois, A. Heaume, J. Imbert, M. Kaeppelin, G.
Lagneau, M. Lotte, P.-E. Lambert, A. Le Donné, A. Persitz, J.
Poirrier, H. Tougard, and J. Tournant, all of whom seem to have shared
responsibility for the buildings flanking the Place de l’Hôtel de
Ville. Poirrier, Le Donné, and Lambert were, however, joint
architects-in-chief. Specific attributions are perhaps not very
significant in this kind of situation, but the characteristic Hôtel
Normandie (1950) is by Poirrier and the whole sea front by Lambert.
Footnote 405:
See Garnier, T., _Une Cité industrielle_, Paris [1918]. The basic
project goes back to 1901, but was much elaborated in the intervening
years. Although it was unpublished, many architects were certainly
familiar with its general character. See Wiebenson, D., ‘Utopian
Aspects of Garnier’s Cité Industrielle’, _Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians_, XIX (1960), 16-24.
Footnote 406:
See Garnier, T., _Les Grands Travaux de la ville de Lyon_, Paris,
1919.
Footnote 407:
This applies particularly to the work of Michel Roux-Spitz (b. 1888),
who became in the thirties the acknowledged leader of the profession
in France.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 19 - Notes
Footnote 408:
See Zevi, B., _Verso un’architettura organica_, Turin, 1945; English
translation, _Towards an Organic Architecture_, London, 1950.
Footnote 409:
See Pellegrini, L., ‘La decorazione funzionale del primo Wright’,
_L’Architettura_ (1956), 198-203.
Footnote 410:
Wright’s ‘Baroque’ period, running for approximately ten years from
1914 to 1924, parallels the Expressionist episode in European modern
architecture (see Chapters 21 and 22). That may be considered to open
with van der Meij’s Scheepvaarthuis of 1912-13 in Amsterdam and to run
out in general sometime in the mid twenties. It is not apparent that
there was any influence of consequence either way; indeed, the effect
of studying Wright’s work in the war years and the early twenties was
rather adverse to Expressionism and related tendencies, particularly
in Holland where Wright’s influence was strongest.
Footnote 411:
See _Life_, V (26 Sep. 1938), 60-1.
Footnote 412:
See _Ladies Home Journal_, February 1901; June 1901; April 1907.
Footnote 413:
Wright, F. Ll., _The Story of the Tower_, New York, 1956.
Footnote 414:
Wright had a tendency to scoff at the work of his former junior
associates and to deny the reality of their discipleship. There are at
present in practice a good many architects who have been for shorter
or longer periods at Taliesin, where the Fellowship has at times since
the Second World War included over sixty. Those who were at Taliesin
some time ago have naturally made the greater mark, since many of the
post-war members of the Fellowship had, in the mid 1950s, only just
begun their own practice. Alden Dow (b. 1904) in Midland, Michigan,
and Henry Klumb (b. 1905) in San Juan, Puerto Rico, have over the last
few years the greatest volume of work of more-or-less Wrightian
inspiration to their credit. But it must not be forgotten that Richard
J. Neutra (b. 1892), whose work is of a very different order, was also
for a time with Wright; while there are some architects whose work is
Wrightian to the point of parody who have never had any direct contact
with Wright at all.
Footnote 415:
Richard E. Schmidt (1865-1959) and Hugh M. G. Garden (1873-1961).
Footnote 416:
The contribution of these men is only beginning to receive the study
which it merits now the realization is growing that American
architecture was far less dominated by traditionalism in the first
quarter of the twentieth century, particularly in the Middle West and
on the Pacific Coast, than has generally been supposed in the last
thirty years. See Brooks, A., ‘The Early Work of the Prairie
Architects’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, XIX
(1960), 2-10.
Footnote 417:
See Thompson, E., ‘The Early Domestic Architecture of the San
Francisco Bay Region’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians_, X (1951), 15-21; Bangs, J. M., ‘Bernard Ralph Maybeck,
Architect, Comes into His Own’, _Architectural Record_, CIII (1948),
72-9, and ‘Greene and Greene’, _Architectural Forum_, LXXXIX (1948),
80-9; McCoy, E., _Five California Architects_, New York, 1960; and
Woodbridge, J. M. and S. B., _Buildings of the Bay Area, a Guide to
the Architecture of the San Francisco Bay Region_, New York, 1960,
which covers both earlier and later work.
Footnote 418:
See Price, C., ‘Panama-Californian Exposition: Bertram Grosvenor
Goodhue and the Renaissance of Spanish-Colonial Architecture’,
_Architectural Record_, XXXVII (1915), 229-51.
Footnote 419:
See Macomber, B., _The Jewel City, its Planning and Achievement_...,
San Francisco, 1915.
Footnote 420:
See Lancaster, C., ‘The American Bungalow’, _Art Bulletin_, XL (1958),
239-53.
Footnote 421:
That is, on the West Coast; considered as an alternative to the
‘International Style’ suitable for emulation everywhere, as it was for
a few years, it had no more validity than any other regional mode.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 20 - Notes
Footnote 422:
Reviving interest in Expressionism has already led to considerable
significant publication. See, for example, Dorfles, G., _Barocco
nell’architettura moderna_, Milan, 1951, especially the second part;
Gregotti, G., ‘L’Architettura del’Espressionismo’, _Casabella_, August
1961, [260]-48; Conrads, U., and Sperlich, H. G., _Phantastische
Architektur_, Stuttgart, [1960]; and, for a particularly significant
figure, Joedicke, J., ‘Haering at Garkau’, _Architectural Review_,
CXXVII (1960), 313-18. For a remarkable Expressionist publication by
an architect who was very active and influential in Germany in the
1920s, see Taut, B., _Die Stadtkrone_, Jena, 1919.
Footnote 423:
For the development of Van de Velde’s ideas in these years see _Die
Renaissance im modernen Kunstgewerbe_, Berlin, 1901, and _Vom neuen
Stil_, Leipzig, 1907. Van de Velde was a prolific writer, and it is
impossible to give a complete list of his books and articles here.
They will be found in Madsen’s _Sources of Art Nouveau_, 469.
Footnote 424:
See Bauer, C. K., _Modern Housing_, Boston and New York, 1934; and my
_Early Victorian Architecture in Britain_, Chapters XIII and XIV.
Footnote 425:
See Schumacher, F., _Das Wesen des neuzeitlichen Backsteinbaues_,
Munich, 1917. The rich and decorative use of brick is as
characteristic of the Hamburg School as of the Amsterdam School in
these decades (see Chapter 21).
Footnote 426:
See Bie, O., _Der Architekt Oskar Kaufmann_, Berlin, 1928; Hegemann,
W., _German Bestelmeyer_, Berlin [n.d.] and Mayer, H., and Rehdern,
G., _Wilhelm Kreis_, Essen, 1953. In the twenties a large number of
such well-illustrated monographs on individual German architects were
published; it is much more difficult to find adequate documentation on
the work of several architects in other countries who are of
considerably greater originality and historical importance.
Footnote 427:
Paraboloid domes of ferro-concrete were used with brilliant spatial
effect by Jacques Droz (b. 1882) at Sainte-Jeanne-d’Arc in Nice. This
was built in 1932, just at the same time that Böhm was building Sankt
Engelbert. The plan, consisting of three intersecting ellipses, is
very nearly identical with that of J. B. Neumann’s Baroque masterpiece
Vierzehnheiligen; the result is very different, however, because of
the continuity of the walls and roof here. Unfortunately Droz’s church
was elaborated with a tower and other features of a rather
‘Jazz-Modern’ order.
Footnote 428:
Another German church-architect of the twenties who has still a very
considerable reputation is Otto Bartning (b. 1883). He moved much
earlier in this direction than Böhm. For a statement of his
intentions, see Bartning, O., _Vom neuen Kirchbau_, Berlin, 1919.
Footnote 429:
See _Maria Königin_ [Cologne, n.d.].
Footnote 430:
This is not the place to discuss these churches. It may be remarked
here, however, that Candela’s church is considerably more
Expressionist in appearance, especially the interior, than anything
Böhm ever built in the twenties. Yet its strangely angular piers and
vaults that _look_ so much like the settings for the ‘Cabinet of Dr
Caligari’, the most famous German Expressionist film, result from this
engineer’s consistent use of the hyperbolic paraboloid forms which he
favours primarily for technical reasons. De la Mora, Niemeyer, and
Moya were content to use barrel-vault elements of plain parabolic
section such as were first introduced by Böhm in 1925-6.
Footnote 431:
The triangular bay-window lighting the stairs is still somewhat
Expressionist, but the interior treatment is in general more related
to geometrical abstract art. The decoration approaches what came to be
known as ‘Jazz-Modern’ when it became vulgarized in the next ten years
or so in England. The contrast of the interiors that Behrens designed
with the fine examples of Mackintosh’s furniture, brought from a house
that he had remodelled earlier for the Bassett-Lowkes, appears rather
shocking a generation later. What must have been considered a bit
_démodé_ in 1925 now represents to posterity—at least in the field of
furniture design—the main line of advance in the early twentieth
century; what then seemed in England to be ‘the last word’ has dated
badly.
Footnote 432:
‘New Objectivity’: A generic term for some of the advanced movements
that succeeded Expressionism in the arts; in architecture, roughly
equivalent to ‘Functionalism’.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 21 - Notes
Footnote 433:
The use of aluminium in architecture became widespread only some forty
years later, it should be noted, although it had supplied the cap of
the pyramid with which T. L. Casey finally completed the Washington
Monument as early as 1884—its first use in architecture. In the
nineties Thomas Harris already foresaw its great importance in
building; see his _Three Periods of English Architecture_, London,
1894.
Footnote 434:
See ‘Ornament und Verbrechen’ in Loos, A., _Trotzdem: Gesammelte
Aufsätze 1900-1930_, Innsbruck, 1931, first published in the _Neue
Freie Presse_ in January 1908. A French translation of the article
appeared in _L’Esprit nouveau_, I (1920), 159-68.
Footnote 435:
Considering that Wright’s open planning had by no means matured while
Loos was in Chicago, American influence (if any) came probably from
the houses of the Shingle Style. Because of his close _rapport_ with
England, however, one may assume that the influence of Baillie Scott’s
plans was more important; while the treatment of interior trim comes
closest to Voysey, as has been noted.
Footnote 436:
The recurrent suggestions of Richardsonian influence in Europe in the
nineties are not yet adequately explained. Townsend in England knew of
Richardson’s work from American and English publications, and there
was in England one house by Richardson, Lululund at Bushey, Herts, now
largely destroyed except for the entrance. This was designed shortly
before Richardson’s death for Sir Hubert von Herkomer, who had painted
his portrait, and executed without supervision. Boberg had been for a
short while in Chicago and Bruno Schmitz (1858-1916) in Indianapolis;
but there are others whose work also seems somewhat Richardsonian,
such as Theodor Fischer, who certainly had not. Berlage did not visit
America until 1911, when it was Wright’s work that most impressed him.
He and Fischer might, of course, have known Richardson’s buildings
from publications. For foreign publications of Richardson’s work
before 1900, see pp. 333-5 in the 1961 edition of my Richardson book.
Footnote 437:
See Berlage, H. P., _Gedanken über den Stil in der Baukunst_, Leipzig,
1905; _Grundlagen und Entwicklung der Architektur_, Amsterdam, 1908;
German ed., Berlin, 1908; and _Studies over Bouwkunst_, Rotterdam,
1910.
