From the Notebook

  • Urban Life: Green anole

    Green anole (Anolis carolinensis)
    Green anole (Anolis carolinensis)
  • Western Expedition: Elk

    Elk (Cervus canadensis) at Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming
    Elk (Cervus canadensis) at Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming
  • In the Words of G.L. Norrman: On Huntsville, Alabama (1899)

    G.L. Norrman. Bienville Hotel (1900, demolished circa 1969). Mobile, Alabama.
    G.L. Norrman. Bienville Hotel (1900, demolished circa 1969). Mobile, Alabama.

    The Background

    The June 13, 1899, edition of The Atlanta Journal published remarks from G.L. Norrman about Huntsville, Alabama, where he had just returned “from a business visit”.

    Norrman may have visited that area in connection with plans to renovate the Lauderdale Court House in nearby Florence, Alabama, which was awarded days later to Golucke & Stewart of Atlanta.1

    It’s unclear if Norrman ever completed any work in Huntsville or North Alabama, although he designed multiple projects in Anniston and Gadsden, Alabama, in the late 1880s, and briefly considered moving his practice to Birmingham, Alabama, in late 1899, when he was designing the Bienville Hotel (pictured above) in Mobile, Alabama.

    The spring he refers to here is the Big Spring in downtown Huntsville.

    Norrman’s remarks:

    “I like Huntsville very much. It’s a pretty, thrifty little town—the people there dress well and seem to be prosperous and the streets are full of elegantly dressed, handsome ladies.

    “A great stream of water, twenty-odd feet broad, gushes from rock to the tune of over a million gallons a minute. It is a most refreshing sight— this spring. This hot weather a man can almost keep cool who carries around a picture of the Huntsville spring in his mind.”2

    References

    1. “$5,000 To Be Spent”. The Florence Herald (Florence, Alabama), June 22, 1899, p. 1. ↩︎
    2. “Loitering In the Lobbies”. The Atlanta Journal, June 13, 1899, p. 3. ↩︎
  • Breuer in Brief

    Marcel Breuer and Hamilton P. Smith. Whitney Museum of Art (1966). New York.
    Marcel Breuer and Hamilton P. Smith. Whitney Museum of Art (1966). New York.

    A masterpiece of the Brutalist style, the Whitney Museum of Art (1966) in New York was designed by Marcel Breuer (1902-1981), an American modernist architect of the 20th century.

    Like so many architects of his era, Breuer’s legacy has been rapidly forgotten in the 21st century, with many of his buildings now under threat or destroyed.

    Born in Hungary to a Jewish family, Breuer (pronounced Broy-er) was both a student and teacher at the Bauhaus in Germany, where he became known for his cutting-edge furniture designs, most famously the Wassily chair.

    With the rise of the Nazi regime, Breuer moved to England in 1935, then immigrated to the United States in 1937 with his mentor, Walter Gropius, becoming a member of the influential Harvard Five group of architects.

    Between 1938 and 1941, Gropius and Breuer designed several residential projects together before Breuer broke off and began his solo practice. One of their joint works is the Weizenblatt Duplex (1941) in Asheville, North Carolina, for which Breuer is credited as the primary designer.

    Walter Gropius and Marcel Breuer. Weizenblatt Duplex (1941). Asheville, North Carolina.
    Walter Gropius and Marcel Breuer. Weizenblatt Duplex (1941). Asheville, North Carolina.

    Breuer’s architectural career is neatly bifurcated into 2 distinct periods that couldn’t be more unlike.

    In the 1940s and 50s, he was chiefly a small-scale designer and specialized in creating light, airy International-style residences that were much praised for their innovative floor plans and use of materials and building techniques.

    In the 1960s and 70s, Breuer abruptly switched gears and almost exclusively produced larger, more lucrative corporate and civic projects in the forceful, imposing Brutalist style, using concrete as his primary material.

