Monastery at Large

It’s time to change your tired old story.

Category: Architects of Atlanta and the Southeast

  • “The Harmony Between Color and Music” (1884) by E.G. Lind

    The following text is the transcript of a presentation given at the 1884 convention of the American Institute of Architects by Edmund George Lind (1829-1909), professionally known as E.G. Lind, a British-born architect who spent most of his life and career in Baltimore, but practiced in Atlanta from 1883 to 1893.

    Although his work in Atlanta and the Southeast in the 1880s and 1890s was largely unremarkable, Lind was by all accounts a well-respected architect who sought to elevate the status of the entire profession, and before 1885 he was the only architect in Atlanta who was a member of the American Institute of Architects (AIA).

    Lind read the following paper on October 21, 1884, at the annual convention of the AIA, held in Nashville, Tennessee. The thesis has little to do with architecture, tenuously connecting the subjects of color and music in a meandering and mystical fashion that was popular in the late 19th century [G.L. Norrman‘s Architecture as Illustrative of Religious Belief is another prime example], and Lind makes numerous references to songs and music that are likely unfamiliar to modern readers.

    Lind further explored the topic of color in his 1892 article “Coloring of Rooms”, and in 1893, he wrote a paper entitled “A Few Words About Acoustics”, in which he stated that he designed music halls and concert rooms in dimensions based on the number 7. It’s in this paper, however, that Lind first explains his interest in the number 7, which he later referred to as “the symbol of perfection and completeness”.

    “The Harmony Between Color and Music”

    By E.G. Lind, F.A.I.A., Baltimore.

    “The harmony existing between color and music is so remarkable that it cannot fail to interest all who will give the subject a little attention, and the more it is investigated the more we shall be struck with its various correlations.

    The first quality noticeable, as harmonizing these two sciences, is the numeral one of 7. There being that number of natural colors, and the same of natural sounds. And in this connection it may be proper to direct attention for one moment to the pregnant use of this number throughout the history of the world. In the earliest writings with which we are familiar, the Holy Scriptures, it occupies a very conspicuous position, beginning with a hallowing of a seventh day as a Sabbath of rest upon earth, and ending in the pouring out of the seven vials of wrath upon the people. Pharaoh, you know, dreamed of and experienced a seven years of plenty and seven of famine, Naaman was directed to wash seven times in the river Jordan that he might be cleansed of his leprosy. Joshua besieged Jericho with seven Priests sounding seven trumpets, as during seven days they marched seven times round the walls of the doomed city. The great feast of the Jews was held seven days, commencing on the seventh day of the seven month of the seventh year. And many other instances might be cited where this particular number is alluded to. Our very existence seems to be in some mysterious way connected with it, for on the seventh day, the pulse of humanity beats slower and feebler than on the other six days. Diseases change for better or worse on the seventh day, and we are told that every seventh year our whole bodily system is renewed. Several works have been written bearing upon this special subject, and it is quite possible that 7 may be a complete and perfect number in some way governing and pervading all natural science, for it is not an unreasonable presumption that the Creator worked upon some definite plan which may form the key to the whole design.

    To proceed with our analogy [diagram exhibited of solar spectrum and colored side of music].

    In the solar spectrum we have seven colors. Red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo and violet, which we call the natural colors. In music we have seven sounds, do, re, me, fa, sol, la, and si [ti], which we term natural sounds. To form a complete chromatic scale of sound, we need five other notes, viz: do sharp, re sharp, fa sharp, sol sharp and la sharp, so that the seven natural sounds are increased to twelve. A correlation will be found in the color scale, as red merges into orange, orange into yellow, green into blue, blue into indigo and indigo into violet, so that we have complete and correspondingly harmonious chromatic scales both of music and color.

    The natural scale of do in music has been so named because the human voice is almost universally tuned in that key, and the first note of that scale, do, gives out two hundred and forty vibrations to convey the impression of that particular sound to the ear.

    In the next note, re, these vibrations are increased to two hundred and seventy, and so as we ascend the scale till the seventh note, si, is reached, when four hundred and fifty distinct vibrations are recorded. In short, the higher and more distant the note, the greater number of vibrations necessary to produce it.

    In color we find an analogy in the fact that the sensation of red is imparted to the eye by a certain number of vibrations of light, the second color, orange, by an increasing number of vibrations, and so on ascending the scale. These vibrations bearing the same harmonious correlation with reference to sound, although not the same in actual numbers, and as in sound the deeper tones are the near ones, so in color the warmer tints composed of red are made use of by artists to depict nearness and the colder greys to obtain distant effects, thus blindly observing a natural law which we have endeavored to make clear in the diagrams presented, a law, too, entirely in harmony with the law of sound.

    We have previously stated that there are seven natural colors in the solar spectrum, but in reality there are only three; red, yellow and blue, which are known as the primary colors, the other four being merely combinations of the former. In our colored scale of music it will be seen that the chord do, mi, sol is formed by these three primary colors, and as the three sounds, or chord notes, form a key to the musical composition, so the three colors are the base and foundation for the whole system of color. Red and yellow producing orange; yellow and blue, green; and blue and red, indigo and violet. As well-known the three primaries commingled make black, and if the whole solar spectrum be rotated rapidly white light is produced.

    The two sciences being so much in accord, as we have shown, it might be presumed that what would please the ear would please the eye. If, therefore, a musical instrument should be so constructed that when played upon colored sounds would be produced, then we might expect lively music to produce bright colors; said tunes subdued and secondary colors, and doleful sounds, colors of a dull and sombre hue. Nay, even the national airs of a particular country might partake of the peculiar characteristics of its people. [These different characteristics illustrated by colored diagrams of various tunes, “Yankee Doodle”, “John Anderson, My Jo”, “Bethany”, “Windham”, etc., which fully sustained the foregoing theory, and especially so in the colored tune of “Auld Lang Syne”, which bore a remarkable resemblance to a Scotch plaid.]