Footnote 438:
The work of K. P. C. de Bazel (1869-1923), a pupil of Cuijpers who
represents a rather different stream in Dutch architecture of the
early twentieth century, is especially close to that of the
contemporary German leaders but hardly at all related to
Expressionism. His massive office building for the Nederlandsche
Handel Maatschappij in Amsterdam of 1917-23 is quite similar to
Behrens’s nearly contemporary office blocks in Hanover and Düsseldorf,
but much more intricate and inventive in its brick-and-stone detail.
Footnote 439:
Although it is unlikely that de Klerk actually owed anything to the
sets that Bakst, Benois, and others were designing for the Ballet
Russe, the visual investiture of the Diaghilev productions certainly
had a loosening effect on Western European taste in these years just
before the First World War. For the first time Russia impinged
visually on European art, but that impingement had only an oblique
effect on architecture, for the art that was exported was not, of
course, very architectural.
Footnote 440:
See _American Architect_, CXXVIII (5 October 1925).
Footnote 441:
See ‘The American Radiator Company Building, New York’, _American
Architect_, CXXVI (1924), 467-84.
Footnote 442:
It is this that makes it so difficult to decide which architects
should be discussed in Chapters 18-21 and which in Chapter 24. No two
critics will agree, but most now recognize that the boundary line is
not a sharp one. For this reason in _Modern Architecture_, published
thirty years ago, I labelled the work of this generation ‘The New
Tradition’ and did not then reject the work of the Scandinavians as
too ‘traditional’ to be classed, broadly at least, with that of
Wright, Perret, Behrens, Wagner, and Loos, as I have done here.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 22 - Notes
Footnote 443:
That is, Barr proposed the title _The International Style_ for the
book prepared by myself and Philip Johnson to go with this Exhibition,
drawing the word ‘international’ from the title of Gropius’s
_Internationale Architektur_. For various reasons the name
‘International Style’ has often been castigated since 1932; yet it is
still recurrently used, with or without apology, by many critics. The
term is, for example, used in English and in a rather unflattering
sense by Gillo Dorfles in _L’ Architettura moderna_—one chapter is
entitled ‘“L’lnternational Style” ed i nuovi regionalismi’—with no
indication of its origin. Since this term had rather generally
acquired a pejorative meaning, I avoided using it as far as possible
in this book, preferring the vaguer but less controversial phrase
‘modern architecture of the second generation’ despite its clumsiness.
For the possible claim that the original meaning of ‘International
Style’, as used by Barr, Johnson, and myself, still retained some
validity in the early fifties, see my article ‘The “International
Style” Twenty Years After’, _Architectural Record_, CX (1952), 89-97.
(See Epilogue.)
Footnote 444:
See Roggero, M. F., _Il Contributo di Mendelsohn alla evoluzione dell’
architettura moderna_, Milan [1952].
Footnote 445:
See Jaffé, H. L. C., _De Stijl, 1917-1931_, London [1956], and Zevi,
B., _Poetica dell’ architettura neoplastica_, Milan, 1935.
Footnote 446:
See Mendelsohn, E., _Bauten und Skizzen_, Berlin, 1923; and English
ed., _Buildings and Sketches_, London, 1923.
Footnote 447:
The whole question of Expressionism in architecture is still a
difficult one despite a renewed critical interest in the intentions
and achievements of the architects influenced by the movement (see
Note [422] to Chapter 20). As will shortly be noted, Gropius and Mies
van der Rohe were both briefly affected by Expressionist concepts and
used forms of distinctly Expressionist character in the years 1919-21.
Footnote 448:
An earlier Goetheanum of 1913-20, which was destroyed by fire, had
been largely of wood. It was not at all like Mendelsohn’s Einstein
Tower but still somewhat Art Nouveau. See Brunati and Mendini,
_Steiner_, Milan [n.d.], for both versions. See also Steiner, R.,
_Wege zu einem neuen Baustil_, Dornach, 1926 (Eng. trans., London-New
York, 1927), and _Der Baugedanke des Goetheanum_, Dornach, 1932; and
Rosenkrantz, A., _The Goetheanum as a New Impulse in Art_, [London,
n.d.].
Footnote 449:
For a late reassessment of that influence, see Jordan, R. F., ‘Dudok’,
_Architectural Review_, CXV (1954), 237-42.
Footnote 450:
It is probable that Mendelsohn’s early projects and also the tower had
some influence on the later development of ‘streamlining’ in
industrial design. See Banham, R., ‘Machine-aesthetic’, _Architectural
Review_, CXVII (1955), 224-8.
Footnote 451:
This sort of enclosure has come of late to be called a ‘curtain-wall’.
Some of the skyscrapers of the nineties in Chicago, most notably
Beman’s Studebaker Building of 1895 and Holabird & Roche’s McClurg
Building of 1899, approached it very closely, yet in them the actual
supporting piers remained in the façade plane as at the Fagus Factory
and thus the ‘curtain’ was interrupted, not continuous horizontally.
The first true example of the curtain-wall applied to a large urban
structure followed within a few years after the Fagus Factory, and
certainly with no influence from it; this is the Hallidie Building in
San Francisco, completed by Willis Polk (1867-1924) in 1918
immediately after the First World War. But see p. 238 and Note 9 to
Chapter 14 for Oriel Chambers of 1864-5.
Footnote 452:
See Note [454], below.
Footnote 453:
See Popp, J., _Bruno Paul_, Munich.
Footnote 454:
To those historians of modern architecture who find its relevant
prehistory largely in the technical developments of the previous
century and a half, the Fagus Factory is the more important; to those
who accept that the architecture of the mid twentieth century had
aesthetic as well as technical roots, the special ‘classicism’ of
Mies’s project, like Wright’s contact with the American ‘Academic
Tradition’ of the nineties, seems perhaps at least as important. The
thesis of the late Emil Kaufmann, adumbrated in a series of books from
his _Von Ledoux bis Le Corbusier_ of 1931 to his posthumous
_Architecture in the Age of Reason_ of 1955, stresses—indeed
overstresses—the relevance of the theories and projects of the
revolutionary architects of the late eighteenth century to the new
architecture of the twentieth century. If it ever becomes possible to
subsume historically under a single rubric the ‘traditional’ and the
‘advanced’ architecture of the first quarter of the twentieth century,
the ‘classicism’ and ‘academicism’ of Wright, Wagner, Mies, and Le
Corbusier as well as of Perret and Behrens will prove as significant
as the technical feats of those architects who erected the last great
railway stations in these years and the tallest skyscrapers. Lest the
issue seem a simple dichotomy, Mies’s respect for Berlage’s
structuralism should also be remembered at this point; as also the
Expressionism which influenced both Gropius and Mies after the First
World War, not to speak of Wright’s ‘Baroque’ phase of 1914-24.
Footnote 455:
Le Corbusier’s first publication was an _Étude sur le mouvement d’art
décoratif en Allemagne_, La Chaux de Fond, 1912, giving evidence of
his closer _rapport_ with Central European than with Parisian currents
at this point in his life.
Footnote 456:
For the early work of Le Corbusier, hitherto almost entirely
unpublished, see _Perspecta_, 6 (1961), 28-33.
Footnote 457:
Le Corbusier’s relations with Loos were very close for a year or two
after Loos settled in Paris in 1923. But he undoubtedly knew of Loos’s
work well before the First World War, having been for a short stay in
Vienna in 1908, at which time he had already begun to react against
the dominant decorative emphasis in the work of Hoffmann and the
Wiener Werkstätte.
Footnote 458:
As has been noted, Garnier’s book on the ‘Cité Industrielle’ did not
appear until 1918, but his projects had long been generally known in
Paris. His work attracted more attention in the early twenties, thanks
to his own publication _Les Grands Travaux de la ville de Lyon_,
Paris, 1919, and an article by Jean Badovici, ‘L’Œuvre de Tony
Gamier’, in _L’Architecture vivante_, Autumn-Winter 1924.
Footnote 459:
See Note [455], _supra_.
Footnote 460:
See Note [445], _supra_. Also relevant is my book _Painting towards
Architecture_, New York, 1948.
Footnote 461:
Several years earlier, possibly even before he actually joined _De
Stijl_, Rietveld had designed and executed a remarkable ‘Red-Blue’
chair in which many aspects of the three-dimensional aesthetic of the
group were already realized.
Footnote 462:
The first number is not dated and may have appeared in 1919.
Footnote 463:
See Bayer, H., and others, _Bauhaus 1919-28_, New York, 1938.
Footnote 464:
The mixed character of Bauhaus theory and production in the early
years is well illustrated in Gropius, W., _Staatliches Bauhaus,
1919-1923_, Munich [1923].
Footnote 465:
The effect of van Doesburg’s visit to Germany remains controversial.
Although Gropius denies, or at any rate minimizes, its importance to
the Bauhaus group—and, indeed, personally disliked van
Doesburg—critics and historians mostly believe the influence of
Neoplasticism to have been at least as significant at this point as
that of the Russian Constructivists. See Zevi, B., ‘L’Insegnamento
critico di Theo van Doesburg’, _Metron_, VII (1951), 21-37.
It is not without significance that Gropius included in 1926 Oud’s
_Holländische Architektur_ in the series of Bauhausbücher which he
edited. That certainly proves a special respect for the _De
Stijl_-nurtured modern architecture of Holland at the time.
Footnote 466:
Like Le Corbusier’s window-walls, these horizontal strip-windows,
usually called ‘ribbon-windows’ in English, can be traced back at
least as far as Shaw’s work of the sixties, though all the intervening
links are not yet clearly identified. Their analogy with ‘Chicago
windows’ is closest and, indeed, Sullivan’s Carson, Pirie & Scott
façades, with their wide windows crisply cut in the smooth terracotta
wall-plane, are amazingly premonitory of the characteristic new
window-banded façades of the twenties. Before this time window-strips
were always subdivided by relatively heavy mullions in the plane of
the wall, as in Voysey’s houses, or set behind ranges of colonnettes
or other supports, as they were still in the clerestory of Wright’s
Unity Church.
Footnote 467:
This special vision of America is well illustrated in books of the
twenties by European architectural visitors; see Mendelsohn, E.,
_Amerika. Bilderbuch eines Architekten_, Berlin, 1926, and Neutra, R.,
_Wie baut Amerika?_ Stuttgart, 1927.
Footnote 468:
The preoccupation with the shapes of things that move—which
architecture does not—reflects doubtless the motion-aesthetic of the
Futurists. How well Le Corbusier knew the pre-war projects of the
brilliant Italian Antonio Sant’Elia is not clear. But his own
aesthetic is less related to the particular forms found in Sant’Elia’s
designs for buildings than to generalized Futurist dreams of speed and
technical modernity. See also Note [495] to Chapter 23.
Footnote 469:
However, Le Corbusier’s sketch books make evident that he had used his
eyes to advantage on a very wide range of buildings in the
Mediterranean world on his early travels, from peasant huts to the
Parthenon, the Campidoglio, and Versailles. His attitude towards the
past was very different, evidently, from that of the Futurists, of
which a somewhat closer reflection is to be found in the doctrines of
Gropius.
Footnote 470:
Throughout this period, and indeed down to 1943, Le Corbusier
practised in partnership with his cousin Pierre Jeanneret (b. 1896);
technically most of his work should therefore be attributed to ‘Le
Corbusier & Jeanneret’. No attempt has yet been made by critics or
historians to determine to what extent Jeanneret deserves credit for
the work of the firm, nor to evaluate the work he has since done
independently.