    Marcel Breuer with Robert F. Gatje. Snower House (1954). Mission Hills, Kansas.
    Marcel Breuer with Robert F. Gatje. Snower House (1954). Mission Hills, Kansas.1

    A typical design of Breuer’s residential period, the Snower House (1954) is also one of his least-known projects, occupying a large corner lot in the Mission Hills suburb of Kansas City.

    The design is essentially a 1,800-square-foot rectangular box cantilevered on a concrete block base and was reportedly modeled after Breuer’s first home in New Canaan, Connecticut2, although most of his houses from the era had a similar look.

    Breuer’s work was heavily concentrated in New England and the East Coast, and together with a house in Aspen, Colorado, the Snower house is one of only 2 completed residential projects he designed west of the Mississippi River3 — he never even visited the property.4

    No one would claim the Snower house is one of Breuer’s better works, but it still has all the trademarks of his early residential designs. Notably, the home utilizes Breuer’s “bi-nuclear” floor plan, with living spaces placed on one side and sleeping areas on the other.

    Detail of Snower House
    Detail of Snower House

    You can also clearly identify Breuer’s attention to form and creative use of materials: large windows on every side of the home blur the boundary between exterior and interior, tiny windows punctuate walls patterned with cedar strips, and brightly colored asbestos panels add much-needed visual contrast.

    The home has remained remarkably true to its initial design and, at the time of a 2015 article, had retained many of its original furnishings, including living and dining furniture designed or specified by Breuer, the original kitchen cabinets, and a built-in bookcase in the living room.

    As of 2015, the interior still featured the original cedar-plank ceilings and walnut flooring, and the owners had restored the original orange, blue, and gold color scheme.5

    The Snower house was built as a country residence, but is now surrounded by a sprawling maze of cookie-cutter homes. The structure spends most of the year concealed by trees, and with its cantilevered design, it almost appears to float among the greenery.

    It’s a home that takes a certain amount of architectural knowledge to appreciate: while groundbreaking when it was constructed, today an uninformed observer could easily misjudge it as a holdover from a high-end trailer park.

    Trapezoidal window detail on the Whitney Museum of Art
    Trapezoidal window detail on the Whitney Museum of Art

    Twelve years after the Snower house was built, Breuer’s design for the Whitney Museum of Art was completed at 945 Madison Avenue in New York’s Upper East Side.

    Anyone unfamiliar with Breuer’s work would never guess the two projects were by the same architect, but look closely, and you’ll note that both buildings give the same impression of floating and show the same attention to form and materials.

    Looking something like an inverted ziggurat, the 7-story, 76,830 square foot structure — now also known as the Breuer Building — was designed by Breuer with his longtime associate Hamilton P. Smith.

    The building’s exterior is defined by cantilevered floors that progressively extend toward the street, covered in dark granite tiles over reinforced concrete. The ground-floor entrance is set back from the street and accessed by a bridge spanning a moat-like sunken courtyard.

    The facade presents a nearly blank face to Madison Avenue, apart from a large trapezoidal window, an element that became one of Breuer’s signatures. The north side of the building, facing East 75th Street, is punctuated by 6 smaller windows, similar to Breuer’s use of tiny windows in the Snower residence.

    Lobby detail of the Whitney Museum of Art
    Lobby detail of the Whitney Museum of Art

    The building’s interior showcases Breuer’s masterful blending of textures and patterns, particularly in the lobby and stairwells.

    Smooth concave dome lights in the lobby contrast against the dark ceiling and roughly textured walls, created with vertical board-formed concrete. Floors throughout the building are covered in bluestone slab tile, and the walls in the stairwells are formed with bush-hammered concrete.

    Sleek bronze railing on the stairs recalls Breuer’s earlier furniture designs, and the abundance of built-in seating thoughtfully incorporated throughout the building is an obvious byproduct of his residential period.

    Detail of the stairwell in the Whitney Museum of Art
    Detail of the stairwell in the Whitney Museum of Art

    I visited 945 Madison in January 2024, when the building was about to end its 3-year run as the temporary home of the Frick Collection.

    The Frick was a grim and joyless experience, and, for whatever reason, the museum’s management prohibited photography in the galleries—it’s not like any of their boring art was worth a picture. I dodged the leering security guards and snapped a photo anyway, because fuck that Nazi-inspired nonsense.

