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 School1 were passed over in favor of one designed by Golucke & Stewart,2 a substandard architectural firm even by Atlanta standards.
Golucke & Stewart.Boys’ High School (1894). Atlanta.3
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, detailing his objections to the design in exacting detail.4
Norrman apparently forwarded a copy of the letter to The Atlanta Constitution, which published it 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—
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.
The ventilation is not as good, as only corner rooms in the accepted plan have windows on more than one side.
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.
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.
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.”
A.McC. Nixon. J.M. Beath Residence (1890). Inman Park, Atlanta.
The Queen Anne-style J.M. Beath Residence in Atlanta’s Inman Park neighborhood, better known as the Beath-Dickey House, is the only known extant work by A.McC. Nixon, a British-born architect1 who began his practice in Texas circa 1881 23 and first appeared in Atlanta in 1888.4
In late 1890, Nixon partnered with J.M.P. Lindsey as Nixon & Lindsey.5 The firm dissolved in 1894,6 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 1891.78910 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.11
Lindsey moved to Toronto in January 1895,12 and Nixon’s work in Atlanta dwindled. In July 1896, his personal possessions and business contents were sold at public auction to pay off debt.13
Apparently quite ill, Nixon returned to England in July 1896, “in the hope that the sea voyage might improve his shattered health.”14 Yet as The Southern Architect so eloquently reported:
“On the contrary, the physicians consulted after his arrival in England pronounced his ailment a hopeless case of consumption, and gave him but a few weeks of life. This will be sad news to all who knew the gentleman here in his adopted city and throughout the South, where he established a high reputation as a skilled architect, and had won many friends by his gentle and cultured manners, and whose sincere sympathies like silken chords will extend to him and his across the ocean in their hours of trial and affliction.”15
Despite the claim that he was a “skilled architect,” I’ve seen no evidence that Nixon was an especially good designer, and the Beath Residence’s clumsy, top-heavy design is typical of his oeuvre.
The home was said to be of the “Domestic Gothic” style, “although not pure in this style throughout.”20 That was an understatement: I see little Gothic about it.
The home was also reportedly built “at very moderate cost,”21 which is apparent from its appearance.
In 1891, Nixon also designed the similarly styled D.H. Dougherty Residence (above, demolished),22 which has been erroneously attributed to both G.L. Norrman and W.L. Stoddart.23
Atlanta really doesn’t know its own history.
Looking at the Palladian window on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaDormer and roof finial on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaAttic window on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaBelvedere on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaPost and ornamentation on the second floor of the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaBargeboard and ornamentation on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaChimneys on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaCorbels on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaGable on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaTurret on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaRoof finial on the J.M. Beath Residence, AtlantaJ.M. Beath Residence circa 190324J.M. Beath Residence circa 190025
References
“Personal.” The Southern Architect, Volume 7, No. 9 (July 1896), p. 182. ↩︎
“San Sada.” The Galveston Daily News, May 15, 1881, p. 1. ↩︎
“Twenty-Five Cent Column”. The Austin Daily Statesman, June 2, 1881, p. 3. ↩︎
“From Our Notebooks.” The Atlanta Constitution, October 1, 1888, p. 4. ↩︎
“Wanted.” The Atlanta Journal, November 15, 1890, p. 7. ↩︎
“A Dissolution of Copartnership.” The Atlanta Constitution, April 4, 1894, p. 3. ↩︎
“Architects On Trial.” The Atlanta Journal, June 21, 1894, p. 1. ↩︎
“The Architect Not Guilty.” The Atlanta Journal, June 22, 1894, p. 3. ↩︎
“Mr. Nixon Not Guilty.” The Atlanta Constitution, June 23, 1894, p. 5. ↩︎
“The Case Dismissed.” The Atlanta Journal, June 23, 1894, p. 9. ↩︎
G.L. Norrman. Denmark Hall (1902). University of Georgia, Athens.
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 was 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
Location of Denmark Hall
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
Norrman’s plans were selected in open competition against a fairly meager crop of designers: J.W. GoLucke of Atlanta, Hodgson & Company of Athens, Georgia; E.C. Seiz of Atlanta; D.A. Myer of Williamsport, Pennsylvania; Alexander Blair of Macon, Georgia; and Walter & Legare of Columbia, South Carolina.9
It also no doubt helped that Norrman and B.A. Denmark had a history together: Denmark was a longtime member of Savannah’s local Board of Public Education, and approved Norrman’s plans for the Anderson Street School (1896),10 and presumably, the 38th Street School (1901).11
The Design
G.L. Norrman. Projected design of Denmark Hall, Athens, Georgia.12
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 at the back and a small one-story wing at the front, containing a sitting room, lounge, and small recessed entry porch. Storage rooms were located in the basement.13
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.14 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 plain string course at the base of the building
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. GibbesResidence in Savannah, Georgia, built in 1900.15 The Gibbes home is one of the most atrocious designs Norrman ever put his name to, and Denmark Hall wasn’t much better.