Footnote 471:
See Roth, A., _Zwei Wohnhäuser von Le Corbusier und Pierre Jeanneret_,
Stuttgart, 1927.
Footnote 472:
The open plan of the Vaucresson house was more significant than the
treatment of the exterior; that was ‘scraped’ of all features in a
Loos-like way, yet still quite symmetrical, at least on the garden
side.
The studio-house for Ozenfant, built on a very restricted corner site,
was too special in its vertical organization to be very influential.
Although today in good general condition, the very ‘industrial’
saw-toothed skylights on the roof have been removed and the terrace
surrounded with a crude railing.
Footnote 473:
Confused by Le Corbusier’s description of his houses as _machines à
habiter_ and the general ‘machinolatry’ of much of his early writing,
many have mistakenly supposed that his was a machine-aesthetic. Just
how to define his aesthetic other than by begging the question and
merely calling it ‘Corbusian’ is, however, far from clear. For an
analysis stressing Le Corbusier’s ‘formalism’, but not in the
pejorative sense of Stalinist criticism, see Rowe, C., ‘Mannerism and
Modern Architecture’, _Architectural Review_, CVII (1950), 289-300.
Footnote 474:
Le Corbusier’s personal system of proportion, first used for the 1916
house, gradually crystallized into a very detailed mathematical scheme
which has been made generally available in his books _Le Modular_,
Boulogne-sur-Seine, 1950; English ed., London, 1954; and _Modular II_,
London, 1958.
Footnote 475:
See Moussinac, L., _Robert Mallet-Stevens_, Paris, 1931.
Footnote 476:
See _André Lurçat, projets et réalisations_, Paris, 1929.
Footnote 477:
In this connexion Schumacher’s school-building programme for Hamburg,
initiated considerably earlier, is also significant.
Footnote 478:
See Le Corbusier, _Une maison—un palais_, Paris, 1928.
Footnote 479:
As building activity increased in Russia in the late twenties there
was considerable experimentation, mostly along Constructivist lines,
and a growing acceptance of the new architecture of the western world.
This continued into the early thirties. But the competition for the
Palace of the Soviets of 1931, to which Le Corbusier and Gropius as
well as Poelzig and Mendelsohn were among the over two hundred
architects who contributed projects, represented a major turning
point. This was won by the Soviet architect B. M. Iofan (b. 1891) with
a very monumental scheme designed in a variant of that megalomaniac
mode of scraped classicism which had been popular for large-scale
architecture in Germany under the Second Reich and which returned to
favour in 1933 under the Third Reich, just after Iofan’s scheme
triumphed. By 1937 this relatively severe project had been elaborated
by Iofan and his collaborators W. G. Helfreich and V. A. Schouko until
it rose—and to the same tremendous height as the Empire State Building
in New York—like a telescopic wedding-cake, terminating in a statue of
Stalin a third as tall as the whole structure below.
Henceforth the ‘scraping’ of Classical forms ceased and Stalinist
architecture in general aimed at an elaboration that was at once
Baroque and Victorian in its coarse exuberance and in its illiterate
use of academic clichés all but forgotten in the western world. During
the later Stalinist period official Soviet criticism decried the
modern architecture of the western world as a manifestation of
‘bourgeois formalism’.
Since the end of that period the denunciation of its characteristic
architecture by Soviet leaders implies some return towards the contact
with advanced western ideas which was evident in the twenties and
early thirties. For the production of the Stalinist period, which
would rate anywhere else as very low-grade ‘traditional’ architecture,
see _Dreissig Jahre sowjetische Architektur in der RSFSR_, Leipzig,
1950.
Footnote 480:
More than rivalling Gropius’s housing in its extent was that carried
out by Ernst May (b. 1887) for the city of Frankfort at this same
time.
Footnote 481:
Gropius and Meyer first used a smooth rendered surfacing on a theatre
at Jena that they remodelled in 1922; this was not otherwise very
significant, except that no trace of Expressionist influence, still
strong in work of the year before, remained. As will appear shortly,
Mies van der Rohe proposed to use brick in a design for a country
house in 1922; and all the private houses he built in the twenties are
of that material, though his housing blocks at Berlin and Stuttgart
were rendered.
Footnote 482:
Although Mies is not, as his second name van der Rohe might suggest,
Dutch, he has always been an admirer of Berlage, and his very high
standards for brickwork derive from his knowledge of Dutch building,
both old and new, acquired during the year spent in The Hague
designing the Kröller house.
Footnote 483:
Much of Le Corbusier’s prolific writing of the twenties has already
been mentioned in the text and earlier notes; for Gropius’s, see Cook,
R. V., _A Bibliography: Walter Gropius, 1919-1950_, Chicago [1951].
Footnote 484:
For example, the German translation of _Vers une architecture_
appeared in 1926; the English translation in 1927 in both English and
American editions. Of _Urbanisme_, the American edition is of 1927,
the English of 1929, and the German of 1929 also. Mies wrote, in
effect, nothing at all.
Footnote 485:
As has been noted, Oud, at the invitation of Gropius, wrote
_Holländische Architektur_ (No. 10 in the series of Bauhausbücher) and
also published many articles in Dutch, German, English, and French
magazines.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 23 - Notes
Footnote 486:
See Note [443], Chapter 22.
Footnote 487:
Le Corbusier’s moulded _pilotis_ supporting the Swiss Hostel in Paris
(Plate 165B) are two years later; those under the Unité d’Habitation,
which resemble Aalto’s much more closely, were designed after the
Second World War.
Footnote 488:
A hospital built in 1926-8 by Adolf Schneck and Richard Döcker (b.
1894) in Stuttgart is actually earlier but hardly comparable in
quality.
Footnote 489:
For Howe’s earlier ‘traditional’ work see _Monograph of the Work of
Mellor, Meigs and Howe_, New York, 1923; for an assessment of his
later career, _see also_ Zevi, B., ‘George Howe’, _Journal of the
American Institute of Architects_, XXIV (1955), 176-9. For the PFSF
see Jordy, W., and Stern, R., _Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians_, XXII (1962), entire June issue.
Footnote 490:
The same description applies roughly to Aalto’s work down to the
buildings mentioned above, it may be noted.
Footnote 491:
See Jordan, R. F., ‘Lubetkin’, _Architectural Review_, CXVIII (1955),
36-44.
Footnote 492:
Technically the architects were J. Alan Slater and Arthur Hamilton
Moberly (1885-1952) with Crabtree as designing associate. Professor
Sir Charles Herbert Reilly (1874-1948), head of the School of
Architecture at Liverpool, which he made one of the most advanced
schools in the world in these years, was consultant. It is curious to
recall that he had earlier been a consultant on Devonshire House in
Piccadilly in London, built in 1924-6 by Carrère & Hastings (John M.,
1858-1911; and Thomas, 1860-1929), when the influence of American
‘traditional’ architecture was strong in London (see Chapter 24).
Footnote 493:
Amyas Douglas Connell (b. 1901), Basil Robert Ward (b. 1902), and
Colin Anderson Lucas (b. 1906); _see also_ Note [492] to this chapter.
Footnote 494:
For the late twenties and early thirties, when the newer architecture
first penetrated England, see Pevsner, N., ‘Nine Swallows—No Summer’,
_Architectural Review_, XCI (1942), 109-12, and Hitchcock, H.-R.,
‘England and the Outside World’, _Architectural Association Journal_,
LXXII (1956), 96-7 (this is a special number of the _Journal_ devoted
to the work of Connell, Ward & Lucas, 1927-39). See also Richards, J.
M., ‘Wells Coates’, _Architectural Review_, CXXIV (1958), 357-60.
Footnote 495:
If Expressionism in architecture is an episode difficult to assess
despite the real achievement of several of the architects involved
with it (see Chapters 20 and 22), Futurism is impossible to evaluate
at all since it was only a ‘might have been’. Italian modern
architecture since the thirties does not derive from the projects of
Sant’Elia, many of which are only now being studied for the first
time. Sant’Elia and the other architects associated with Futurism
wished to cut all links with the past, Terragni re-linked the
‘International Style’—usually called _architettura razionale_ under
the Fascist regime—with Italian tradition, a line which several
Italian modern architects have followed since. See Sartoris, A.,
_Sant’Eliae l’architettura futurista_, Rome, 1943; Tentori, F., ‘Le
Origini Liberty di Antonio Sant’Elia’, _L’Architettura_, 1(1955),
206-8; Banham, R., ‘Futurism and Modern Architecture’, _Journal of the
Royal Institute of British Architects_, LXIV (1957), 129-38, and
‘Futurist Manifesto’, _Architectural Review_, CXXVI (1959), 77-80. The
greater part of Sant’Elia’s drawings are now available for study at
the Villa Olmo, Como.
Footnote 496:
See Le Corbusier, _UN Headquarters_, New York, 1947.
Footnote 497:
See Rudolph, P., ‘Walter Gropius et son école’, _L’Architecture d’
aujourd’hui_, XX (1950), 1-116.
Footnote 498:
Credit for initiating the reform at Harvard must be given to the Dean
of the school there, Joseph Hudnut (b. 1886), who invited Gropius to
join his faculty.
Footnote 499:
Louis Skidmore (1897-1962), Nathaniel Owings (b. 1903), John O.
Merrill (b. 1896).
Footnote 500:
Ralph Rapson is Dean of the School of Architecture at the University
of Minnesota, it is relevant to note at this point.
Footnote 501:
See Le Corbusier, _The Marseilles Block_, London, 1953.
Footnote 502:
See Le Corbusier, _Œuvre complète_, [VI, 1957], 50-107.
Footnote 503:
See Stirling, J., ‘Ronchamp’, _Architectural Review_, CXIX (1956),
155-61. The best coverage is in Le Corbusier, _Œuvre complète_, [VI,
1957], 16-43, however. See also Le Corbusier, _The Chapel at
Ronchamp_, New York, 1957.
Footnote 504:
In collaboration with the French architect B.-H. Zehrfuss and the
Italian engineer Pierluigi Nervi.
Footnote 505:
For a late published statement of Gropius’s principles, see _The Scope
of Total Architecture_, New York, 1955, London [1956], although there
is little there not to be found already in his other writings of the
last forty years. See also Note [482] to Chapter 22.
Footnote 506:
Curiously enough Philip Johnson’s glass house in New Canaan, Conn.,
which obviously derives in several ways from the Farnsworth house, was
actually erected first, in 1949; but of course Mies’s plan and model
of the Farnsworth house had already been published by Johnson in his
book _Mies van der Rohe_ in 1947.
Footnote 507:
Although their design follows closely that of the two blocks built in
1949-51, the construction is actually of ferro-concrete, not steel.
Footnote 508:
Thanks to the continuance in the early post-war years of the reaction
of the thirties, the buildings at the south end of the Coolsingel
appear to present a curious inversion of chronology. While Dudok’s
Bijenkorf Department Store of 1929-30, now demolished to open the view
to the harbour, was characteristic of the ambiguity of much of his
work, this ‘baby skyscraper’ of 1939-40 and also the contiguous
Exchange by J. F. Staal (1879-1940), designed in 1929 and built in the
thirties, appear much more ‘modern’ to mid-century eyes than the first
big banks and so forth rebuilt after the war—these look as if they had
been designed at least a generation ago. But the wave of reaction soon
ran its course; the Lijnbaan of 1953-4, a complete shopping street by
van den Broek & Bakema running parallel to the Coolsingel, if not the
new Bijenkorf by Breuer of 1955-7, was among the most advanced
projects carried out anywhere in the mid fifties.