    In preparing the various colored diagrams illustrating this paper, it was found that a piece of music colored in accordance with the rules of color could be successfully harmonized by a person wholly unacquainted with music, so long as he understood the said rules of color, for he would only have to apply notes with primary colors in opposition to primary colors and secondary colors to secondary, and he would produced as perfectly harmonized a piece of music as if he had been fully acquainted with thorough bass.

    As a country advances in civilization so does it advance artistic taste, it is no longer satisfied with the crude colors and tones of a ruder age, it seeks a higher plane, more complex, refined and intellectual. The primary colors and sounds are supplemented by others more complicated and aesthetic; the possibilities of each science is pushed to the extreme, every combination of tone and semi-tone in music and every shade and tint in color is made subservient to higher demands, and pleasures are imparted which could not possibly have been realized in the earlier stages of civilization.

    [Diagram in illustration “Sullivan‘s Lost Chord“.]

    In short, so allied are the sciences of color and music that it is possible to give a color to every sound and a sound to every color. All the intonations of the human voice can be easily depicted in color as on a violin, there is no limit to either, and symphonies in red and green, and idyls in blue and yellow are nearer of attainment than artists ever dreamed of or hoped for. [Diagram exhibited of a “Child’s Wail” and “Lawyer’s Speech”.]

    Curious to trace the gradual development of color and music from the earliest to the present times. We examined a great number of examples of color, with the following results: Adhering to the harmonic number, 7, we selected that number of examples from many, and found that in the savage tribes the only colors known and used were red, yellow, white and black. The Egyptians added blue and green to this list, and so on upward through the Greek, Pompeian, Arabian, Middle Age and Renaissance periods there was a gradual accession of color, till in our own day we absorb all the colors of the spectrum and many more.

    Of the progress of musical sounds we have fewer opportunities for acquiring information. We know that among savage tribes few colors and sounds prevail, and these too of the most primitive characters. It is fair to assume color and music have kept on with equal step, hand in hand, neither in advance of the other so will they continue through the ages to the end, enobling and refining each other.

    One word for our own art. As “frozen music,” architecture is fairly entitled to a place beside her two lovely sisters; we have then the great civilizers of the world, architecture, music and painting, these three.

    In conclusion, it may be asked in relation this “Cui bono?” What good will it do? We cannot tell; we think it possible that these harmonies may be so utilized as to be productive of much good, if by means of seeing these colored notes the deaf mute can be made to understand something of the nature of sound, or if by hearing them a blind person can be given to understand something of the nature of color, a great good will have been accomplished; a new field will have been opened and new pleasures added to the few enjoyed, by two classes of suffering humanity whose afflictions naturally excite the kindly sympathy of all.”

  • Davison-Paxon-Stokes Department Store – Atlanta (1927)

    Davison-Paxon-Stokes Department Store – Atlanta (1927) – designed by Starrett & van Vleck with Hentz, Reid & Adler

  • In the Words of G.L. Norrman: On Clearing His Name

    The background: Following Norrman’s public airing of grievances [read the first, second, and third letters], the school board discovered there wasn’t enough money to begin construction on the boys’ high school as planned. The mayor urged the board to delay the school’s construction until the following year, but the board insisted on laying the foundation for the building with plans to resume construction when funds were available.

    In recounting the events, The Atlanta Constitution said “many declared that Mr. Norrman had won his fight”, and recalled his earlier letters, stating that “many interesting epithets were scattered around.” Norrman apparently disliked the insinuation and wrote “A Pointed and Picquant Card” which was published on October 28, 1894.

    Norrman’s remarks:

    Atlanta, Ga.
    October 27, 1894

    “Editor Constitution—

    The manner of alluding to my name in Friday’s issue ofThe Constitution, I think is apt to be misleading, in regard to my attitude to the board of education. I have the highest respect for the board as a whole. Most, if not all, of its members are my personal friends, but being specially educated as an architect, and having followed the profession for twenty-five years, I do not think it can be considered presumptuousness on my part, or a mark of disrespect, that I ventured to suggest that some of the members of the board do not indicate such a high training or natural genius as to make them reliable, as either literary or artistic critics.

    Only a feeling of kindness prompted me to suggest that some of the members might fill, with honor to themselves and profit to the community, one of many pursuits which requires only personal character, but not a high order of culture. I am always pained when I see any of my friends pretend to know what they do not know, as they thereby put themselves in the attitude of filling positions for which they are not qualified.

    I never indulge in epithets—to call people names is vulgar. The occupation which I suggested to some of the members, of attending to domestic animals, is a most honorable calling. Many pursuits are more profitable, but none is more useful to the community at large, unless it be that of a scavenger. He is the true philanthropist. He does the greatest good to the greatest number, without either profit, honor or glory. On him depends all health and strength of both body and mind, throughout all civilization.

    That I did not suggest an occupation of the highest usefulness, like the latter, was not on account of any intended slight, but simply that it did not occur to me at the time.

    The only act which may in any degree reflect on the board, as far as I know, is the action of the building committee in selecting a plan which is unsafe in construction, defective in its appointments, and which will cost, when finished, $10,000 more than any other plans submitted. That the building committee should be so anxious and hasty to fasten such a defective and expensive building on the community, by wishing to start the foundation of the building this year, seems specially strange, in view of the fact that the honorable mayor went especially before the board to call its attention to the depleted condition of the municipal exchequer, and urged that the building be deferred to the ensuing year.

    Very respectfully,

    G.L. NORRMAN.”