    The Frick had covered Breuer’s signature windows with giant scrims, so there wasn’t much to admire in the building’s galleries. In the image below, you can still see some of the coffered ceilings, bluestone tiles, and built-in seating.

    I took a picture in the gallery. Sue me.
    I took a picture in the gallery. Sue me.

    Breuer’s creative output arguably peaked with the Whitney and became increasingly repetitive and self-referential through the late 1960s.

    In 1968, the same year he was awarded the Gold Medal of the American Institute of Architects, Breuer also faced severe backlash for his proposed Grand Central Tower, which called for the demolition of New York’s landmark train station, only a few years after the destruction of the original Penn Station ignited widespread protest.

    New Yorkers aren’t known for forgiveness, and at Breuer’s death, Paul Goldberger, then the architecture critic for The New York Times, stated in his obituary for Breuer that the architect was “most likely to be remembered for things that are very small — things that are not buildings at all.”6

    That observation was catty but dead on, as Breuer’s contributions to architecture are essentially unknown to the public today. And why is that?

    Marcel Breuer and Herbert Beckhard. Department of Housing and Urban Development (1968). Washington, D.C.
    Marcel Breuer and Herbert Beckhard. Department of Housing and Urban Development (1968). Washington, D.C.

    Societal taste in architecture is always fickle, but the backlash against Brutalism has been especially swift and severe. What was initially embraced in the 1960s as a universal, egalitarian, and essentially optimistic style was, by the 21st century, widely viewed as hostile, oppressive, and just plain ugly.

    It doesn’t help that concrete ages poorly: it cracks, it stains, and if it isn’t regularly power-washed (and it never is), it just looks drab and dirty. Slapping white paint on old concrete buildings has become popular in recent years, but it’s a cheap trick that never succeeds.

    Breuer’s output was also wildly inconsistent in the second half of his career. While he had a few outstanding gems like the Whitney, his firm also produced a large number of banal and uninspired projects in the 1960s and 70s, with a clear prioritization for commissions over creativity.

    Thus, Breuer’s name is associated with such dreary designs as the Department of Housing and Urban Development (1968) in Washington, D.C., or the downright hideous building for the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (1977) in the same city.

    Later projects like the Strom Thurmond Office Building and Federal Courthouse (1979) in Columbia, South Carolina, shouldn’t even be mentioned in the same breath as Breuer, since he obviously had nothing to do with their design.

    Breuer’s disappearance from public consciousness is hardly unique: most people today are unfamiliar with his contemporaries, such as Philip Johnson, Louis Kahn, Paul Rudolph, and I.M. Pei, and the average person’s assessment of any of those designers’ best works would likely be unfavorable.

    Marcel Breuer and Hamilton P. Smith. Detail of Strom Thurmond Office Building and Federal Courthouse (1979). Columbia, South Carolina.
    Marcel Breuer and Hamilton P. Smith. Detail of Strom Thurmond Office Building and Federal Courthouse (1979). Columbia, South Carolina.

    Breuer is still a favorite of architectural historians and preservationists, however, and they were outraged when Breuer’s first binuclear residential design was demolished in January 2022 to make way for a tennis court.

    At the same time, Breuer’s own summer home (1949) in Wellfleet, Massachusetts, was also threatened with demolition but was spared after it was purchased by a local historic trust.

    In June 2025, the Department of Housing and Urban Development announced the departure from its Breuer-designed facility, and the future of that complex — which lacks historic protections — is anyone’s guess.

    Some of Breuer’s projects have found new uses: in 2003, part of Breuer’s landmark design for the Armstrong Rubber Company (1966) in New Haven, Connecticut, was demolished to make way for an IKEA store, but the remaining portion of the structure has since been converted to a boutique hotel.

    Atlanta’s Central Library (1980) was the last project credited to Breuer, and it too faced possible destruction until it was spared by a controversial renovation completed in 2021. That story will be forthcoming.