Footnote 509:
Oud’s prominent Resistance Monument on the Dam in Amsterdam opposite
the Royal Palace, completed in 1956, is hardly a work of architecture
but rather an enlarged pedestal and frame for sculpture. Such a
commission and the honorary doctorate he received in 1955 from the
University of Leiden none the less indicate the high respect he was
receiving in Holland by that time.
Footnote 510:
See Note [511] to Chapter 24.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 24 - Notes
Footnote 511:
‘Historicism’ is a clumsy term matched by no viable adjective. It
does, however, express more accurately than ‘traditionalism’,
‘revivalism’, or ‘eclecticism’ a certain aspect of architecture which
was common throughout the last five hundred years, and not unknown in
early ages. Quite simply, it means the re-use of forms borrowed from
the architectural styles of the past, usually in more or less new
combinations. It is late in this book to introduce a definition; but
historicism is always so much taken for granted in discussing the
architecture of the nineteenth century that it is only after the
appearance as an alternative of exclusive modernism, rejecting all
borrowed forms, that the older attitude needs to be isolated in order
to discuss its continuance in this century. Characteristically, the
architecture of two-thirds of the period covered by this book balanced
a moderate sort of modernism with more or less of historicism. This is
as true of most of the novel projects of Ledoux in the 1780s as it is
of a considerable part of the work of the first generation of modern
architects. However, only the traditional architects remained firmly
attached to the concept of historicism in the twentieth century; men
like Behrens and Perret were, through much of their careers at least,
in highly significant revolt against it, quite as Ledoux had been in
his day.
Footnote 512:
See Östberg, R., _The Stockholm Town Hall_, Stockholm, 1929.
Footnote 513:
The decline is perhaps to be related at its start to the death of
their associate Joseph M. Wells in 1890. Never a member of the firm,
he had nevertheless been personally responsible for the design of the
Villard houses (Plate 109B) that had opened the academic phase of the
firm’s career. Later, the death of White and the retirement of McKim
in the early years of the new century removed the two controlling
personalities from the firm. Henceforth the office was a
‘plan-factory’, with high professional standards undoubtedly, but
without direction other than that already established in the late
eighties and nineties by the founders. In 1961 the firm finally came
to an end with the death of J. K. Smith, the only surviving partner
who had known the founders.
Footnote 514:
J.-L. Pascal (1837-1920), a pupil of Gilbert who had worked with
Garnier on the Opéra and succeeded Labrouste at the Bibliothèque
Nationale, had at least as high a reputation, and was the teacher of
several prominent English and American architects. His severe academic
style, emulated later by his Anglo-Saxon pupils, was well established
by the time he designed the Faculty of Medicine at Bordeaux in the
early nineties. Nénot was one of Pascal’s French pupils.
Footnote 515:
William Adams Delano (b. 1874) was a pupil of Laloux; Chester Holmes
Aldrich (b. 1878) was also trained at the École des Beaux-Arts. For an
attempt to reassess the ‘traditional’ houses of this period, see Lane,
J., ‘The Period House in the Nineteen-Twenties’, _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians_, XX (1961), 185-90.
Footnote 516:
The controversy as to which firm should receive credit for the design
of the Grand Central Station once waxed hot. The organization of the
tremendous complex was probably the work of Charles A. Reed (?-1911)
and Allen H. Stem (1856-1931), who had already built other big
stations in Troy, N.Y., in 1901-4 and in Tacoma in 1909-11—as,
moreover, their successors, Felheimer & Wagner, have done also:
Buffalo and North Station, Boston, both begun in 1927, and Cincinnati
in 1929-33. Whitney Warren (1864-1943) and Charles D. Wetmore
(1866-1941), who also worked with Reed & Stem on the Detroit station
completed in 1913, were doubtless more responsible for the dignified
and well-scaled detailing. See Marshall, D., _Grand Central_, New
York, 1946.
Footnote 517:
Books of the period, such as _American Architecture_ of 1928 by the
distinguished architectural historian Fiske Kimball, or _American
Architecture of Today_, also of 1928, by the then Dean of the Harvard
University School of Architecture, G. H. Edgell, offer the later
writer very little assistance. Kimball in the twenties was too ready
to consider the continuance of the academic tradition assured—his
chapter on Sullivan and Wright was entitled ‘The Lost Cause’—while
Edgell offers such a miscellany of buildings that no clear picture
emerges. Several attempts within the period to select its major
monuments fixed on much the same lot as are given prominence here; but
such selections hardly help to organize the work of the day in
historical terms.
Footnote 518:
See Weisman, W., ‘Towards a New Environment: the Way of the Price
Mechanism; the Rockefeller Centre’, _Architectural Review_, CVIII
(1950), 399-405; ‘Who Designed Rockefeller Center?’, _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians_, X (1951), 11-17; and ‘The First
“Mature” Skyscraper’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians_, XVIII (1959), 54-9.
Footnote 519:
This firm were the successors of Richardson, and Henry Richardson
Shepley, now its head, is Richardson’s grandson. See Forbes, J. D.,
‘Shepley, Bulfinch, Richardson and Abbott, Architects—An
Introduction’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_,
XVII (1958), 19-31.
Footnote 520:
‘Compositionalism’ has been suggested by Colin Rowe as a name for the
style-phase with which this section deals. Composition was then
conceived by many architects and theorists as an absolute to which the
re-use of any sort of stylistic forms could be accommodated. It is at
least open to suspicion, for example, that Rogers’s Pierson College at
Yale was designed originally with Gothic forms and then re-cast as
Neo-Georgian. Later eyes than our own will doubtless find it possible
to identify the period characteristics of traditional work of the
twenties in the way many critics already feel able to do with the
nineteenth-century revivals. The period-designation ‘President
Harding’ may some day perhaps be as meaningful as ‘General Grant’, if
hardly comparable to ‘Victorian’!
Footnote 521:
Harvey Wiley Corbett (b. 1873), a pupil of Pascal at the École des
Beaux-Arts, was probably the designer.
Footnote 522:
Carrère was dead by this time, but the firm name remained unchanged;
as has been mentioned earlier, Professor Sir Charles Reilly was
consultant, and he probably made some real contribution to the design.
Footnote 523:
C.-F. Mewès (1858-1947) and Arthur Joseph Davis (1878-1951), both
pupils of Pascal, like Corbett.
Footnote 524:
Gropius is very insistent on the desirability of anonymous team-work
in architecture. His TAC, the one-time Tecton group in London, and
other firms with similar names are examples of this ideal which aims,
of course, at something rather different from the anonymity of the
large commercial firms. Theirs is fact rather than ideal.
Footnote 525:
See Weisman, W., ‘Group Practice’, _Architectural Review_, CXIV
(1953), 145-51.
Footnote 526:
Sir John J. Burnet (1857-1938), another pupil of Pascal at the École;
Thomas S. Tait (1882-1954).
Footnote 527:
See Pevsner, N., ‘Building with Wit; the Architecture of Sir E.
Lutyens’, _Architectural Review_, CX (1951), 217-25.
Footnote 528:
See Purdom, C. B., _The Garden City_, London, 1913; and Culpin, E. G.,
_The Garden City Movement Up-to-Date_, London, 1913.
Footnote 529:
See Macfadyen, D., _Sir Ebenezer Howard and the Town Planning
Movement_, London, 1933.
Footnote 530:
See Unwin, R., _Town Planning and Modern Architecture at the Hampstead
Garden Suburb_, London, 1909.
Footnote 531:
Some of the other large buildings were the work of Sir Herbert Baker,
who was also responsible for another dominion capital at Pretoria in
South Africa. Of his rival’s intervention at New Delhi Lutyens
remarked characteristically, ‘It was my Bakerloo’.
Footnote 532:
See Drysdale, G., ‘The Work of Leonard Stokes’, _Journal of the Royal
Institute of British Architects_, XXXIV (1927), 163-77, and Roberts,
H. V. M., ‘Leonard Aloysius Stokes’, _Architectural Review_, C (1946),
173-7.
Footnote 533:
The New-Zealand-born Connell’s High-and-Over in Bucks of 1927 is very
superior, however, to Tait’s Le Chateau at Silverend in Essex, and a
year earlier.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHAPTER 25 - Notes
Footnote 534:
No sharp distinction has been made in this book between architects and
engineers. Such engineers, from Telford to Candela, as have been
responsible for work of architectural pretension deserve to be
considered as architects, and monographic works on several of them
will be found in the Bibliography.
Footnote 535:
See San Francisco Museum of Art, _Domestic Architecture of the San
Francisco Bay Region_, San Francisco, 1949.
Footnote 536:
See Banham, P. R., ‘New Brutalism’, _Architectural Review_, CXVIII
(1955), 355-61. See also Banham’s articles in the _Architectural
Review_ on ‘Neo-Liberty’, a term introduced by Paolo Portoghesi.
Footnote 537:
Consideration of such topics of current controversial interest more
properly belongs in periodicals or special critical works than in a
general history, but see the Epilogue.
Footnote 538:
There is something symptomatic in the fact that the younger men,
whether architects or critical writers, are mostly content to revive
early controversial attitudes of the preceding half century rather
than to offer anything really new. (See Epilogue.)
Footnote 539:
See Holford, W., ‘The Precincts of St Paul’s’, _Journal of the Royal
Institute of British Architects_, LXIII (1956), 232-4.
Footnote 540:
See Aarhus Universitet, _Hovedbygningen_, Aarhus [n.d.].
Footnote 541:
The term skyscraper in this context is to be understood as meaning a
very tall office building. Many European housing blocks, such as are
discussed below, would have been considered skyscrapers a generation
ago, and the same is true of much urban office building in central
areas which often today rivals in height the German examples of the
twenties mentioned in Chapter 20. However, the significant skyscrapers
of the post-war period are much taller than this, and—perhaps equally
important—they characteristically stand in their own space, rising
sheer from some sort of plaza at their base.
Footnote 542:
9 James Cubitt (b. 1913), Stephan Buzas (b. 1915), Fello Atkinson (b.
1919), and Richard Maitland (b. 1917).
Footnote 543:
Osvaldo Luis Torro (b. 1914) and Miguel Ferrer (b. 1915).
Footnote 544:
Architects designing for prefabrication and above all structural
experimenters such as Buckminster Fuller were certainly far bolder and
more revolutionary in their concepts of the house as ‘controlled
environment’ than are most of those who have so far built airports.
Footnote 545:
The death of Eero Saarinen in 1961 brought to a premature end the
career of a typical, indeed a very leading, post-war architect whose
mature production dated very largely from the years since the mid
fifties when this book was originally written. (See Epilogue.)
Monographs on such different architects as Philip Johnson and the firm
of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill should appear almost coincidentally with
this second edition and others are already in preparation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
For the study of the architecture of the western world since about 1840
no sources are more valuable than the professional periodicals. To
provide a comprehensive list with full bibliographical details would
require an inordinate amount of space and many technicalities because of
the complicated way such publications start and stop, initiate new
series, merge, and change title. However, it may be helpful to mention,
without giving any descriptive details, a few that are especially
valuable to the historian. In England, the _Builder_, the _Building
News_, and later the _Architectural Review_ are most useful; in France
the _Revue générale de l’architecture_, the _Encyclopédie
d’architecture_, the _Gazette des architectes_, and later
_L’Architecture vivante_ and _L’Architecture d’aujourd’ hui_. In
Austria-Hungary the _Allgemeine Bauzeitung_ may be cited. For the United
States, the _American Architect and Building News_ and later the
_Architectural Record_, the _Architectural Forum_, and _Progressive
Architecture_ cover the field from the eighteen-seventies to the
present. The American _Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians_ has devoted more articles to the nineteenth century than
other learned journals. Particular articles in the above-mentioned and
other periodicals are for the most part merely referenced in the Notes,
except those that provide the equivalent of separate monographs on
certain architects; such are listed here.