  • In the Words of G.L. Norrman: On Boys High School, Golucke & Stewart, and Captain J.C. Hendrix (1894)

    The background: Following the publication of Norrman’s previous letters [read the first and second], Captain Hendrix of the school board issued a bland, deferential statement praising both Golucke & Stewart’s and Norrman’s work. Golucke & Stewart wrote a catty letter in response to Norrman’s criticism of the firm and their plans, concluding: “We shall pay no further attention to his malicious attacks.”

    Norrman had his say again, in an article appropriately titled “Mr. Norrman Is Mad”, published in The Atlanta Constitution on September 6, 1894. This time, Norrman’s primary target was Captain Hendrix, whom he likened to an “assistant hog drover”.

    Norrman’s remarks:

    “Why, do you know that the attempts that have been made to answer my objections to the plans selected through the public prints, have amounted to nothing. I objected to those plans first, because they were imperfect and not suitable. My objection then was that of an architect. But now that the committee has selected those plans I object to them as a citizen of Atlanta and as a taxpayer. The building erected by those plans will not only be unsuitable, but it will be unsafe. That building, I tell you, would not be safe for school purposes, and as a citizen I have a right to object to them.

    Norrman continued his rant with another letter:

    Editor Constitution—

    The card in this morning’s paper answers none of the complaints in regard to the defects in the adopted plans for the boys’ high school.

    Architecture is a combination of art and science which requires many years of study to comprehend, and any one who reflects for a moment will see how very difficult it is to learn architecture and how subtle the principles are on which it is based, as only a few can, after a lifetime study, design a building which will bear professional criticism, but only very ordinary training is necessary to see the defects which are pointed out in the design adopted for the boys’ high school.

    Captain Hendrix says in his letter that he can see no defects in the plans adopted. I never thought that he could see them. In fact, I believe that he has not the slightest conception of anything which pertains to culture, and would be a much more useful member of the community in the position of assistant hog drover to the president of the board of education than that of chairman of the building committee. I think he could see when pigs were well fed, and he would not then be in a position to waste the public funds or to jeopardize the lives of the occupants of the building.

    As to the card by Golucke & Stewart, I do not blame them for pretending to be architects as long as people will give them work in that line. The idea which I wanted to convey in the former interview was not a reflection on the competency of Golucke & Stewart as architects, but rather a reflection on the culture of those who recommended them.

    Very respectfully,”

    G.L. NORRMAN

  • In the Words of G.L. Norrman: On Golucke & Stewart

    The background: As part of his ongoing dispute with the Atlanta school board, G.L. Norrman had choice words for the architectural firm of Golucke & Stewart. Norrman’s public criticism was unprofessional, but his assessment of the designers was correct, and frankly, not harsh enough.

    Almost nothing is known of Stewart, but J.W. Golucke was a self-proclaimed architect from rural Georgia with no formal training or discernible skill. He was little more than a con artist who, throughout his career, managed to successfully swindle the good-ol’ boys of 27 Georgia counties and 4 Alabama counties, where he produced a string of courthouses that were sloppily designed and hideously styled, and in several cases so poorly constructed that they posed the risk of catastrophic failure.

    Golucke died pathetically in 1907, a few weeks after trying to kill himself in a southwest Georgia jail, where he was being held on charges of — no surprise — forgery.

    Every known design by Golucke & Stewart shows consistently clumsy and crude work, and the plan for Atlanta’s boys’ high school was no exception. Norrman shared his opinion of the firm in The Atlanta Constitution for a September 5, 1894, article entitled “In Harsh Terms”.

    Norrman’s remarks:

    “Why, those plans which the building committee have accepted are a monstrosity in architecture, and the building should not be allowed to go up that way. No building should be erected in which valuable space is thrown away when it could be easily utilized. In fact, it could more easily be utilized than thrown away, as it is by these plans.

    You should know that plans cannot be examined and passed upon except by one who knows architectural work thoroughly. Now, the tracing of those lines to the members of that committee were no more than the marks in India ink on a man’s arm. It is not meant for a reflection upon the members of the board or that committee when I say that, but it is said to show that they have simply made a mistake, and a mistake which should be corrected.

    Now, Mr. Golucke does not pretend, as I understand it, to be an architect, but attends the building or contract work. Mr. Stewart is no architect: he is simply a tracer of lines. That’s about all, and cannot do anything more than make a nice picture. It was the picture, maybe, that caught the members of the committee which awarded the contract. Why, take for instance that stairway. To come from the second to the first floor there is but one, you may say, while from the third to the second there are two. Suppose all of those who might happen to be on the third floor should rush for an escape. On the second floor they would be joined or augmented by all on that floor. The reverse should be the case. Then, the way the designs read, a great deal of good space is lost that might be utilized, while the plan of ventilation is bad.”

  • In the Words of G.L. Norrman: On the Plan for Boys’ High School (1894)

    The background: One of G.L. Norrman‘s most bitter public disputes — and there were several — unfolded in 1894, when plans that he and other legitimate Atlanta architects had submitted for the construction of the new Boys’ High School were passed over in favor of one designed by Golucke & Stewart, a substandard architectural firm even by Atlanta standards.

    1893 Illustration of proposed Boys’ High School in Atlanta – designed by Golucke & Stewart

    Norrman had been shown the winning plans by Captain J.C. Hendrix, chairman of the school building committee, and was disgusted by what he found, writing a letter of opposition to the chairman of the school board, D.A. Beattie, in which he expressed his issues with the winning plans in exacting detail.

    Norrman apparently sent a copy to The Atlanta Constitution, which published the letter on September 5, 1894, in an article appropriately entitled “In Harsh Terms”.