    References

    1. McCarter, Robert. Breuer. New York: Phaidon Press Limited (2016). ↩︎
    2. Billhartz Gregorian, Cynthia. “An original vision with an attention to detail”. The Kansas City Star, October 18, 2015, p. 20G. ↩︎
    3. McCarter, Robert. Breuer. New York: Phaidon Press Limited (2016). ↩︎
    4. Paul, Steve. “Architecture A to Z”. The Kansas City Star Magazine, April 18, 2010, p. 15. ↩︎
    5. Billhartz Gregorian, Cynthia. “An original vision with an attention to detail”. The Kansas City Star, October 18, 2015, p. 20G. ↩︎
    6. Burnett, W.C. “Architect Marcel Breuer’s influence memorialized in Atlanta Public Library”. The Atlanta Journal, July 8, 1981, p. 3-B. ↩︎

  • W.T. Roberts Residence (1901) – Douglasville, Georgia

    C. Walter Smith. W.T. Roberts Residence (1901). Douglasville, Georgia.
    C. Walter Smith. W.T. Roberts Residence (1901). Douglasville, Georgia.1 2
    Front porch of the W.T. Roberts Residence
    Front porch of the W.T. Roberts Residence
    Decorative frieze on the W.T. Roberts Residence
    Decorative frieze on the W.T. Roberts Residence

    References

    1. The Southern Architect and Contractor, Volume 11, no. 51 (January 25, 1901), p. 1. ↩︎
    2. Roberts-Mozley House – Cultural Arts Council Douglasville/Douglas County ↩︎

  • Georgia-Pacific Center (1982) – Atlanta

    Leon Moed and Michael McCarthy of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. Georgia-Pacific Center (1982). Atlanta.
    Leon Moed and Michael McCarthy of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. Georgia-Pacific Center (1982). Atlanta. 1 2 3 4
    Looking up at Georgia-Pacific Center from the southeast
    Looking up at Georgia-Pacific Center from the southeast
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from Peachtree Center Avenue NE
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from Peachtree Center Avenue NE
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from 55 Park Place
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from 55 Park Place
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from the west
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from the west
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from the northeast
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from the northeast
    Looking at windows on the Georgia-Pacific Center from the southeast
    Looking at windows on the Georgia-Pacific Center from the southeast
    Looking up at Georgia-Pacific Center from Peachtree Center Avenue NE
    Looking up at Georgia-Pacific Center from Peachtree Center Avenue NE
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from the northeast
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from the northeast
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from the east
    Looking at Georgia-Pacific Center from the east
    Street-level view of Georgia-Pacific Center on Peachtree Center Avenue NE
    Street-level view of Georgia-Pacific Center on Peachtree Center Avenue NE
    Former home of the High Museum of Art at Georgia-Pacific Center on John Wesley Dobbs Avenue NE
    Former home of the High Museum of Art at Georgia-Pacific Center on John Wesley Dobbs Avenue NE
    Former home of the High Museum of Art at Georgia-Pacific Center on John Wesley Dobbs Avenue NE
    Former home of the High Museum of Art at Georgia-Pacific Center on John Wesley Dobbs Avenue NE
    Skybridge to Georgia-Pacific Tower over Peachtree Center Avenue NE
    Skybridge to Georgia-Pacific Tower over Peachtree Center Avenue NE
    Entrance plaza at Georgia-Pacific Center
    Entrance plaza at Georgia-Pacific Center

    References

    1. Teasley, Colleen. “Georgia-Pacific Wants Its Own Place in Skyline”. The Atlanta Journal, February 13, 1979, p. 5-D. ↩︎
    2. Walker, Tom. “Georgia-Pacific Leasing Starts In March”. The Atlanta Journal, February 20, 1979, p. 8-D. ↩︎
    3. Walker, Tom. “Plans Unveiled for Tower That Will Rise 52 Floors.” The Atlanta Journal, May 3, 1979, p. 1-D. ↩︎
    4. Fox, Catherine. “G-P Center: a flashy gem for Sun Belt”. The Atlanta Journal/The Atlanta Constitution, January 16, 1983, p. 9H. ↩︎

  • In the Words of G.L. Norrman: On the Meaning of “Civilization” and “Christian Community” (1899)

    George E. Walker. Trinity Episcopal Church (1860). Abbeville, South Carolina.
    George E. Walker. Trinity Episcopal Church (1860). Abbeville, South Carolina.1 2

    The Background

    On May 1, 1899, The Atlanta Constitution published this short letter from G.L. Norrman in its “Topics About Which the People Are Talking” column.

