Modern Architecture: Louis Sullivan and the refinement of the Chicago School

Chicago Illinois is top on the list of my favorite cities, not because it is in the vicinity of my hometown, nor for their delicious cuisines, but for its architecture and many skyscrapers thanks to a man named Louis Sullivan, one of the fathers of the Chicago School of tall buildings. He redefined the organization and hierarchy of the exterior and interior of tall office buildings through these three words “form follows function” or “form vs. function.” He gained this ideology about architecture by studying the concepts and philosophies of Ville le Duc and his beliefs on tectonic expression, Schelling and the Schlegel brothers and their view on works of art representing the product of an inner force, and the New England philosophical school of Transcendentalism and their organic principals, “all things in nature have shape…tell us what they are…distinguishes them from ourselves and from each other (Colquhoun, 2002pg. 111).” But was the refinement of skyscrapers really a necessity or was Sullivan nit picking and trying to define himself as an architect during career?

Standards for Tall Office Buildings

Architects of Sullivan’s time including himself in the beginning of his career, as seen in the Auditorium Building in Chicago, was designing skyscrapers using the following method. The 1^st story, which is below ground, will usually contain the mechanical equipment such as the boilers, heating, cooling, lighting and other various machines. The 2^nd story, the ground or main floor, is normally devoted to commercial and retail use, providing an ample amount of space, lighting, and a huge entrance access. The 3^rd story, which is the second story of the building, is accessible by stairs or elevator, is usually sectioned into large subdivisions, “with corresponding liberality in structural spacing and expanse of glass and breadth of external openings (Sullivan, 1988pg. 105).” The 4^th story, consist of a couple of floors that house offices, one floor of offices stack on another floor of offices, one office looks just like all the other offices in this building. The 5^th story, the attic, was located at the very top of the tall building, normally grand expressing the metaphor of ascending and descending. This space is also normally filled with pipes, tanks, valves, sheaves, and other mechanical equipment (Sullivan, 1988pg 105).

Sullivan's Critiques

Two buildings which Sullivan criticized about its exterior and interior designs flaws as a result of following the above design method, was the Auditorium Building by Dankmar Adler and himself and the Tacoma Building by William Holabird and Martin Roche:

Sullivan felt that if the Auditorium Building had a weakness, it would be that the building failed to reflect its programs since every floor functioned the same (Colquhoun, 2002pg. 39). This building was a mixed use building (the first mixed use building), housing a theater, hotel, and offices under one roof (University). Base off the buildings appearance you would never guess that an auditorium was in this building or where it might be located, even though most might say its location would be near the front because of the detail on the entrance but it is actually located a couple of floors below the tower, according to this section cut of the building. When comparing the building to the section, by people who pass by this building would never had guest that the building consist of these different programs, shifts, and functions. This section cut definitely is more visually interesting and upholds more information about the building than its exterior.

Auditorium Building, Chicago, IL by Adler and Sullivan

Floor plan of the Auditorium Building

Section View of the Auditorium Building

Interior View of the Auditorium's Theater

According to Sullivan, Tacoma Building suffered a fault opposite of the one seen in the Auditorium Building, the similarity of functions was expressed but it lacked this expression on the exterior of the building making it seem like it is just a succession of floors found in the interior (Colquhoun, 2002pg. 39). I agree the building really does look like a succession of floors, it has some unique qualities but it seemed like whatever the unique quality was on the first floor was replicated on all of the other floors, leaving no hierarchy among the building. The only floors that seem to be different on the exterior were the main floor and the top floor or the attic.

Tacoma Building by William Holabird and Martin Roche, Chicago, IL

The Critics View on His Concept

Many adored Sullivan’s theories and ideas on structural organization and hierarchy, form vs. function but was not found about the facade of the building displaying all of these elements, they thought it would cause confusion to the visual eye. “the tall office building should not, must not, be made a field for the display of architectural knowledge in the encyclopedic sense; that too much learning in this instance is fully as dangerous, as obnoxious, as too little learning; that miscellany is abhorrent to their sense; that the sixteen story building must not consist of sixteen separate, distinct and unrelated buildings piled one upon the other until the top of the pile is reached (Sullivan, 1988pg 110).” For those who knew little about architecture design, felt that they would not be able to understand the visual appearance of Sullivan’s buildings. After listening to their critiques on Sullivan’s concepts, readers would infer that his design would mostly be used to define himself as an architect and not the era or to solve the social problems of society.

The Perfect Skyscraper

Sullivan thought yes architects of tall office buildings have been given a organization principal to follow while designing buildings of these sort, but why can it not be a functional maybe even a structural reason behind these standards? In his Wainwright Building in St. Louis he really executed this idea of form vs. function within the typical organization of skyscrapers. He focused on emphasizing two main stories the base, which is the main floor, and the attic and piling floors in the middle. Instead of following the structural principals of the column spacing he reduced the spacing size of the pilaster to the width size of a single window. “In doing this, he produce a phalanx of verticals that could be read simultaneously as columns and as mullions, as structure and as ornament (Colquhoun, 2002pg 41-42).” His manipulation with the columns did away with expectation of classical mathematical proportions and meaningless ornamentation among tall office buildings. His design truly made this building seems like it was ascending and descending from the heavens. By allowing the interior influencing the shape of the exterior, the building looked more structurally sound and even the people outside his profession could understand structure, materiality, and ornamentation that develop this building.

Wainwright Building by Adler and Sullivan

ornamentation as an extension of structure

floors stacked on top of these steel columns/mullions

Was it Necessary?

Toward the end of his career he ended his partnership with Adler, who consistently brought in new business and partnerships for their firm, and as a result building commissions began coming in slow. Many of his projects reduced to smaller scale designs like banks and small shopping malls, but his ideas on form vs. function continued to live, inspiring other architects and design movements like Frank Lloyd Wright, who work for Sullivan in his early career and Art Nouveau with the Wainwright Building (first modern skyscraper) and Carson Pirie Scott building. No longer do architects design according to an exterior organization that has nothing to do with the space, function, and activities of the interior of the building. No longer will a building seem like a waste, a lost canvas full off meaningless work of art, nor unpleasing to the eye since it does not match its inner organs, its natural system. Nature is the essences of beauty to us because its organic form matches its complex functions; it tells us what it is before we know its function or story. Based off those facts, the organization and hierarchy of these extremely tall buildings needed to be redefined to become a true essence of beauty in its presence and solution to social problems when placed in our world. Sullivan was truly trying to better the social conditions of urban life through natural beauty and function; not defining himself as an extraordinary architect of his time.