    Norrman’s remarks:

    Atlanta, Ga.,
    August 25, 1894

    Mr. D.A. Beatie, City,

    “Dear Sir:

    The plans for the Boys’ High school were shown me yesterday by Captain Hendrix, and I find—

    1. That the size of the building is much larger than the plans submitted by me, which will make it cost at least $5,000 more than my plan would have cost, and yet it has not as many appointments, which shows that there is a great deal of waste space in the plan accepted.
    2. The ventilation is not as good, as only corner rooms in the accepted plan have windows on more than one side.
    3. The accepted plan being four stories, makes it very much more inconvenient, and besides makes it very dangerous in case of fire, not only on account of its extra height, but on account of the stairway running zigzag so that one flight of stair does not come over the one below; especially so with the stairway leading to the public hall. So entirely different plans will have to be made, as the fire department and building inspectors will doubtless condemn the plan on account of the great fire risk.
    4. The hall cannot be constructed without using columns to support the ceiling, and is not high enough for a gymnasium, which will make it practically useless.
    5. The design is an architectural monstrosity, and will be a lasting reflection on the judgment of the board of education. If education is of any value at all, it is to adduce such qualities and surrounding as are in conformity with good taste, and I think among well-informed people, bad taste in architecture is more offensive than unconventional manners or incorrect speaking or writing. So it is of the greatest advantage that children should have training and correct architectural forms. To debauch children’s taste is about as bad as to debauch their morals, as taste and morals can hardly be separated.

    Believing that the board came to the decision without thorough examination into the designs submitted, I respectfully request that you allow me a hearing before the board. I feel sure that the result would be a reconsideration of your decision, as the plan submitted by myself should be accepted on account of less cost, superior appointment, better ventilation and greater safety in case of fire, and account of its architectural merit.

    As this is a matter of high public importance, I respectfully urge this request and ask you to lay it before the board at your earliest convenience. Not having seen any other plans, what I have said refers only to the plans adopted. There may be other plans of more merit than mine.”

    G.L. NORRMAN

  • J.M. Beath House – Inman Park, Atlanta (1890)

    J.M. Beath House – Inman Park, Atlanta (1890) – designed by A.M.C. Nixon

    The Queen Anne-style J.M. Beath House in Atlanta’s Inman Park neighborhood, better known as the Beath-Dickey House, is the only known extant work by A.M.C. Nixon, an architect who began his practice in Texas circa 18811,2 and first appeared in Atlanta in 1888.3

    In late 1890, Nixon partnered with J.M.P. Lindsey under the name Nixon & Lindsey.4 The firm dissolved in 18945, shortly before a court trial in which the pair were acquitted on charges of larceny after trust stemming from their supervision of a home’s construction in 1891.6,7,8,9 The client had accused the pair of pocketing money intended for the contractors, but the matter was successfully proven to be a simple accounting error.8

    After the trial, Nixon’s work in Atlanta dwindled, and in July 1896, his personal possessions and business contents were sold at public auction to pay off debt.10 Apparently in poor health, he moved to England in July 1896, where he died that October.11

    Nixon was not an especially good designer, and the Beath House’s clumsy, top-heavy design is typical of his oeuvre. In 1891, he also designed the similarly styled D.H. Dougherty House12 (demolished), which has been erroneously attributed to both G.L. Norrman and W.L. Stoddart. Atlanta really doesn’t know its own history.

    References

    1. “San Sada.” The Galveston Daily News, May 15, 1881, p. 1.
    2. “Twenty-Five Cent Column”. The Austin Daily Statesman, June 2, 1881, p. 3.
    3. “From Our Notebooks.” The Atlanta Constitution, October 1, 1888, p. 4.
    4. “Wanted.” The Atlanta Journal, November 15, 1890, p. 7.
    5. “A Dissolution of Copartnership.” The Atlanta Constitution, April 4, 1894, p. 3.
    6. “Architects On Trial.” The Atlanta Journal, June 21, 1894, p. 1.
    7. “The Architect Not Guilty.” The Atlanta Journal, June 22, 1894, p. 3.
    8. “Mr. Nixon Not Guilty.” The Atlanta Constitution, June 23, 1894, p. 5.
    9. “The Case Dismissed.” The Atlanta Journal, June 23, 1894, p. 9.
    10. “Public Sale of Personal Valuable Property”. The Atlanta Journal, June 15, 1896, p. 2.
    11. “Mr. A. McC Nixon Dead.” The Atlanta Journal, October 26, 1896, p. 5.
    12. The Southern Architect, June 1895, Vol. 6, No. 8, p. 167.

  • Denmark Hall – Athens, Georgia (1902)

    Denmark Hall – Athens, Georgia (1902)

    One of G.L. Norrman‘s least interesting works, Denmark Hall at the University of Georgia in Athens has always been something of a bastard stepchild.

    Tucked in a dark corner of the campus near South Lumpkin Street, the structure was designed primarily as a dining hall containing two adjoining 1,296-square-foot dining rooms, and initially accommodated 144 students.1

    The structure was built concurrently with nearby Candler Hall, and named for B.A. Denmark of Savannah2, a University of Georgia alumnus and the chairman of the building committee for the university’s Board of Trustees, who died in June 1901, just weeks after approving Norrman’s plans,3 and one day before the building’s cornerstone ceremony.4

    Denmark had secured $45,000 from the Georgia legislature to fund the 2 buildings,5 but one of Norrman’s original plans called for combining the dining hall and dormitory into one structure — the committee rejected that proposal.6

    Candler Hall subsequently received the bulk of the funding — $28,0007 — and most of Norrman’s attention, it seems. Denmark Hall was reportedly built for less than half that amount: $12,850.8

    The Design

    Illustration of Denmark Hall – Athens, Georgia (1902) – designed by G.L. Norrman9

    Low-slung and utilitarian, Denmark Hall was designed with a central 2-story structure that originally housed the dining rooms, flanked by a large one-story kitchen on the back, and a small one-story wing on the front, containing a sitting room, lounge, and small recessed entry porch. Storage rooms were located in the basement.10

    The second floor included the “matron’s room” — living quarters for the dining hall manager — and “three other rooms for the use of students who may be sick enough to need such care and attention as they can be given there”, according to the Atlanta Constitution.11 A spacious recessed porch spanned the front of the second floor.

