Architect Drawings : A Selection of Sketches by World Famous Architects Through History
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Sullivan, Louis (1856–1924)<br />
Study <strong>of</strong> ornamental frame for Richard Morris Hunt memorial portrait for Inland <strong>Architect</strong>,<br />
August 7, 1895, Avery <strong>Architect</strong>ural and Fine Arts Library, FLLW/LHS 123, 17 20.3cm,<br />
Pencil on paper<br />
Known for his ‘evolutionistic’ botanical style, Louis Sullivan was born in 1856 (Twombly and<br />
Menocal, 2000). He entered Massachusetts Institute <strong>of</strong> Technology in 1872. Sullivan was briefly<br />
employed <strong>by</strong> Frank Furness and later moved to Chicago to work with William Le Baron Jenny before<br />
enrolling at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in 1874. Disappointed <strong>by</strong> his experience in Vaudremer’s atelier,<br />
Sullivan instead spent his time studying Paris architecture and traveling to Rome and Florence. In 1879<br />
he started with Dankmar Adler as a freelance draughtsman in Chicago. This firm eventually became<br />
Adler and Sullivan and was influential in the development <strong>of</strong> the skyscraper and the building <strong>of</strong><br />
Chicago. Sullivan’s role in the firm involved the ‘composition <strong>of</strong> façades and the design <strong>of</strong> ornamentation’<br />
(Twombly and Menocal, 2000, p. 84).<br />
Upon the closing <strong>of</strong> his firm shortly before his death in 1924, Sullivan moved all <strong>of</strong> the firm’s architectural<br />
drawings to storage. Of these drawings, he retained approximately 100 sketches consisting<br />
largely <strong>of</strong> botanical and geometric ornament. These sketches make up the entirety <strong>of</strong> drawings <strong>by</strong><br />
Sullivan found in collections today (Twombly and Menocal, 2000). Why Sullivan chose these particular<br />
images is a matter <strong>of</strong> speculation. They may have reflected a more direct expression <strong>of</strong> his inspiration,<br />
creativity, or personal architectural style.<br />
Sullivan’s architectural style involved massive volumes contrasted with intricate ornamentation.<br />
Narcisco Menocal writes about Sullivan’s use <strong>of</strong> ornament: ‘Louis Sullivan’s concept <strong>of</strong> architectural<br />
and ornamental design was based on a belief that the universe was sustained <strong>by</strong> a cosmic rhythm.<br />
Change, flow, and one entity turning into another were effects <strong>of</strong> a universal becoming. … In that<br />
scheme, beauty emerges from a never-ending transformation <strong>of</strong> all things into new entities’ (Twombly<br />
and Menocal, 2000, p. 73). The ornament was, for Sullivan, an enhancing part <strong>of</strong> otherwise straightforward<br />
steel frame buildings.<br />
This study, from 1895, is an ornamental frame for the Richard Morris Hunt memorial portrait<br />
(Figure 4.4). It is typical <strong>of</strong> Sullivan’s studies for ornament, displaying intertwined organic shapes,<br />
composed <strong>of</strong> light guidelines with darker areas for detail. It appears to be a running band <strong>of</strong> foliage;<br />
the top edge and the indicated centerline suggest a linear pattern, one that would be repeated across<br />
the frame. This centerline reveals that the sketch is only half <strong>of</strong> the intended ornament. It was not<br />
necessary for Sullivan to complete the entire frieze, as he was able to make a judgment from a small<br />
section. This became his point <strong>of</strong> decision, whether to continue or reject the proposal. By using an<br />
underlying geometry, the ornate and complex foliage pattern could appear loose and haphazard, yet<br />
it could be precisely duplicated.<br />
When drawing the negative space (the shadows) rather than the positive outline <strong>of</strong> the foliage,<br />
Sullivan was simulating and testing a future three-dimensional effect. The sketch, consistently undeveloped<br />
across the page, resembles a doodling that did not need to be completed.<br />
Although this sketch represents only a small detail <strong>of</strong> ornament, it may be central to understanding<br />
Sullivan’s architecture. It seems to act as appliqué to the functional spaces, in such a way that the ornament<br />
becomes the skin on the steel frame. Sullivan’s buildings reflect the ‘organic’ on two different<br />
levels – in the way the architecture developed, and the allusions to nature found in the ornament. This,<br />
coupled with his desire to retain such sketches as evidence <strong>of</strong> his design, assists to understand the focus<br />
<strong>of</strong> Sullivan’s architecture (Andrews, 1985).<br />
107