G.L. Norrman. Arthur B.M. Gibbes Residence (1900). Savannah, Georgia.
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 Residence was one such project, a clunky reiteration of his design for the Milton DarganResidence 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 either side were replaced with simpler windows.
The small recessed porch from the previous plans was expanded across the second floor, and the two 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 (pictured 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.
Breaking with classical precedent, the odd number of columns across the front was an unconventional choice, and a subtle indicator of the building’s role as a modern facility for the 20th century.
Photograph of Denmark Hall from an undated postcard.16
Construction and History
Construction on Denmark Hall began circa May 1901,17 using convict labor loaned by Clarke County.18
There was 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.”19
Denmark Hall’s cornerstone was laid on June 14, 1901,20 and a July report from “Supt. McKinly” stated that work on both buildings was expected to be completed by late October.21
Denmark and Candler Halls ultimately opened 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 four days.22
In Denmark Hall’s first year of operation, students were charged a whopping $7.50 to $8 a month for meals.23
The original “matron” of the facility was Mrs. B.H. Kinnebrew.24 She resigned in March 1908,25 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.2627
By that time, students had already begun referring to Denmark Hall as “the Beanery”,28 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,29 a function it served through at least the early 1920s.
Interior of Denmark Hall, Athens, Georgia. Photograph from a postcard postmarked 1907.
Norrman never seemed overly concerned with planning his structures for anticipated growth: he publicly railed against “waste space” and consistently designed his interiors to be as compact as possible while remaining functional.
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.”30
By 1903, seating was increased to 160,31 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.”32 In 1911, a report stated that the building was “taxed to its capacity”, requiring “enlargement and better equipment.”33
Attendance at the school continued to grow, and despite repeated funding requests, 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.”34
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.”35 Apparently, Mrs. Kinnebrew returned.
Finally, with the opening of Memorial Hall in June 1924, the campus gained additional dining space,36 although Denmark Hall remained the primary facility for that purpose.
1936 addition to Denmark Hall, Athens, Georgia
In 1936, Denmark Hall received its first expansion: a small cafeteria seating 92 students.3738The cafeteria wing was attached to the southwest corner of the building,39 and its exterior appearance is remarkably congruent with Norrman’s design. The basement was also remodeled during the expansion.40
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,41 ending the era of “food served in the old manner”, which required the employment of waiters.42
In 1939, Mrs. M.D. Dunlap became the new director and dietitian of Denmark Hall,4344 and she and her husband, a professor, 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.45
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.464748
The first expansion was an annex hastily added to the kitchen in 1942, expanding its size by a third.49 In 1943, four small additions were made to the building, including two screened porches.50 In September 1943, the Signal Corps school was closed,51 and the dining hall returned to student use.5253
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”,54 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”. 5556
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.57 Seizing the opportunity, the college’s department of landscape architecture took over the building’s second floor, creating three draft rooms.58
Since 1938, the landscape architecture department had been based at the Lumpkin House,5960 a small antebellum residence that still stands on campus. With 75 students enrolled in the program,61 the new space in Denmark Hall was a much-needed addition to accommodate the department’s growth.
East side of Denmark Hall, Athens, Georgia
In 1955, a popular student hangout spot called the Co-Op moved to Denmark Hall’s basement, where it included a soda fountain, snack bar, grill, and a supply store. For the Co-Op’s occupation of the space, the basement was air-conditioned and refinished in knotty pine.6263
The rest of the building, however, was not air-conditioned and was reportedly “in bad shape”. In 1952, an inspection committee identified Denmark Hall as one of several buildings “in need of extensive repairs.”64
First-hand accounts of the Beanery at the time were unpleasant: students described it as “drab old Denmark Hall”,65 where “…to find your food during the warm months, you have to push literally dozens of flies from your plate.”66 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.6768
The university had previously announced its plans to demolish Denmark Hall,6970 but the building was instead spared and received an extensive $40,000 overhaul for use as the landscape architecture department’s new home.7172
Looking at Denmark Hall from the northwest
Primarily designed by E.C. Weren, a member of the landscape architecture faculty, Denmark Hall’s renovation was not sympathetic to Norrman’s original design.