    Norrman’s own views of Christianity and society were already well-documented in his pamphlet Architecture As Illustrative of Religious Belief and as a Means of Tracing Civilization, and here he suggested that the newspaper interview people on their definition of the terms “civilization” and “Christian community”.

    The note includes an outdated and offensive term referencing people of color.

    Norrman’s remarks:

    In all countries, where moral and social systems similar to our own prevail, two expressions are in use among all sorts and conditions of men, to which each individual man seems to give his own interpretation. These terms are used in the kitchen and in the parlor; in squalid hovels and in the most elaborate apartments; we hear them in the barroom, at the bar of justice and behind jail bars. From press and pulpit they are heard continually, and fanatics for ages have made zealous use of them while kindling cruel bonfires for the immolation of their fellow creatures. Politicians use them as a means of catching votes; trades people to sell goods; promotors of all sorts to float their schemes. Sometimes they are used by learned professors and sometimes by ignorant field negroes. The expressions I have reference to are ‘civilization’ and ‘Christian community.’ I think it would be interesting to a large number of your subscribers to read definitions of these terms from people of various pursuits and various intellectual attainments.”3

    References

    1. Trinity Episcopal Church and Cemetery, Abbeville County – SCDAH ↩︎
    2. Restoring Abbeville’s Trinity Episcopal Church – South Carolina Public Radio ↩︎
    3. “Topics About Which the People Are Talking”. The Atlanta Constitution, May 1, 1899, p. 4. ↩︎

  • William R. Cannon Chapel and Religious Center – Atlanta

    Paul Rudolph. William R. Cannon Chapel and Religious Center (1981). Emory University, Atlanta.
    Paul Rudolph. William R. Cannon Chapel and Religious Center (1981). Emory University, Atlanta.1 2 3
    Looking at Cannon Chapel from the northwest
    Looking at Cannon Chapel from the northwest
    Looking atCannon Chapel from the southeast
    Looking at Cannon Chapel from the southeast
    South elevation of Cannon Chapel
    South elevation of Cannon Chapel
    East facade of Cannon Chapel
    East facade of Cannon Chapel
    Entrance breezeway on the west facade of Cannon Chapel
    Entrance breezeway on the west facade of Cannon Chapel
    Steeple on Cannon Chapel
    Steeple on Cannon Chapel
    Ground floor entrance on the north elevation of Cannon Chapel
    Ground floor entrance on the north elevation of Cannon Chapel
    Covered walkway beneath Cannon Chapel
    Covered walkway beneath Cannon Chapel
    Window and roof on the south elevation of Cannon Chapel
    Window and roof on the south elevation of Cannon Chapel
    Door handles on Cannon Chapel
    Door handles on Cannon Chapel
    Looking out a window in Cannon Chapel
    Looking out a window in Cannon Chapel
    Sanctuary in Cannon Chapel
    Sanctuary in Cannon Chapel
    Teaching chapel in Cannon Chapel
    Teaching chapel in Cannon Chapel
    Teaching chapel in Cannon Chapel
    Teaching chapel in Cannon Chapel
    Sanctuary of Cannon Chapel
    Sanctuary of Cannon Chapel
    Organ in the sanctuary of Cannon Chapel
    Organ in the sanctuary of Cannon Chapel
    Sanctuary in Cannon Chapel
    Sanctuary in Cannon Chapel
    Looking up at the skylight in Cannon Chapel
    Looking up at the skylight in Cannon Chapel
    Board-formed concrete on the exterior of Cannon Chapel
    Board-formed concrete on the exterior of Cannon Chapel