_General Works_ are subdivided, necessarily with some overlap, into
those covering the _Nineteenth Century_ (including, in fact, the later
decades of the eighteenth also) and those covering the _Twentieth
Century_. There follow rubrics for separate countries or groups of
countries. Finally come the monographs on individual architects
arranged, regardless of country or period, alphabetically by architect.
GENERAL WORKS
NINETEENTH CENTURY
BENEVOLO, L. _Storia dell’architettura moderna_, 1. Bari, 1960.
CASSOU, J., LANGUI, E., and PEVSNER, N. _The Sources of Modern Art._
London, 1962. (In America, _Gateway to the Twentieth Century_, New
York, 1962.)
FERGUSSON, J. _History of the Modern Styles of Architecture._ London,
1862.
GIEDION, S. _Space, Time and Architecture._ Cambridge, Mass., 1941.
Later editions to 1954.
GIEDION, S. _Spätbarocker und romantischer Klassizismus._ Munich, 1922.
HAMLIN, A. D. F. _A Text-Book of the History of Architecture._ New York,
1896.
HAUTECOEUR, L. _Rome et la renaissance de l’antiquité à la fin du
XVIII^e siècle._ Paris, 1912.
HITCHCOCK, H.-R. _Modern Architecture, Romanticism and Reintegration._
New York, 1929.
JOSEPH, D. _Geschichte der Baukunst des XIX. Jahrhunderts._ 2 vols.
Leipzig [1910].
KAUFMANN, E. _Architecture in the Age of Reason._ Cambridge, Mass.,
1955.
KAUFMANN, E. _Von Ledoux bis Le Corbusier._ Vienna, 1933.
LAVEDAN, P. _Histoire de l’urbanisme_, vol. 3. Paris, 1952.
LUNDBERG, E. _Arkitekturens Formspråk_, IX, _Vägen till Nutiden,
1715-1850_, Stockholm, 1960; X, _Nutiden, 1850-1960_, Stockholm, 1961.
MADSEN, S. T. _Sources of Art Nouveau._ Oslo, 1956; New York, 1956.
MEEKS, C. L. V. _The Railroad Station._ New Haven, 1956.
MICHEL, A. (ed.). _Histoire de l’art depuis les premiers temps chrétiens
jusqu’à nos jours_, VII, 2; VIII, 1, 2, 3. Paris, 1924-9.
MUTHESIUS, H. _Stilarchitekur und Baukunst: Wandlungen der Architektur
im XIX. Jahrhundert._ Mülheim-Ruhr, 1902.
PAULI, G. _Die Kunst des Klassizismus und der Romantik._ Berlin, 1925.
PEVSNER, N. _An Outline of European Architecture._ Harmondsworth, 1942;
seventh edition 1963.
PEVSNER, N. _Pioneers of Modern Design._ London, 1936; 3rd ed.,
Harmondsworth, 1960.
RÉAU, L. _Histoire de l’expansion de l’art français_, vol. 1-. Paris,
1924-.
REHME, W. _Die Architektur der neuen freien Schule._ Leipzig, 1901.
RICHARDSON, E. P. _The Way of Western Art, 1776-1914._ Cambridge, Mass.,
1939.
SUMMERSON, J. N. _Heavenly Mansions._ London, 1949.
TWENTIETH CENTURY
BANHAM, R. _Theory and Design in the First Machine Age._ London, 1960.
BEHRENDT, W. C. _Modern Building._ New York, 1937.
BENEVOLO, L. _Storia dell’architettura moderna_, II. Bari, 1960.
_Contemporary Architecture of the World 1961._ Tokyo [1961].
DORFLES, G. _L’Architettura moderna._ Milan, 1954.
GIEDION, S. _A Decade of Contemporary Architecture._ Zurich, 1954.
GROPIUS, W. _Internationale Architektur._ Munich, 1925.
HAMLIN, T. F. _Forms and Functions of Twentieth-Century Architecture._ 4
vols. New York, 1952.
HITCHCOCK, H.-R., and JOHNSON, P. _The International Style: Architecture
since 1922._ New York, 1932.
JAFFÉ, H. L. C. _De Stijl, 1917-1931._ London [1956].
JOEDICKE, J. _A History of Modern Architecture._ New York, 1959.
PLATZ, G. _Die Baukunst der neuesten Zeit._ Berlin, 1927.
RICHARDS, J. M. _An Introduction to Modern Architecture._ 9th ed.
Harmondsworth, 1962.
ROTH, A. _The New Architecture._ Zurich, 1940.
SARTORIS, A. _Introduzione alla architettura moderna._ Milan, 1949.
SARTORIS, A. _Gli Elementi dell’architettura funzionale._ Milan, 1935.
SFAELLOS, C. _Le Fonctionnalisme dans l’architecture contemporaine._
Paris, 1952.
SMITH, G. E. K. _The New Architecture of Europe._ Cleveland and New York
[1961]; Harmondsworth, 1962.
WHITTICK, A. _European Architecture in the Twentieth Century._ 2 vols.
London, 1950-3.
ZEVI, B. _Storia dell’architettura moderna._ Turin, 1950.
INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES
AUSTRIA-HUNGARY
DEHIO, G. _Handbuch der deutschen Kunstdenkmäler: Österreich._ Vienna,
1933.
LÜTZOW, C. von, and TISCHLER, L. (eds). _Wiener Neubauten._ 2 vols.
Vienna, 1876-80.
RADOS, J. _A magyar klasszicista építészet hagyományai._ Budapest, 1953.
SCHMIDT, J., and TIETZE, H. _Wien._ Vienna [1954].
TIETZE, H. _Wien._ Leipzig, 1928.
VIRGIL, B. _A magyar klasszicismus epiteszete._ Budapest, 1948.
_Wiener Neubauten in Stil der Sezession._ 6 vols. Vienna, 1908-10.
WIRTH, Z. _Ceśká architektura, 1800-1920._ Prague, 1922.
BRITISH DOMINIONS
_Architecture in Australia_ (catalogue of exhibition at the R.I.B.A.).
London, 1956.
BEIERS, G. _Houses of Australia._ Sydney [1948].
BOYD, R. ‘Victorian Victorian’, _Architectural Review_, CXIV (1953),
105-8.
BOYD, R. _Australia’s Home._ Carlton, 1952.
CASEY, M., and others (eds.). _Early Melbourne Architecture._ Melbourne,
1953.
CLARKE, B. F. L. _Anglican Cathedrals outside the British Isles._
London, 1958.
‘Commonwealth I, II’, (special issues of) _Architectural Review_,
October 1959; July 1960.
GOWANS, A. _Looking at Architecture in Canada._ Toronto, 1958.
GRIFFITHS, G. N. _Some Houses and People in New South Wales._ Sydney,
1948.
HERMAN, M. _The Early Australian Architects and their Work._ Sydney and
London, 1954.
HERMAN, M. _The Architecture of Victorian Sydney._ Sydney, 1956.
HUBBARD, R. ‘Canadian Gothic’, _Architectural Review_, CXVI (1954),
102-8.
SHARLAND, M. _Stones of a Century._ Hobart, 1942.
TURNBULL, C. _The Charm of Hobart._ Sydney, 1949.
WILSON, H. _Old Colonial Architecture in New South Wales and Tasmania._
Sydney, 1924.
FRANCE
BARQUI, F. _L’Architecture moderne en France._ Paris [n.d.]
BAUCHAL, C. _Nouveau dictionnaire biographique et critique des
architectes français._ Paris, 1887.
BRAULT, E. _Les Architectes par leurs œuvres._ 3 vols. Paris [n.d.].
CALLIAT, V. _Parallèle des maisons de Paris._ 2 vols. Paris, 1850, 1864.
GOURLIER, BIET, GRILLON, and TARDIEU. _Choix d’édifices publics projetés
et construits en France depuis le commencement du XIX siècle._ 3 vols.
Paris, 1825-36.
GROMORT, G. _L’Architecture_ in _Histoire générale de l’art français de
la Révolution à nos jours_, II. Paris, 1922.
HAUTECOEUR, L. _Histoire de l’architecture classique en France_, vols
IV-VII. Paris, 1952-7.
KRAFFT, J., and THIOLLET, F. _Choix des plus jolies maisons de Paris et
des environs._ Paris, 1849.
MAGNE, L. _L’Architecture française du siècle._ Paris, 1889.
NORMAND, L. M. _Paris moderne ou choix de maisons._ 3 vols. Paris, 1837,
1843, 1849.
RÉAU, F. L. _L’Œuvre de baron Haussmann._... Paris, 1954.
ROCHEGUDE, Marquis de. _Guide pratique à travers le vieux Paris._ New
ed. Paris, 1923.
VACQUIER, J. _Le Style empire._ Paris, 1911.
GERMANY
BEENKEN, H. _Schöpferische Bauideen der deutschen Romantik._ Mainz,
1942.
_Berlin und seine Bauten._ Berlin, 1877.
CONRADS, U. _Neue deutsche Architektur 1955-1960._ Stuttgart, 1962.
DEHIO, G. _Handbuch der deutschen Kunstdenkmäler._ 5 vols. Berlin, 1905
_et seq._; new ed., ed. E. Gall, so far, 11 vols. Berlin and Munich,
1935 _et seq_.
HERRMANN, W. _Deutsche Baukunst des 19. und 20. Jahrhunderts_, vol. 1
Breslau, 1932.
HOFFMANN, H., and KASPAR, K. _Neue deutsche Architektur._ Teufen [1956].
LANDSBERGER, F. _Die Kunst der Goethezeit._ Leipzig, 1931.
LICHT, H. _Architektur Deutschlands._ 2 vols. Berlin, 1882.
MEBES, P. _Um 1800._ Munich, 1918.
SCHMALENBACH, F. _Jugendstil._ Würzburg, 1935.
SCHMITZ, H. _Berliner Baumeister vom Ausgang des 18. Jahrhunderts._
Berlin, 1914.
SCHUMACHER, F. _Strömungen in der deutschen Baukunst seit 1800._
Leipzig, 1935.
VOGEL, H. _Deutsche Baukunst des Klassizismus._ Berlin, 1937.
GREAT BRITAIN
BOASE, T. S. R. _English Art 1800-1870._ London, 1959.
CASSON, H. _An Introduction to Victorian Architecture._ London, 1948.
CASSON, H. _New Sights of London._ London, 1938.
CLARK, K. _The Gothic Revival._ London, 1928; second edition 1950.
CLARKE, B. F. L. _Church Builders of the Nineteenth Century._ London,
1938.
COLVIN, H. M. _A Biographical Dictionary of English Architects,
1660-1840._ London, 1954.
EASTLAKE, C. L. _A History of the Gothic Revival._ London, 1872.
GOODHART-RENDEL, H. S. _English Architecture since the Regency._ London,
1953.