The renovation 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.”73
This also appears to be when Denmark Hall’s columns, dormers, and balustrade were removed from the exterior, as they were still present in a photograph from 1951.74
The renovated building officially reopened on October 16, 1957.75
The Co-Op remained in the basement during Denmark Hall’s renovation and was expanded,767778 but in 1963, it was unceremoniously shuttered for full occupation by the landscape architecture department.79
On October 6, 1964, the building officially reopened again, with the basement now housing a model shop, blueprint room, darkroom, 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.80
Rear of Denmark Hall with screen walls from the 1957 renovation
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 2003,81 the University of Georgia has shown little appetite to renovate its less-attractive sibling, which could still be accurately described as “drab old Denmark Hall.”
The College of Environment + Design’s 2025 strategic plan included a vague goal to “renovate Denmark Hall as a cutting-edge teaching facility… funds permitting.”82
That doesn’t sound very promising, does it?
Gallery
Dentilled cornice on the facade of Denmark Hall, Athens, GeorgiaFirst-floor double window on the facade of Denmark Hall, Athens, GeorgiaKeystone design and a window mullion on Denmark Hall, Athens, GeorgiaCornice on the facade of Denmark Hall, Athens, GeorgiaPilaster and dentilled cornice on the facade of Denmark Hall, Athens, Georgia
References
“Plan of University Buildings Complete”. The Atlanta Constitution, April 24, 1901, p. 1. ↩︎
Henrietta C. Dozier. John Blackmar Residence (circa 1910 renovation and expansion). Columbus, Georgia.123Looking at the John Blackmar Residence from the southwestDormers and cornice on the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaEaves and cornice on the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaFront door of the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaCorinthian capital on the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaEnclosed porch on the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaLooking between columns at a pilaster on the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaDormer and chimney on the south elevation of the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaConsoles over the front entrance of the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaBalcony on the front porch of the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaRailing and console for the second-floor balcony of the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaLooking between columns at the enclosed porch on the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, GeorgiaCornice, frieze, and Doric capitals on the porte cochere of the John Blackmar Residence, Columbus, Georgia
References
“Personal and Incidental.” The Columbus Enquirer-Sun (Columbus, Georgia), October 17, 1909, p. 4. ↩︎
“Wanted–Driver and Butler.” (classified advertisement) The Columbus Ledger (Columbus, Georgia), September 25, 1910, p. 2. ↩︎
“Mrs. Blackmon’s Bridge Party”. The Columbus Enquirer-Sun (Columbus, Georgia), March 5, 1911, p. 2. ↩︎
Bruce & Morgan.Samford Hall (1888), Auburn University. Auburn, Alabama.12345Looking up at Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaClock tower on Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaGable on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaCenter bay on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaLooking at the northeast corner of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaSecond-floor windows on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaSecond- and third-floor windows on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaGable dormer on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTower with a belvedere on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaEaves, brackets, and terracotta frieze on a tower of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTerracotta ornamental figure and a second-floor window on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaWindows on the clock tower of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaThird-floor windows and the gable on the center bay of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTerracotta tympanum and roof finial on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaSecond- and third-floor windows on the northeast corner of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTerracotta inscription over the northeast entrance of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTerracotta spandrel on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTower with a belvedere on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaSecond- and third-floor windows with spandrel on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaGable dormer on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTerracotta ornamental figure on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTerracotta window spandrels on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaSoutheast entrance of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaWeather vane on the bell tower of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaColumn on the southeast entrance of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaArch over the southeast entrance of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaEaves and cornice on the northeast corner of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaFirst-floor and basement windows on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaNortheast entrance of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaCornice and terracotta frieze on the facade of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaInscription over the southeast entrance of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTerracotta column and capital on the southeast entrance of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaPedestal at the northeast entrance of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaLooking at the south elevation of Samford Hall from the southwestCornerstone of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaFinial on a tower of Samford Hall, Auburn, AlabamaTowers on Samford Hall, Auburn, Alabama
References
“Auburn.” The Montgomery Daily Advertiser (Montgomery, Alabama), August 3, 1887, p. 2. ↩︎
“Technical Education in Alabama.” The Atlanta Constitution, August 24, 1887, p. 8. ↩︎
“Notice to Contractors.” The Montgomery Daily Advertiser (Montgomery, Alabama), September 20, 1887, p. 8, ↩︎
“Auburn.” The Weekly Advertiser (Montgomery, Alabama), June 14, 1888, p. 1. ↩︎
Bruce & Everett. First Methodist Church renovation and expansion (1909). Opelika, Alabama. 1234Dome on First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaNortheast elevation of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaColumns and Corinthian capitals on First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaPediment on the facade of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaPortico of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaSanctuary windows on the northeast elevation of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaTransept on the northeast corner of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaEaves, cornice, and acroteria on the facade of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaEaves, cornice, and pilaster capital on the facade of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaTransept windows on First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaPilaster capital on First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaCorinthian capital on First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaEaves and cornice on First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaDoor and second-floor windows on the facade of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaAcroterion on the facade of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaSecond-floor windows and door pediment above the main entrance of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaSecond-floor window, cornice, and pilaster on the southeast corner of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaMain entrance of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaSecond-floor windows on First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaDoor and pediment on the facade of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaSanctuary windows on the northeast elevation of First Methodist Church, Opelika, AlabamaLooking at First Methodist Church from the southeast
Dixie Drive-In (1959). 600 Montague Avenue, Greenwood, South Carolina.1
I’ve passed through Greenwood, South Carolina, countless times on back-and-forth trips between Abbeville and Newberry, two towns that contain surviving works by G.L. Norrman.