    The exterior of the building was clad in stucco-covered brick scored to resemble stone, and given Neoclassical touches.

    Intact original elements include:

    • A simple Tuscan cornice around the main structure
    • A composite cornice on the front wing
    • Smooth pilasters on the front wing
    • Mullioned windows on the front wing
    • 4 chimneys

    Original elements that have been removed include:

    • The second-floor porch
    • 7 Doric columns
      • 2 decorative columns framing the entry
      • 5 supporting columns spaced across the second-floor porch
    • A balustrade lining the roof of the front wing
    • Dormer windows on the front and sides

    Denmark Hall’s facade evolved from Norrman’s design for the Arthur B.M. Gibbes House in Savannah, Georgia, completed in 1900. The Gibbes home is one of the most atrocious designs Norrman ever put his name to, and Denmark Hall wasn’t much better.

    Arthur B.M. Gibbes House – Savannah, Georgia (1900) – designed by G.L. Norrman

    By the turn of the 20th century, Norrman had all but abandoned the brash, soaring lines and elements of his earlier designs: the lofty towers, fantastically high roofs, oversized porches and gables, and prominent chimneys. The transition was partly due to changing tastes, but also reflected a severely depressed economy and Norrman’s own dwindling fortunes.

    Looking at his projects circa 1897-1900, it’s clear that Norrman had lost confidence, inspiration, and interest: his designs from the time were often sluggish and banal, many of them poor rehashes of his earlier, more successful works. The Gibbes House was one such project, a clunky reiteration of his design for the Milton Dargan House in Atlanta.

    For Denmark Hall, Norrman took the template for the Dargan and Gibbes facades and stretched it out. The entry porch from those designs remained, but the Palladian windows on each side were swapped for simpler versions. The small recessed porch from the previous plans was expanded across the second floor, and the 2 large dormer windows from the Dargan house were shrunk to fit the building’s reduced height.

    Norrman was a master of working with solids and voids in his compositions, and in his design for Denmark Hall, you can easily spot his technique. It was as if he had removed a block of space from the second floor and placed it at the foot of the building, creating both the upper porch and the lower front wing — a simple but effective trick to achieve visual balance.

    The building’s overall composition would have been stronger if it had remained faithful to the design shown in the original rendering (above), which included a higher roofline.

    Why Norrman altered the roof to a lower pitch is unclear, but a vintage photograph of the building (below) shows that the large porch columns and wide chimneys depicted in the illustration were substituted with thinner versions to accommodate the altered design, robbing the composition of much-needed vigor.

    Vintage postcard view of Denmark Hall, date unknown12

    Construction and History

    Construction on Denmark Hall began circa May 1901,13 using convict labor loaned by Clarke County.14 Twenty years earlier, Norrman left Spartanburg, South Carolina, in part — it was later reported — because of that city’s use of convict labor to build his Spartan Inn project. If Norrman had any objections to the practice in Athens, there is no record of it.

    However, there is a report from June 1901 that the university’s Board of Trustees had concerns about the quality of the building materials used in Denmark Hall and Candler Hall, which the Atlanta Constitution remarked were “without weight, the architect demonstrating to the satisfaction of the board that the material was all right.”15

    Denmark Hall’s cornerstone was laid on June 14, 1901,16 and a July report from “Supt. McKinly” stated that work was expected to be completed on both buildings by late October.17 Instead, Denmark and Candler Halls opened simultaneously on January 7, 1902. With delays blamed on weather and the holidays, construction on the buildings ran to the last minute, and their completion delayed the start of the school semester by 4 days.18

    In Denmark Hall’s first year of operation, students were charged a whopping $7.50 to $8 a month for meals.19 The original “matron” of the facility was Mrs. B.H. Kinnebrew.20 She resigned in March 1908,21 after her husband, a sheriff’s deputy, shot and killed himself with a .44 caliber pistol “from no known cause” in their apartment on the building’s second floor.22 23

    By that time, students had already begun referring to Denmark Hall as “the Beanery”,24 an inglorious name that stuck with the structure for decades. By 1910, with the school’s halls overflowing, part of the second floor was converted to dormitory space,25 a function it served through at least the early 1920s.

    Norrman never seemed too concerned about planning his structures for anticipated growth: he publicly railed against “waste space” and consistently designed his interiors to be as compact as functionally possible. His design for Denmark Hall was no exception, and in November 1902, a newspaper report on the college’s record-breaking attendance stated that “every chair at the Denmark Dining Hall has been filled.”26

    By 1903, seating was increased to 160,27 and in 1908, the hall reportedly served 253 students, with the Board of Trustees asking the governor and legislature for “increased facilities at Denmark Hall.”28 In 1911, a report stated that the building was “taxed to its capacity”, requiring “enlargement and better equipment.”29

    Attendance at the school continued growing, and despite consistent requests for funding, Denmark Hall remained the only dining option on campus for more than 20 years. In 1914, the Athens Daily Herald reported that “the Beanery is crowded again this year”, adding “we hope that the legislature will be able to make appropriations to enlarge the dining hall.”30

    In 1921, the Athens Daily Banner lamented: “Not only is the dining room crowded but the matter of cooking for 350 people in a kitchen equipped for two-thirds that number and not well equipped at that is taxing Mrs. Kennebrew’s [sic]most skillful management.”31 Apparently, Mrs. Kinnebrew returned.