GOODHART-RENDEL, H. S. ‘Rogue Architects of the Victorian Era’, _Journal
of the Royal Institute of British Architects_, LVI (1949), 251-9.
HARBRON, D. _Amphion or the Nineteenth Century._ London and Toronto,
1930.
HITCHCOCK, H.-R. _Early Victorian Architecture in Britain._ 2 vols. New
Haven and London, 1954.
HITCHCOCK, H.-R. and others. _Modern Architecture in England._ New York,
1937.
HUSSEY, C. _English Country Houses: Mid-Georgian 1760-1800._ London
[1956].
HUSSEY, C. _English Country Houses: Late Georgian 1800-1840._ London
[1960].
HUSSEY, C. _The Picturesque._ London, 1927.
MCCALLUM, I. _A Pocket Guide to Modern Buildings in London._ London,
1951.
MILLS, E. _The New Architecture in Great Britain, 1946-53._ London,
1953.
MUTHESIUS, H. _Das englische Haus._ 3 vols. Berlin, 1904-5.
MUTHESIUS, H. _Die englische Baukunst der Gegenwart._ Leipzig and
Berlin, 1900.
MUTHESIUS, H. _Die neuere kirchliche Baukunst in England._ Berlin, 1902.
PEVSNER, N. _The Buildings of England._ 25 vols. to date. London, 1951
_et seq_.
PILCHER, D. _The Regency Style, 1800 to 1830._ London, 1947.
RICHARDSON, A. E. ‘Architecture’, in G. M. Young (ed.), _Early Victorian
England, 1830-1865_, II, 177-248. London, 1934.
RICHARDSON, A. E., and GILL, C. L. _Regional Architecture of the West of
England._ London, 1924.
RICHARDSON, A. E. _Monumental Classic Architecture in Great Britain and
Ireland._ London, 1914.
Royal Institute of British Architects. _One Hundred Years of British
Architecture, 1851-1951._ London, 1951.
SUMMERSON, J. _Georgian London._ London, 1945.
SUMMERSON, J. _Ten Years of British Architecture._ London, 1956.
TURNOR, R. _The Smaller English House, 1500-1939._ London, 1952.
TURNOR, R. _Nineteenth Century Architecture in Britain._ London, 1950.
WHIFFEN, M. _Stuart and Georgian Churches outside London._ London,
1947-8.
GREECE
RUSSACK, H. H. _Deutsches Bauen in Athen._ Berlin, 1942.
HOLLAND
BEHNE, A. _Holländische Baukunst in der Gegenwart._ Berlin, 1922.
BLIJSTRA, R. _Netherlands Architecture since 1900._ Amsterdam, 1960.
MIERAS, J., and YERBURY, F. _Dutch Architecture of the XXth century._
London, 1926.
_Moderne Bouwkunst in Nederland._ 20 vols. Rotterdam, 1932.
_Nederland bouwt in Baksteen, 1800-1940._ (Catalogue of exhibition at
Boijmans Museum.) Rotterdam, 1941.
OUD, J. J. P. _Holländische Architektur._ Munich, 1926.
THIENEN, F. van. ‘De bouwkunst van de laatste anderhalve eeuw’, in H.
van Gelder (ed), _Kunstgeschiedenis der Nederlanden_, II. Utrecht,
1955.
WATTJES, J. G. _Amsterdams bouwkunst en stadsschoon, 1306-1942._
Amsterdam, 1944.
WATTJES, J. G. _Niewe Nederlandsche bouwkunst_, 2 vols. Amsterdam,
[1923]-1926.
YERBURY, F. R. _Modern Dutch Buildings._ London, 1931.
ITALY
BOTTONI, P. _Antologia di edifici moderni in Milano._ Milan, 1954.
CARACCIOLO, E. ‘Architettura dell’ottocento in Sicilia’, _Metron_, VII
(Oct. 1952), 29-40.
GOLFIERI, E. _Artisti neoclassici in Faenza._ Faenza, 1929.
KIDDER SMITH, G. E. _Italy Builds._ London, 1955.
OLIVERO, E. _L’Architettura in Torino durante la prima metà dell’
Ottocento._ Turin [1952].
PAGANI, C. _Architettura italiana oggi._ Milan, 1955.
PICA, A. _Architettura moderna in Italia._ Milan 1941.
REGGIORI, F. _Milano 1800-1943._ Milan, 1947.
SASSO, C. _Storia de’ monumenti di Napoli e degli architetti che li
edificavano_, II. Naples, 1858.
LATIN AMERICA
ARANGO, J., and MARTINEZ, C. _Arquitectura en Colombia._ Bogotá, 1951.
CETTO, M. _Modern Architecture in Mexico._ New York, 1961.
GOODWIN, P. _Brazil Builds._ New York, 1943.
HITCHCOCK, H.-R. _Latin American Architecture since 1945._ New York,
1955.
MINDLIN, H. _Modern Architecture in Brazil._ New York [1956].
MYERS, I. E. _Mexico’s Modern Architecture._ New York, 1952.
RUSSIA AND POLAND
_Architektura polska do poowy XIX wicku._ Warsaw, 1952.
DMOCHOWSKI, Z. _The Architecture of Poland._ London, 1956.
GRABAR, I. _Istoriya Russkagho iskusstva_, vols 3 and 4. Moscow [1912,
1915].
HAMILTON, G. H. _The Art and Architecture of Russia_, Chapters 21-23.
Harmondsworth, 1954.
LO GATTO, E. _Gli architetti del secolo XIX a Pietroburgo e nelle tenute
imperiali._ Rome, 1943.
NEKRASOV, A. _Russki Ampir._ Moscow, 1935.
SCANDINAVIA
AHLBERG, H. _Swedish Architecture of the Twentieth Century._ London,
1925.
_Architecture in Finland_ (R.I.B.A. Exhibition Catalogue). London, 1957.
CORNELL, E. _Ny svensk byggnadskonst._ Stockholm, 1950.
_Danish Architecture of Today_ (catalogue of exhibition at R.I.B.A.).
London, 1950.
_Denmark_ (special issue on Danish Architecture). _Architectural
Review_, CIV (1948).
_Finland bygger._ Helsinki, 1953.
FINSEN, H. _Ung danske arkitektur, 1930-45._ Copenhagen, 1947.
FISKER, K., and YERBURY, F. R. _Modern Danish Architecture._ London,
1927.
HAHR, A. _Architecture in Sweden._ Stockholm, 1939.
HIORT, E. _Nyere dansk bygningskunst._ Copenhagen, 1949.
HULTEN, B. _Building Modern Sweden._ Harmondsworth, 1951.
_Industriearkitektur i Finland._ Helsinki, 1952.
JACOBSON, T. P., and SILOW, S. (eds.). _Ten Lectures on Swedish
Architecture._ Stockholm, 1949.
JOSEPHSON, R. ‘Svensk 1800-tals architektur’, in _Teknisk Tidskrift_,
LII (1922), 1-64.
LANGBERG, H. _Hvem byggede hvad; Gamle og nye bygninger i Danmark._
Copenhagen, 1952.
LINDBLOM, A. _Sveriges Konsthistoria fran fortnid till nutid_, III.
Stockholm, 1946.
LINDAHL, G. _Högkyrkligt Lågkyrkligt Frikyrkligt i Svensk architektur,
1850-1950._ Stockholm, 1955.
MADSEN, S. T. _To Kongeslot._ Oslo, 1952.
MADSEN, S. T. ‘Dragestilen. Honnør til en hånet stil’, _Vestlandske
Kunstindustrimuseums Årbok, 1949-1950_, 19-62. Bergen, 1952.
MILLECH, K. _Danske arkitektur stromninger, 1850-1950._ Copenhagen,
1951.
_New Architecture in Sweden._ Stockholm, 1961.
_New Swedish Architecture._ Stockholm, 1940.
SMITH, G. E. K. _Sweden Builds._ London, 1950.
WANSCHER, L. E. _Danmarks arkitektur._ Copenhagen, 1943.
SWITZERLAND
BILL, M. _Moderne Schweizer Architektur, 1925-1945._ Basel, 1949.
JENNY, H. _Kunstführer der Schweiz, ein Handbuch ... der Baukunst._
Bern, 1945.
_Moderne Schweizer Architektur_, 10 vols. Basel, 1940-6.
SMITH, G. E. K. _Switzerland Builds._ London, 1950.
SPAIN
CALZADA, A. _Historia de la arquitectura española._ Barcelona, 1933.
CIRICI-PELLICER, P. _El arte modernista catalán._ Barcelona, 1951.
FLORES, C. _Arquitectura española contemporanea._ Madrid, 1961.
LOZOYA, Marqués de (CONTRAVERAS, J. de). _Historia del arte hispánico_,
v. Barcelona, 1949.
UNITED STATES
_Artistic Homes._ New York, 1886.
ANDREWS, W. _Architecture, Ambition and Americans._ New York, 1955.
ANDREWS, W. _Architecture in America, A Photographic History._ New York,
1960.
CONDIT, C. _The Rise of the Skyscraper._ Chicago, 1952.
CONDIT, C. _American Building Art—The Nineteenth Century._ New York,
1960.
CONDIT, C. _American Building Art—The Twentieth Century._ New York,
1961.
DENMARK, E. R. _Architecture of the Old South._ Atlanta [1926].
DOWNING, A., and SCULLY, V. J. _The Architectural Heritage of Newport,
Rhode Island._ Cambridge, Mass., 1952.
EDGELL, G. H. _The American Architecture of Today._ New York and London,
1928.
FITCH, J. M. _American Building; the Forces that Shape It._ Boston,
1948.
FRARY, I. T. _Early Homes of Ohio._ Richmond, 1936.
HAMLIN, T. F. _The American Spirit in Architecture._ New Haven, 1926.
HAMLIN, T. F. _Greek Revival Architecture in America._ New York, 1944.
HITCHCOCK, H.-R. _A Guide to Boston Architecture, 1637-1954._ New York,
1954.
HITCHCOCK, H.-R. _American Architectural Books._ 2nd ed. Minneapolis,
1962.
HITCHCOCK, H.-R. _Rhode Island Architecture._ Providence, 1939.
HITCHCOCK, H.-R., and DREXLER, A. _Built in U.S.A.: Post-War
Architecture._ New York, 1952.
HOWLAND, R., and SPENCER, E. _The Architecture of Baltimore._ Baltimore,
1953.
KILHAM, W. _Boston after Bulfinch._ Cambridge, Mass., 1946.
KIMBALL, F. _American Architecture._ Indianapolis, 1928.
KIMBALL, F. _Domestic Architecture of the American Colonies and of the
Early Republic._ New York, 1922.
JACKSON, H. _New York Architecture, 1650-1952._ New York, 1952.
MCCALLUM, I. _Architecture U.S.A._ London, 1959.
MOCK, E. (ed.). _Built in U.S.A., 1932-1944._ New York, 1944.
MUMFORD, L. _The Brown Decades._ 2nd ed. New York [1955].
MUMFORD, L. _Roots of Contemporary American Architecture._ New York,
1952.
MUMFORD, L. _From the Ground Up._ New York [1957].
MUMFORD, L. _Sticks and Stones._ New York, 1924.
NEWCOMB, R. _Architecture of the Old North-West Territory._ Chicago,
1950.
NEWCOMB, R. _Architecture in Old Kentucky._ Urbana, Ill., 1953.
NICHOLS, F. D., and JOHNSTON, F. B. _The Early Architecture of Georgia._
Chapel Hill, 1957.