On my last pass, I was happy to find this well-preserved sign for the Dixie Drive-In, which apparently debuted with the restaurant’s opening in 1959.
This is a true Googie relic, which is quite rare in the Deep South. Sorry, I ain’t calling it Dixie.
Location of Dixie Drive-In
References
“Announcing the Grand Opening of the Dixie Drive-In” (advertisement). The Index-Journal (Greenwood, South Carolina), October 17, 1959, p. 3. ↩︎
G.L. Norrman.Newberry Hotel (1879). Newberry, South Carolina. G.L. Norrman.City Hall and Opera House (1882). Newberry, South Carolina. G.L. Norrman.Eureka Hotel (1903). Abbeville, South Carolina. G.L. Norrman.Samuel McGowan House (1889). Abbeville, South Carolina.
J.W. Golucke. M.A. Hale Residence (1892). Inman Park, Atlanta.
This Queen Anne-style home is Atlanta’s only known extant work designed by J.W. Golucke (1857-1907),12 a shyster carpenter who built a career on smooth talk and grand delusions of being a legitimate architect.
A thoroughly fraudulent and incompetent designer, Golucke was one of several “Atlanta architects” of his era who did little actual work in the city, primarily peddling their shoddy plans to poor, rural communities that didn’t know any better.
If you travel through backwoods Georgia, you’ll find more than a dozen county courthouses by Golucke’s design3—all of them terrible.
Golucke fittingly died in a southwest Georgia jail cell while being held on charges of forgery,4 weeks after attempting suicide under the influence of drugs.56 His work is not celebrated here.
Gallery
Gable on the facade of the M.A. Hale Residence, AtlantaCornice and corbels on the M.A. Hale Residence, AtlantaSecond-floor bay window on the M.A. Hale Residence, AtlantaPorch post and fretwork ornamentation on the facade of the M.A. Hale Residence, AtlantaPorch pediment and fretwork ornamentation on the facade of the M.A. Hale Residence, AtlantaOval window and porch post on the facade of the M.A. Hale Residence, AtlantaFretwork ornamentation on the M.A. Hale Residence, Atlanta
References
“Atlanta’s Growth.” The Atlanta Constitution, July 13, 1892, p. 7. ↩︎
“Mrs. M.A. Hale’s Death.” The Atlanta Constitution, March 29, 1896, p. 6. ↩︎
G.L. Norrman.Edgewood Avenue Grammar School. Inman Park, Atlanta (1892).
The Background
The following remarks by G.L. Norrman were included in a biographical sketch titled “An Educated Architect”, published in the December 17, 1892, edition of The Atlanta Journal.
Norrman’s remarks:
“I prefer the classic for libraries, school houses, courthouses and all buildings of an educational character, as most proper. For depots and hotels any style will do, but I prefer the Romanesque for depots and the renaissance for hotels and homes as being more homelike and less business like in appearance. Churches I like Romanesque because the growth of the church and that style of architecture are so closely identified.
“The so-called ‘colonial style’ of the old southern mansions is renaissance so far as the builders were able to carry that style in those olden days, and it has recently come again into popular favor because of the sentiment that clings about those honored halls.”1
References
“An Educated Architect.” The Atlanta Journal, December 17, 1892, p. 9. ↩︎