    Finally, with the opening of Memorial Hall in June 1924, the campus gained additional dining space,32 although Denmark Hall remained the primary facility for that purpose.

    In 1936, Denmark Hall received its first expansion: a small cafeteria seating 92 students.33 34The cafeteria wing was attached to the southwest corner of the building,35 and its exterior appearance is remarkably congruent with Norrman’s design. The basement was also remodeled during the expansion.36

    The cafeteria plan quickly gained popularity, and in 1938, Denmark Hall became the first dining space on campus to switch entirely to the cafeteria system,37 ending the era of “food served in the old manner”, which required the employment of waiters.38 In 1939, Mrs. M.D. Dunlap became the new director and dietitian of Denmark Hall,39 40 and she and her husband, a professor at the college, took up residence on the second floor. At some point in their residency, Professor Dunlap began a garden on the roof of the front wing.41

    In 1942 and 1943, Denmark Hall received multiple additions to accommodate the feeding of 1,200 Signal Corps troops who trained on the University of Georgia campus in preparation for World War II.42 43 44The first expansion was an annex hastily added to the kitchen in 1942, expanding its size by a third.45 In 1943, four small additions were made to the building, including 2 screened porches.46 In September 1943, the Signal Corps school was closed,47 and the dining hall returned to student use.48 49

    With over $10,000 in improvements, the remodeled Denmark Hall was touted as “one of the most modern cafeterias on any campus in the South”,50 although that appears to have been hyperbole. In 1945, the university president reported to the Georgia general assembly that the building was “outmoded and inadequate”. 51 52

    In 1948, after 10 years living on the second floor, Professor Dunlap moved to Atlanta, leaving his rooftop garden at Denmark Hall “wiltering”, according to one report.53 Seizing the opportunity, the college’s department of landscape architecture took over the building’s second floor, creating 3 draft rooms.54

    Since 1938, the landscape architecture department had been based at the Lumpkin House,55 56 a small antebellum residence that still stands on campus. With 75 students enrolled in the program,57 the new space in Denmark Hall was a much-needed addition to accommodate the department’s growth.

    East side of Denmark Hall

    In 1955, a popular student hangout spot called the Co-Op moved to Denmark Hall’s basement, which included a soda fountain, snack bar and grill, and a supply store. For the Co-Op’s occupation of the space, the basement was air-conditioned and refinished in knotty pine.58 59

    The rest of the building was not air-conditioned, however, and was reportedly “in bad shape”. In 1952, an inspection committee identified Denmark Hall as one of several buildings “in need of extensive repairs”.60 First-hand accounts of the Beanery at the time were unpleasant: students described it as “drab old Denmark Hall”,61 where “…to find your food during the warm months, you have to push literally dozens of flies from your plate”.62 Savory.

    With the opening of a new cafeteria in nearby Memorial Hall, the last meal at Denmark Hall was served on March 14, 1956, ending 55 years of continuous food service.63 64

    The university had previously announced its plans to demolish Denmark Hall,65 66 but the building was instead spared and given an extensive $40,000 overhaul for use as the landscape architecture department’s new home.67 68

    Primarily designed by E.C. Weren, a member of the landscape architecture faculty, Denmark Hall’s renovation was not kind to Norrman’s original design, and included the demolition of most of the original kitchen, a complete overhaul of the interior, enclosure of the second-floor porch, an outdoor stairwell tacked on to the west side of the building, air conditioning, and “extensive use of screen walls and glass”.69 This also appears to be when the columns, dormers, and balustrade were removed from the exterior, as they were still present in a photograph from 1951.70 The renovated building officially reopened on October 16, 1957.71

    The Co-Op remained in the basement during Denmark Hall’s renovation and was expanded,72 73 74 but in 1963 it was unceremoniously shuttered for full occupation by the landscape architecture department.75 On October 6, 1964, the building officially reopened again, the basement now housing a model shop, blueprint room, dark room, drafting room, and 2 classrooms. The basement renovation reportedly cost $100,000, more than twice the amount spent on the entire building 7 years earlier.76

    Denmark Hall’s 1964 renovation was its last substantial alteration, although it has received piecemeal alterations and upgrades for decades. As of 2025, the building remains in use by the landscape architecture department’s successor, the College of Environment + Design.

    Essentially nothing of Denmark Hall’s original interior remains, but if you stand outside and squint your eyes, you can still make out the form of Norrman’s design.

    While Candler Hall received a beautiful renovation in 2003,77 the University of Georgia has shown little appetite to renovate its less-attractive sibling, which can still be accurately described as “drab old Denmark Hall”.

    The College of Environment + Design’s 2025 strategic plan included the vague goal to “renovate Denmark Hall as a cutting-edge teaching facility” with the added caveat of “funds permitting”.78 That doesn’t sound very promising, does it?