‘One Hundred Years of Significant Building’, _Architectural Record_,
CXIX (June 1956-June 1957) (a series of monthly features).
RANDALL, F. _History of the Development of Building Construction in
Chicago._ Urbana, Ill., 1949.
ROOS, F. J. _Writings on Early American Architecture._ Columbus, 1943.
SCHUYLER, M. _American Architecture._ New York, 1892; new ed. (ed. W.
Jordy and R. E. Coe), Cambridge, Mass., 1961.
SCULLY, V. J. _The Shingle Style._ New Haven, 1955.
SHELDON, G. W. _Artistic County Seats._ 2 vols. New York, 1886-[7].
TALLMADGE, T. _Architecture in Old Chicago._ Chicago, 1941.
TALLMADGE, T. _The Story of Architecture in America._ London [1928].
TUNNARD, C. _American Skyline._ Boston, 1955.
WHITE, T. (ed.). _Philadelphia Architecture in the Nineteenth Century._
Philadelphia, 1953.
MONOGRAPHS
AALTO
Gutheim, F. _Alvar Aalto._ New York, 1960.
Labò, G. _Alvar Aalto._ Milan, 1948.
Neuenschwander, E. and C. _Finnish Buildings; Atelier Alvar Aalto,
1950-1951._ Erlenbach-Zurich, 1954.
ADAM
Adam, R., and J. _The Works in Architecture._ 2 vols. London, 1778-9.
Bolton, A. T. _Robert and James Adam._ 2 vols. London, 1922.
Fleming, J. _Robert Adam and his Circle._ London, 1962.
ASPLUND
Zevi, B. _E. Gunnar Asplund._ Milan, 1948.
Holmdahl, G., Lind, S., and Ödeen, K. (eds.).
_Gunnar Asplund Architect, 1885-1940._ Stockholm [n.d.].
BAKER
Baker, Sir Herbert. _Architecture and Personalities._ London, 1944.
BALLU
Sédille, P. _Théodore Ballu._ Paris, 1886.
BALTARD
Decouchy, M. _Victor Baltard._ Paris, 1875.
BARRY (C.)
Barry, A. THE LIFE AND WORKS OF SIR C. BARRY. London, 1867.
BELLUSCHI
Stubblebine, J. _The Northwest Architecture of Pietro Belluschi._ New
York, 1953.
BEHRENS
Cremers, P. _Peter Behrens, sein Work von 1900 bis zur Gegenwart._
Essen, 1928.
Hoeber, F. _Peter Behrens._ Munich, 1913.
BENTLEY
De L’Hôpital, W. _Westminster Cathedral and its Architect._ 2 vols.
London [1919].
Scott-Moncrieff, W. _John Francis Bentley._ London, 1924.
BERLAGE
Gratama, J. _Dr H. P. Berlage Bouwmeester._ Rotterdam, 1925.
BINDESBØLL
Bramsen, H. _Gottlieb Bindesbøll, Liv og Arbejder._ Copenhagen, 1959.
BLOMFIELD
Blomfield, Sir Reginald. _Memoirs of an Architect._ London, 1932.
BÖHM
Schwarz, R. ‘Dominikus Böhm’, _Kunst und Werkform_, VIII (1955),
72-86.
BONATZ
Tamms, F. _Paul Bonatz._ Stuttgart, 1937.
BOULLÉE
Kaufmann, E. _Three Revolutionary Architects, Boullée, Ledoux, and
Lequeu._ Philadelphia, 1952.
Rosenau, H. _Boullée’s Treatise on Architecture._ London, 1953.
BREUER
Argan, G. C. _Marcel Breuer: disegno industriale e architettura._
Milan [1957].
Blake, P. _Marcel Breuer: Architect and Designer._ New York, 1949.
BRODRICK
Wilson, T. B. _Two Leeds Architects: Cuthbert Brodrick and George
Corson._ Leeds, 1937.
BRONGNIART
Silvestre de Sacy, J. _Alexandre-Théodore Brongniart._ Paris, 1940.
BRUNEL
Rolt, L. T. C. _Isambard Kingdom Brunel._ London, 1957.
BULFINCH
Place, C. _Charles Bulfinch: Architect and Citizen._ Boston, 1925-7.
BURGES
Pullan, A. _Architectural Designs of William Burges._ 2 vols. London,
1883-7.
BURNHAM
Moore, C. _Daniel H. Burnham._ 2 vols. Boston and New York, 1921.
_The Architectural work of Graham, Anderson, Probst & White ... and
their Predecessors D. H. Burnham & Co. and Graham, Burnham & Co._ 2
vols. London, 1933.
BUTTERFIELD
Summerson, J. N. ‘William Butterfield’, _Architectural Review_, LXIV
(Dec. 1945), 166-75. Reprinted in _Heavenly Mansions_, 159-76.
CRAM
Maginnis, C. _The Work of Cram and Ferguson, Architects._ New York,
1929.
CUIJPERS
Cuijpers, J. T. J. _Het Werk van Dr P. J. H. Cuijpers, 1827-1917._
Amsterdam, 1917.
DAVIS, A. J. See TOWN.
D’ARONCO
Nicoletti, M. _Raimondo D’Aronco._ Milan, 1955.
DELANO & ALDRICH
Delano & Aldrich. _Portraits of Ten Country Houses._ New York, 1924.
DESPREZ
Wollin, N. _Desprez en Italie._ Malmö, 1934.
Wollin, N. _Desprez en Suède._ Stockholm, 1939.
DUC
Sédille, P. _Joseph-Louis Duc, architecte (1802-1879)._ Paris, 1879.
DUDOK
_Willem M. Dudok._ [Amsterdam, 1954].
EIDLITZ
Schuyler, M. ‘A Great American Architect: Leopold Eidlitz’,
_Architectural Record_, XXIV (1908), 163-79, 277-92,364-78.
EIFFEL
Bresset, M. _Gustave Eiffel, 1832-1923._ Milan [1957].
Prevost, J. _Eiffel._ Paris, 1929.
FISCHER
Karlinger, H. _Theodor Fischer: ein deutscher Baumeister._ Munich,
1937.
FISKER
Langkilde, H. E. _Arkitekten Kay Fisker._ Copenhagen, 1960.
FURNESS
Campbell, W. ‘Frank Furness, an American Pioneer’, _Architectural
Review_, CX (1951), 310-15.
GARNIER (C.)
Moyaux, C. _Notice sur la vie et les œuvres de M. Charles Garnier._
Paris, 1899.
GARNIER (T.)
Badovici, J., and Morancé, A. _L’Œuvre de Tony Garnier._ Paris, 1938.
Veronesi, G. _Tony Garnier._ Milan, 1948.
GÄRTNER
Moninger, H. _Friedrich Gärtner._ Munich, 1882.
GAUDÍ
Bergós, J. _Antoni Gaudí l’home i l’obra._ Barcelona, 1954.
Collins, G. _Antonio Gaudí._ New York, 1960.
Martinell, C. _Gaudinismo._ Barcelona, 1954.
Ráfols, J. _Gaudí._ Barcelona, 1929; 2nd ed., 1952.
Sweeney, J. J., and Sert, J. Ll. _Antoni Gaudí._ New York [1960].
GENTZ
Doebber, A. _Heinrich Gentz._ Berlin, 1916.
GILBERT
Gilbert, Cass. _Reminiscences and Addresses._ New York, 1935.
GILLY
Oncken, A. _Friedrich Gilly._ Berlin, 1935.
Rietdorf, A. _Gilly_, 1940.
GODWIN
Harbron, D. _The Conscious Stone: The Life of Edward William Godwin._
London, 1949.
GOODHUE
Whitaker, C. (ed.). _Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue—Architect and Master of
Many Arts._ New York, 1925.
GREENWAY
Ellis, M. H. _Francis Greenway: his Life and Times._ Sydney and
London, 1949.
GROPIUS (W.)
Argan, G. C. _Walter Gropius e la Bauhaus._ Turin, 1951.
Giedion, S. _Walter Gropius._ London, 1954.
Gropius, W. _The New Architecture and the Bauhaus._ New York, 1936.
HANSEN (C. F.)
Hansen, C. F. _Samling af forskjellige offentlige og private
Bygninger._ Copenhagen, 1847.
Langberg, H. _Omkring C. F. Hansen._ [Copenhagen] 1950.
Rubow, J. _C. F. Hansens arkitektur._ Copenhagen, 1936.
HANSEN (T.)
Niemann, J., and Feldegg, F. von. _Theophilus Hansen und seine Werke._
Vienna, 1893.
HASTINGS
Gray, D. _Thomas Hastings: Architect._ Boston, 1933.
HERHOLDT
Fisker, K. _Omkring Herholdt._ Copenhagen, 1943.
HITTORFF
Normand, A. _Notice historique sur ... J. I. Hittorff, architecte._
Paris, 1867.
HITZIG
Hitzig, F. _Ausgeführte Bauwerke._ 2 vols. Berlin [1850].
HOFFMANN
Kleiner, L. _Josef Hoffmann._ Berlin, 1927.
Veronesi, G. _Josef Hoffmann._ Milan, 1956.
Weiser, A. _Josef Hoffmann._ Geneva, 1930.
HOOD
North, A. T. _Raymond M. Hood._ New York, 1931.
HOOKER
Root, E. _Philip Hooker._ New York, 1929.
HORTA
Madsen, S. T. ‘Horta: Works and Style of Victor Horta before 1900’,
_Architectural Review_, CXVIII (1955), 388-92.
HOWE
(See Note [486] to Chapter 23.)
HÜBSCH
Hübsch, H. _Bauwerke._ Karlsruhe, 1842.
Valdenaire, A. _Heinrich Hübsch._ Karlsruhe, 1926.
HUNT
Schuyler, M. ‘The Works of the late Richard Morris Hunt’,
_Architectural Record_, V (Oct.-Dec., 1895), 97-180.
HUVÉ
Le Normand. _Notice biographique sur J.-J.-M. Huvé._ Paris, 1853.
JACOBSEN
Pederson, J. _Arkitekten Arne Jacobsen._ Copenhagen, 1957.
JAPPELLI
Carta Mantiglia, R. ‘Giuseppe Jappelli, Architetto’, _L’Architettura_,
I (1955), 538-51.
Pevsner, N. ‘An Italian Miscellany—Pedrocchino and Some Allied
Problems’, _Architectural Review_, CXX (1957).
JEFFERSON
Kimball, F. _Thomas Jefferson, Architect._ Boston, 1916.
JOHNSON
Jacobus, J. M. _Philip Johnson._ New York, 1962.
KAHN
Nelson, G. _The Industrial Architecture of Albert Kahn_. New York,
1939.
KLENZE
Klenze, L. von. _Sammlung architektonischer Entwürfe._ 10 pts. Munich,
1830-50.
DE KLERK
Kramer, P. _M. de Klerk._ _Wendingen_, VI (1924), Nos 4 and 5.
KORNHÄUSEL
Thausig, P. _Joseph Kornhäusel._ Vienna, 1916.
LABROUSTE (H.)
_Souvenirs d’Henri Labrouste: notes recueillies et classées part ses
enfants._ Paris, 1928.
LALOUX
Cox, H. B. ‘Victor Laloux; the Man and his Work’, _Architects’
Journal_, LI (1920), 555-7.
LANGHANS
Hinrichs, W. _Karl Gotthard Langhans._ Strassburg, 1909.
LATROBE
Hamlin, T. F. _Benjamin Henry Latrobe._ New York, 1955.