    References

    1. Speed, Billy Cheney. “New Chapel Will Open At Emory”. The Atlanta Journal-The Atlanta Constitution Weekend, September 19, 1981, p. 10-B. ↩︎
    2. Burnett, W.C. “Emory chapel offered architect a challenge”. The Atlanta Journal, October 2, 1981, 1-C. ↩︎
    3. Fox, Catherine. “Emory Chapel A Gem Of Design”. The Atlanta Constitution, October 16, 1981, p. 1-C. ↩︎
  • In the Words of G.L. Norrman: On Music Critics (1899)

    In the Words of G.L. Norrman: On Music Critics (1899)

    The Background

    Following G.L. Norrman‘s previously published remarks about Moriz Rosenthal, The Atlanta Journal received several indignant letters rebuking his criticism. After his first performance sold out,1 Rosenthal then held a second concert in Atlanta,2 which was attended by a reader of the newspaper, identified only as “M.E.C.”

    In a letter published on February 24, 1899, “M.E.C.” gave a rapturous review of the concert in ridiculously florid terms, while also swiping at Norrman. The pertinent quotes:

    • “I had occasion several weeks ago to refer with indignation to the kind of stuff a morning paper was serving us as musical criticism.”
    • “But why should we expect every artist to have in the highest degree every attribute of other artists: A man may be an excellent architect, and yet know very little about music.”3

    Always eager to have the last word, Norrman shot back with another letter, which was published on February 27, 1899. Norrman liberally quoted M.E.C.’s own words, and also took the opportunity to mock the Christian Science movement — keep in mind, he was still overseeing the construction of Atlanta’s Christian Science church at the time.4

    G.L. Norrman. First Church of Christ Scientist (1899, demolished). Atlanta.
    G.L. Norrman. First Church of Christ Scientist (1899, demolished). Atlanta.5

    It’s probable that “M.E.C.” was Sue Harper Mims, the leader of Atlanta’s Christian Science church, a stuffy old society woman with whom Norrman regularly traded barbs.

    Norrman’s remarks:

    To the Editor ofThe Journal:

    “I never realized until Friday, when reading the criticism on Rosenthal by “M.E.C.” the amount of delicate perception that is necessary to be a musical critic. It requires such a delicacy of perception as to be able to distinguish a half expressed passion from an expressed passion, or from an unexpressed passion. A critic who can comprehend the “half expressed passion of a Chopin” can undoubtedly comprehend “the intellectual profundity of Schumann.” A person who is endowed with such spiritual light might almost be capable of preaching a Christian Science sermon or write poetry for a young ladies’ literary society.

    “To an ordinary person whose spiritual understanding does not extend beyond what is expressed, music, architecture or any other art is a fine art only when it is a vehicle for conveying emotions. When art is used for any other purpose it is merely a handicraft. So an acrobatic performance with the fingers on a piano is itself no more of a fine art than is an acrobatic performance with the toes on a tight rope.”

    G.L. NORRMAN6

    References

    1. “Atlanta To Have Fair”. The Macon Telegraph (Macon, Georgia), February 16, 1899, p. 2. ↩︎
    2. “Rosenthal’s Second Concert.” The Atlanta Constitution, February 16, 1899, p. 5. ↩︎
    3. “Music”. The Atlanta Journal, February 24, 1899, p. 5. ↩︎
    4. “The First Christian Science Church Built Here Will Be Dedicated Today”. The Atlanta Constitution, April 2, 1899, p. 4. ↩︎
    5. ibid. ↩︎
    6. “Criticism of a Critic.” The Atlanta Journal, February 27, 1899, p. 4. ↩︎
  • What I’ve Learned from Social Media

    What I’ve Learned from Social Media

    1. A cry for help is just a cry for attention. No one actually wants to be helped.
    2. Everyone thinks their life is either uniquely special or uniquely awful; neither is true, and either way, it’s narcissism.
    3. Ninety percent of the world’s problems would be solved if every man was complimented on his penis by another man.