    References

    1. “Plan of University Buildings Complete”. The Atlanta Constitution, April 24, 1901, p. 1. ↩︎
    2. “Named in Honor of B.A. Denmark.” The Athens Daily Banner, June 22, 1901, p. 3. ↩︎
    3. “Plans Accepted by the Trustees”. The Athens Daily Banner, April 13, 1901, p. 3. ↩︎
    4. “Profound Gloom on the Campus”. The Athens Daily Banner, June 14, 1901, p. 3. ↩︎
    5. The Twenty-Ninth Annual Report from the Department of Education to the General Assembly of the State of Georgia. Atlanta: The Franklin Printing and Publishing Company, 1901 ↩︎
    6. “To Discuss Buildings.” Savannah Morning News, April 12, 1901, p. 10. ↩︎
    7. “Plan of University Buildings Complete”. The Atlanta Constitution, April 24, 1901, p. 1. ↩︎
    8. “Denmark Hall.” The Red and Black, April 28, 1903, p. 2. ↩︎
    9. The Twenty-Ninth Annual Report from the Department of Education to the General Assembly of the State of Georgia. Atlanta: The Franklin Printing and Publishing Company, 1901 ↩︎
    10. “Plan of University Buildings Complete”. The Atlanta Constitution, April 24, 1901, p. 1. ↩︎
    11. ibid. ↩︎
    12. Doster, Gary L. A Postcard History of Athens, Georgia. Athens, Georgia: Athens Historical Society (2002). ↩︎
    13. “Notice to Contractors.” Athens Daily Banner, April 23, 1901, p. 3. ↩︎
    14. McManus, Rebecca, Alexandra Green, and Sophia Latz. Denmark Hall Historic Structure Report. ↩︎
    15. “Board of Trustees Make Full Report”. The Atlanta Constitution, June 17, 1901, p. 2. ↩︎
    16. “The Program for Today.” The Athens Daily Banner, June 14, 1901, p. 4. ↩︎
    17. “Work Resumed on Students Mess Hall.” The Weekly Banner (Athens, Georgia), July 19, 1901, p. 7. ↩︎
    18. “University Opens Again on Jan. 7.” The Weekly Banner (Athens, Georgia), January 3, 1902, p. 1. ↩︎
    19. “For Sons of Farmers”. The Oglethorpe Echo (Lexington, Georgia), November 22, 1901, p. 8. ↩︎
    20. “Mrs. Kinnebrew To Be In Charge”. The Weekly Banner (Athens, Georgia), September 13, 1901, p. 7. ↩︎
    21. “Editorial Notes”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), March 14, 1908, p. 2. ↩︎
    22. “Athens.” The Jackson Herald (Jefferson, Georgia), March 12, 1908, p. 4. ↩︎
    23. The Hartwell Sun (Hartwell, Georgia), March 13, 1908, p. 6. ↩︎
    24. “Editorial Notes”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), March 14, 1908, p. 2. ↩︎
    25. “Flames Broke Out In Denmark Hall”. The Athens Banner, April 9, 1910, p. 1. ↩︎
    26. “University Letter.” The Danielsville Monitor (Danielsville, Georgia), November 28, 1902, p. 2. ↩︎
    27. “Denmark Hall.” The Red and Black, April 28, 1903, p. 2. ↩︎
    28. “School Gets $75,000”. The Clayton Tribune (Clayton, Georgia), June 18, 1908, p. 1. ↩︎
    29. “A Large Equipment Necessary.” The Athens Banner, October 5, 1911, p. 4. ↩︎
    30. “Denmark Hall too Small”. The Athens Daily Herald. October 12, 1914, p. 5. ↩︎
    31. “Feeding Summer School Attend Ants Expertly”. The Athens Daily Banner, July 8, 1921, p. 5. ↩︎
    32. “Memorial Hall Is Dedicated Tuesday to Georgia’s Dead.” The Banner-Herald (Athens, Georgia), June 17, 1924, p. 1. ↩︎
    33. “Cafeteria Annex Opened at Denmark Dining Hall”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia). October 2, 1936, p. 10. ↩︎
    34. “Registration Reaches 2,815 for Fall Term To Break Old Mark”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), October 2, 1936, p. 1. ↩︎
    35. McManus, Rebecca, Alexandra Green, and Sophia Latz. Denmark Hall Historic Structure Report. ↩︎
    36. “Cafeteria Annex Opened at Denmark Dining Hall”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia). October 2, 1936, p. 10. ↩︎
    37. “Building Program Will Be Completed In About 60 Days”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), September 27, 1940, p. 19. ↩︎
    38. “Views Around Georgia”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), November 6, 1936, p. 4. ↩︎
    39. “House Mothers Add ‘Home Atmosphere’ In Joe Brown and Milledge Dormitories”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), September 29, 1939, p. 16. ↩︎
    40. “Cafeteria Is Seeking Home Atmosphere”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), September 29, 1939, p. 17. ↩︎
    41. Abney, George Jr. “Professor-Gardener Proves Drab Spaces Can Be Useful”. Athens Banner-Herald, September 22, 1948, p. 7. ↩︎
    42. “Denmark Hall Enlarged to Feed Armed Forces”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), March 6, 1942, p. 1. ↩︎
    43. “Additions Being Made to ‘Beanery’”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), July 9, 1943, p. 1. ↩︎
    44. Marshall, George. “Campus Construction Now Under Full Speed”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), July 31, 1942, p. 1. ↩︎
    45. “Denmark Hall Enlarged to Feed Armed Forces”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), March 6, 1942, p. 1. ↩︎
    46. “Additions Being Made to ‘Beanery’”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), July 9, 1943, p. 1. ↩︎
    47. “Signal Corps School Here Is To Be Closed September 24”. Athens Banner-Herald, July 11, 1943, p. 1. ↩︎
    48. “Denmark Hall Opens in Fall For Students”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), August 13, 1943, p. 1. ↩︎
    49. “Denmark Hall”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), August 13, 1943, p. 2. ↩︎
    50. “Denmark Hall Opens in Fall For Students”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), August 13, 1943, p. 1. ↩︎
    51. “$4,820,000 Appropriation Needed by University For Post-War Buildings”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), July 27, 1945, p. 1. ↩︎
    52. “A Step Forward”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), July 27, 1945, p. 2. ↩︎
    53. Abney, George Jr. “Professor-Gardener Proves Drab Spaces Can Be Useful”. Athens Banner-Herald, September 22, 1948, p. 7. ↩︎
    54. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), October 1, 1948, p. 8. ↩︎
    55. “Landscape Architecture Graduates Plan Departmental Homecoming Next Fall.” The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), May 27, 1938, p. 2. ↩︎
    56. “Alumni To Move To Lumpkin House”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), May 23, 1957, p. 3. ↩︎
    57. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), October 1, 1948, p. 8. ↩︎
    58. “Student Co-Op To Move Into Denmark Basement”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), October 21, 1954, p. 1. ↩︎
    59. “Co-Op To Move Monday Into Denmark Basement”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), January 7, 1955, p. 1. ↩︎
    60. “House Sub-Committee Reports On University Inspection Tour”, Athens Banner-Herald, January 21, 1952, p. 2. ↩︎
    61. Bradford, Bob. “Soup a la Fly”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), January 7, 1954, p. 4. ↩︎
    62. Branch, Roger. “Let’s Eat–Better”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), May 20, 1954, p. 4. ↩︎
    63. “Student Union Re-Opening Hailed By Early Christening Ceremonies”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), March 23, 1956, p. 1. ↩︎
    64. “Denmark Dining Hall Ends After 50 Years Service”. Athens Banner-Herald, March 13, 1956, p. 1. ↩︎
    65. “New Dining Hall Approved”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), December 12, 1952, p. 1. ↩︎
    66. “New Building Program To Include Arts Center”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), May 5, 1955, p. 11. ↩︎
    67. “Landscape Architecture Uses Old Colonial Home”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), March 8, 1956, p. 14. ↩︎
    68. “University Prepares Denmark for Landscape Architecture”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), October 12, 1956, p. 2. ↩︎
    69. “Open House Set Tomorrow At Landscape Architecture”. Athens Banner-Herald, October 15, 1957, p. 1. ↩︎
    70. “Red and Black Photographer Views Parking Situation”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), October 19, 1951, p. 1. ↩︎
    71. “Open House Set Tomorrow At Landscape Architecture”. Athens Banner-Herald, October 15, 1957, p. 1. ↩︎
    72. “Final Co-op Plans Receive Approval”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), February 28, 1957, p. 1. ↩︎
    73. “Old ‘Beanery’ Now Modern Campus Landscape Building”. Athens Banner-Herald, September 13, 1957, p. 1. ↩︎
    74. “Denmark Renovation To Expand Facilities For Crowded Co-Op”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), January 17, 1957, p. 1. ↩︎
    75. Taylor, Pat. “Old Co-Op Becomes A Victim of Growth”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), September 20, 1963, p. 1. ↩︎
    76. “Landscape Architecture Building Opens Oct. 6 With Formal Ceremonies”. Athens Banner-Herald, October 5, 1964, p. 1. ↩︎
    77. University of Georgia Historic Preservation Master Plan, October 2019 ↩︎
    78. University of Georgia College of Environment + Design 2025 Strategic Plan ↩︎