LAUGIER
Herrmann, W. _Laugier and Eighteenth-Century French Theorists._
London, 1962.
LE BAS
Vaudoyer, L. _Notice historique sur la vie et les ouvrages de M. Le
Bas._ Paris, 1869.
LE CORBUSIER
Boesiger, W. _Le Corbusier & Pierre Jeanneret: Œuvre complète._ 6
vols. Zurich, 1937-57.
Boesiger, W., and Ginsberger, H. _Le Corbusier His Works 1910-1960._
New York, 1960.
Le Corbusier. _My Work._ London [1960].
Papadaki, S. (ed.). _Le Corbusier: Architect, Painter, Writer._ New
York, 1948.
LEDOUX
Ledoux, C.-N. _L’Architecture considérée sous le rapport de l’art, des
mœurs et de la législation._ Paris, 1804. [Reprint], 2 vols. Paris,
1962.
Raval, M., and Moreux, J.-Ch. _C.-N. Ledoux._ Paris, 1945.
See also BOULLÉE.
LEFUEL
Delaborde, H. _Notice sur la vie et les ouvrages de M. Lefuel._ Paris,
1882.
LETHABY
‘William Richard Lethaby, 1857-1931; a Symposium in Honour of his
Centenary’, _Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects_,
LXIV (1957), 218-25.
LOOS
Glück, F. _Adolf Loos._ Paris, 1931.
Kulka, H. _Adolf Loos, das Werk des Architekten._ Vienna, 1931.
Münz, H. _Adolf Loos._ Milan, 1956.
LURÇAT
_André Lurçat; projets et réalisations._ Paris, 1929.
LUTYENS
Butler, A. S. G. _The Architecture of Sir Edwin Lutyens._ 3 vols.
London, 1950.
Hussey, C. _The Life of Sir Edwin Lutyens._ London, 1950.
Weaver, L. _Houses and Gardens by E. L. Lutyens._ London, 1913. Second
edition 1921.
MAILLART
Bill, M. _Robert Maillart._ Zurich, 1949.
MACKINTOSH
Howarth, T. _Charles Rennie Mackintosh and the Modern Movement._
London, 1952.
Pevsner, N. _Charles Rennie Mackintosh._ Milan, 1950.
MACKMURDO
Pevsner, N. ‘Arthur H. Mackmurdo’, _Architectural Review_, LXXXIII
(1938), 141-3.
Pond, E. ‘Mackmurdo Gleanings’, _Architectural Review_, CXXVIII
(1960), 429-31.
MCKIM, MEAD & WHITE
_A Monograph of the Work of McKim, Mead and White._ 4 vols. New York,
1915-25.
MENDELSOHN
Mendelsohn, E. _Briefe und Auszeichnungen eines Architekten_, 8 vols.
1961.
Whittick, A. _Eric Mendelsohn._ 2nd ed. London [1956].
_Erich Mendelsohn: das Gesamtschaffen des Architekten._ Berlin, 1930.
MENGONI
Ricci, G. _La Vita e le opere dell’ architetto Giuseppe Mengoni._
Bologna, 1930.
MESSEL
Behrendt, W. C. _Alfred Messel._ Berlin, 1911.
MIES VAN DER ROHE
Bill, M. _Ludwig Mies van der Rohe._ Milan, 1955.
Drexler, A. _Ludwig Mies van der Rohe._ New York, 1960.
Johnson, P. _Mies van der Rohe._ 2nd ed. New York, 1953; German ed.,
Stuttgart [n.d.].
Hilbersheimer, L. _Mies van der Rohe._ Chicago, 1956.
MILLS
Gallagher, H. _Robert Mills._ New York, 1935.
NASH
Davis, T. _The Architecture of John Nash._ London, 1960.
Summerson, J. N. _John Nash, Architect to George IV._ London, 1935.
NERVI
_The Works of Pierluigi Nervi._ [Stuttgart] and London, 1957.
Argan, G. C. _Pierluigi Nervi._ Milan, 1955.
Nervi, P. _Costruire correttamente._ Milan, 1955.
NESFIELD
Brydon, J. M. ‘William Eden Nesfield, 1835-1888’, _Architectural
Review_, I (1897), 235-7, 283-95.
Creswell, B. ‘William Eden Nesfield, 1835-1888: An Impression’,
_Architectural Review_, II (1897), 23-32.
NEUTRA
McCoy, E. _Richard Neutra._ New York, 1960.
Zevi, B. _Richard Neutra._ Milan, 1954.
_Richard Neutra, Buildings and Projects._ Zurich, 1955.
NEWTON
Newton, W. G. _The Work of Ernest Newton, R.A._ London, 1923.
NIEMEYER
Papadaki, S. _The Work of Oscar Niemeyer._ New York, 1950.
Papadaki, S. _Oscar Niemeyer: Works in Progress._ New York, 1956.
Papadaki, S. _Oscar Niemeyer._ New York, 1960.
OLBRICH
_Architektur von Professor Joseph M. Olbrich._ 3 vols. Berlin, 1903-7.
Lux, J. A. _Josef Maria Olbrich._ Vienna, 1919.
Veronesi, G. _Josef Maria Olbrich._ Milan, 1948.
OUD
_Architect J. J. P. Oud._ Rotterdam, 1951.
Hitchcock, H.-R. _J. J. P. Oud._ Paris, 1931.
Veronesi, G. _J. J. Pieter Oud._ Milan, 1953.
PAXTON
Chadwick, G. F. _The Works of Sir Joseph Paxton._ London [1961].
Markham, V. _Paxton and the Bachelor Duke._ London, 1935.
PERCIER AND FONTAINE
Fouché, M. _Percier et Fontaine._ Paris, 1905.
PERRET
Champigneulle, B. _Auguste Perret._ Paris, 1959.
Collins, P. _Concrete—The Vision of a New Architecture_, pt. III.
London, 1959.
Jamot, P. _A.-G. Perret et l’architecture du béton armé._ Paris and
Brussels, 1927.
Rogers, E. _Auguste Perret._ Milan, 1955.
_Architecture d’aujourd’hui_, 1932 (special issue on A. Perret).
PERSIUS
(See Note [53] to Chapter 2).
PIRANESI
Focillon, H. _G. B. Piranesi._ Paris, 1918.
PLATT
Cortissoz, R. _Monograph of the Work of Charles A. Platt._ New York,
1913.
POELZIG
Heuss, T. _Hans Poelzig._ Berlin, 1939.
PUGIN
Ferrey, B. _Recollections of A. N. Pugin and His Father A. Pugin._
London, 1861.
Gwynn, D. _Lord Shrewsbury, Pugin and The Catholic Revival._ London,
1946.
Trappes-Lomax, M. _Pugin, a Mediaeval Victorian._ London, 1932.
REIDY
Franck, K. _The Works of Affonso Eduardo Reidy._ New York, 1960.
Giedion, S. _The Works of Eduardo Affonso Reidy._ New York, 1960.
_Revett._ See STUART.
RICHARDSON
Hitchcock, H.-R. _The Architecture of H. H. Richardson and His Times._
2nd ed. Hamden, Conn., 1961.
Van Rensselaer, M. G. _Henry Hobson Richardson and His Works._ Boston
and New York, 1888.
RIETVELD
Brown, T. M. _The Work of G. Rietveld._ Utrecht, 1958.
ROHAULT DE FLEURY
Rohault de Fleury, C. _Œuvre._ Paris, 1884.
ROUX-SPITZ
Roux-Spitz, M. _Réalisations_, 1924-39. 2 vols. Paris [n.d.].
SAARINEN
Christ-Janer, A. _Eliel Saarinen._ Chicago, 1948.
SANT’ ELIA
Banham, P. R. ‘Sant’ Elia’, _Architectural Review_, CXVII (1955),
295-301; CXIX (1956), 343-4.
Mariani, L. ‘Disegni inediti di Sant’ Elia’, _L’Architettura_, I
(1955-6), 210-15, 704-7.
SCHINKEL
Griesebach, A. _Karl Friedrich Schinkel._ Leipzig, 1924.
Pevsner, N. ‘Schinkel’, _Journal of the Royal Institute of British
Architects_, LIX (1952).
Rave, P., and others. _Karl Friedrich Schinkel Lebenswerk_, vol. [I]-.
Berlin, 1941-.
Schinkel, K. F. _Sammlung architektonischer Entwürfe ... _ Berlin,
1819-40.
Wolzogen, A. F. von. _Aus Schinkels Nachlass._ 3 vols. Berlin, 1862-4.
SCOTT (G. G.)
Scott, G. G. _Personal and Professional Recollections by the late Sir
George Gilbert Scott._ London, 1879.
SCOTT (BAILLIE)
Scott, M. H. B. _Houses and Gardens._ London, 1906.
SELVA
Bassi, E. _Giannantonio Selva, architetto veneziano._ Padua, 1936.
SEMPER
Ettlinger, L. _Gottfried Semper und die Antike._ Halle, 1937.
Semper, G. _Der Stil in den technischen und architektonischen
Künsten._ Frankfurt, 1860.
SHAW
Blomfield, Sir R. _Richard Norman Shaw, R.A._ London, 1940.
Pevsner, N. ‘Richard Norman Shaw’, _Architectural Review_, LXXXIX
(1941), 41-6.
See also WEBB.
SOANE
Bolton, A. T. _The Works of Sir John Soane._ London, 1924.
Bolton, A. T. _The Portrait of Sir John Soane._ London, 1927.
Stroud, D. _The Architecture of Sir John Soane._ London [1961].
Summerson, J. N. ‘Soane: the Case-History of a Personal Style’,
_Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects_, LVIII
(1951), 83-9.
SOMMARUGA
_L’Architettura di Giuseppe Sommaruga._ Milan, 1908.
SOUFFLOT
Mondain-Monval, J. _Soufflot._ Paris, 1918.
STREET
Hitchcock, H. R. ‘G. E. Street in the 1850s’, _Journal of the Society
of Architectural Historians_, XIX (1960), 145-72.
Street, A. E. _Memoir of George Edmund Street._ London, 1888.
STRICKLAND
Gilchrist, A. A. _William Strickland: Architect and Engineer._
Philadelphia, 1950.
Gilchrist, A. A. ‘Additions to William Strickland _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians_, XIII (Oct., 1954), sup. 1-16.
STUART
Lawrence, L. ‘Stuart and Revett; their Literary and Architectural
Careers’, _Journal of the Warburg Institute_, II (1938), 128-46.
SULLIVAN
Connely, W. _Louis Sullivan as He Lived._ New York, 1960.
Morrison, H. _Louis Sullivan._ New York, 1952.
Sullivan, L. H. _The Autobiography of an Idea._ New York, 1953.
Sullivan, L. H. _Kindergarten Chats._ New York, 1947.
TELFORD
Gibb, A. _The Story of Telford._ London, 1935.
_Life of Thomas Telford, Civil Engineer, written by himself._ London,
1838.
Rolt, L. T. C. _Thomas Telford._ London, 1958.
TERRAGNI
Labò, M. _Giuseppe Terragni._ Milan, 1947.
THOMSON
Law, G. ‘Greek Thomson’, _Architectural Review_, CXVI (1954), 307-16.
TOWN & DAVIS
Newton, R. H. _Town and Davis: Architects._ New York, 1942.
UPJOHN
Upjohn, E. _Richard Upjohn, Architect and Churchman._ New York, 1939.
VAN DE VELDE