    Additional Reading

    1. “Bids for the New Buildings.” The Red and Black, February 2, 1901, p. 3.
    2. “Trustees Will Select Plans.” The Athens Daily Banner, March 1, 1901, p. 4.
    3. “Will Pass Upon the Plans”. The Atlanta Constitution, March 1, 1901, p. 2.
    4. “Discussing Plans for New Buildings.” The Athens Daily Banner, March 2, 1901, p. 4.
    5. “Dormitory and Mess Hall”. The Atlanta Constitution, March 2, 1901, p. 2.
    6. “Committee Accepts Plans”. The Atlanta Constitution, March 3, 1901, p. 4.
    7. ‘”Building Committee” Transact Important Business.’ The Red and Black, March 9, 1901, p. 1.
    8. “Plans for Buildings Were Discussed Today.” The Atlanta Journal, April 6, 1901, p. 5.
    9. “New Dormitory Plans Completed”. The Atlanta Journal, April 8, 1901, p. 5.
    10. “Board of Visitors Make Annual Report”. The Athens Banner, June 14, 1906, p. 9.
    11. “Increase”. Athens Banner, September 19, 1907, p. 1.
    12. “The University Needs Dormitories.” The Athens Banner, October 4, 1907, p. 4.
    13. “Coming Appropriation Bill”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), June 17, 1913, p. 8.
    14. “University of Georgia and Its Great Work”. The Athens Daily Herald. August 13, 1914, p. 10.
    15. “A Pressing Need”. The Athens Banner, September 19, 1916, p. 4.
    16. Drewry, John E. “Space Problem At University Acute”. The Athens Daily Banner, August 4, 1921, p. 5.
    17. “Stingy Legislature Helps Make University a School for Rich Men’s Sons Only”. The Banner-Herald (Athens, Georgia), October 3, 1923, p. 1.
    18. “Forecast Large Enrollment at the University”, The Athens Banner, September 17, 1921, p. 8.
    19. Many Women Will Attend University”. Athens Daily Herald, September 19, 1921, p. 5.
    20. Reynolds, Charles. “University Prepares for Start Of 136th Annual Session Sept. 17”. Athens Banner-Herald, August 30, 1936, p. 1.
    21. “What’s Rotten in Denmark”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), October 27, 1944, p. 4.
    22. “Letters to the editor”. The Red and Black (Athens, Georgia), October 27, 1944, p. 4.

  • John Blackmar House – Columbus, Georgia (1910)

    John Blackmar House – Columbus, Georgia – renovation and expansion designed by Henrietta C. Dozier circa 1910

  • Samford Hall, Auburn University – Auburn, Alabama (1888)

    Samford Hall at Auburn University – Auburn, Alabama (1888) – designed by Bruce & Morgan