Andrew Carnegie and the Reform of the American Library Abigail A

Connecticut College Digital Commons @ Connecticut College

Architectural Studies Faculty Publications Art History and Architectural Studies

12-1991 "The tmoU st Amount of Effectiv [sic] Accommodation": Andrew Carnegie and the Reform of the American Library Abigail A. Van Slyck Connecticut College, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.conncoll.edu/archfacpub Part of the Architectural History and Criticism Commons, and the Library and Information Science Commons

Recommended Citation Van Slyck, Abigail A. "The tmosU t Amount of Effectiv [sic] Accommodation": Andrew Carnegie and the Reform of the American Library. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 50, No. 4 (Dec., 1991), pp. 359-383.

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Art History and Architectural Studies at Digital Commons @ Connecticut College. It has been accepted for inclusion in Architectural Studies Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Connecticut College. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author. "The tmoU st Amount of Effectiv [sic] Accommodation": Andrew Carnegie and the Reform of the American Library

Keywords patrons, public libraries, United States, Andrew Carnegie

Comments Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 50, No. 4 (Dec., 1991), pp. 359-383

Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society of Architectural Historians

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/990662

This article is available at Digital Commons @ Connecticut College: http://digitalcommons.conncoll.edu/archfacpub/2

"The Utmost Amount of Effectiv [sic] Accommodation": Andrew Carnegie and the Reform of the American Library Author(s): Abigail A. van Slyck Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 50, No. 4 (Dec., 1991), pp. 359- 383 Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society of Architectural Historians Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/990662 . Accessed: 20/12/2012 11:47

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

University of California Press and Society of Architectural Historians are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions "The Utmost Amount of Effectiv [sic] Accommodation": Andrew Carnegie and the Reform of the American Library

ABIGAIL A. VAN SLYCK University of Arizona

The last yearsof the nineteenthcentury saw the widespreadacceptance experiences.The soulof one architect,although guilty of aesthetic sins,has achieved a certainmeasure of of the ideathat libraryfacilities should be madeavailable to the Amer- immortality.1 ican publicfree of charge.In the same years, the design of thefree Americanlibrary was at the centerof a prolongedand heateddebate: IN HERREFLECTIONS on the public landscapeof Xenia, on one hand, the newly organizedlibrary profession called for designs Ohio, in the early decadesof the twentieth century, Helen that supportedefficiency in libraryadministration; on the other, the Hooven Santmyerunwittingly hints at the difficultiesthat face men of wealth who often underwrotelibrary construction continued to the architecturalhistorian attempting to interpretCarnegie li- favor buildingsthat reinforcedthe paternalistic metaphor that sustained braries.Simply massed, symmetrically arranged, and classically theirphilanthropic activities. Between 1886 and 1917, AndrewCar- detailed(often with a temple front gracingthe center of the negieundertook a programof librarygiving that reformedboth library entrancefaqade), the hundredsof Carnegielibraries that dot the philanthropyand librarydesign, encouraginga closercorrespondence country are stylisticallyconventional buildings with a strong betweenthe two. Using the corporationas his model,Carnegie intro- family resemblance(Fig. 1). Designedby hundredsof different ducedmany of the philanthropicpractices of the modernfoundation. architects(rather than Santmyer'ssingle mythicalpractitioner), At the same time, he rejectedthe rigidsocial and spatial hierarchyof these buildingsare neither conceived as uniqueworks of artnor the nineteenth-centurylibrary. In over 1,600 buildingsthat resulted touched by the avant-gardearchitectural sensibility that was directlyfrom this programand in hundredsof othersinfluenced by its responsiblefor creatinga building like Unity Temple in the forms, Carnegiehelped create an Americanpublic librarytype that sameyears. Untouched by artisticgenius, Carnegie libraries do embracedthe planning principles espoused by librarianswhile extending not fall within the purviewof the art historicaltradition that a warmerwelcome to the readingpublic. treatsarchitecture as one of the fine arts. At the same time, Carnegielibraries also stand somewhat Courthouse,high school,and Carnegie library: in anymiddle western outsidethe realmof vernaculararchitecture studies. countrytown these are buildingsimpossible not to recognize;par- Designed ticularly,all Carnegielibraries are so alikethat one's memories hardly by professionalarchitects, they dependheavily on the classical seem associatedwith an individualset of yellow-brickwalls, white traditionsof Western architectureand are made of mass-pro- and stone trim, granitesteps. One might have sat on any one of a duced materials,often shippedover long distances.As a result, hundredparapets to strapon a pairof rollerskates: whatever town some of the most on the American one drives whatever at the of an unknown widely recognizedbuildings through,past library, sight have unstudied.Architectural historians are of- anonymouschild bent over a skatebuckle, one remembersrough landscape gone ten familiarwith stone througha summerdress, the sun on one's back, the pull of Carnegielibraries and sometimesharbor a skateson shoe soles, andaccepts as identicalone's own andall other nostalgicfondness for them as well; but we have let them (and a host of comparablebuilding types) fall throughthe gap that This articleis drawnfrom my Ph.D. dissertation,"Free to All: Carnegie exists between the studyof high-style design and that of ver- Librariesand the Transformationof AmericanCulture, 1886-1917," naculararchitecture.2 Universityof California,1989. My wholeheartedthanks go to my dissertationadvisor, Dell Upton, whose close readingand helpfulsug- 1. H. H. Santmyer,Ohio Town,New York, 1985, 187. gestionshave been invaluablein shapingthe directionof this work. 2. Recentattempts to fill the gapbetween high-style and vernacular Thanksas well to RichardChafee, Angela Giral, Mardges Bacon, and architecturestudies include P. C. Larson,ed., TheSpirit ofH. H. Rich- otherswho commentedon this materialwhen it was presentedat the ardsonon theMidland Prairies: Regional Transformations of an Architectural Temple Hoyne Buell Center'sTalks on AmericanArchitecture III in Style,Minneapolis, Minn., and Ames, Iowa, 1988; R. Longstreth,The 1987;to Ann Gilkersonfor her commentson a draftof this article;and Buildingsof Main Street:A Guideto AmericanCommercial Architecture, to ElizabethLonergan for her adviceon preparingillustrations for pub- Washington,D.C., 1987; idem, "CompositionalTypes in American lication.I would also like to acknowledgethe financialsupport of the CommercialArchitecture," in C. Wells, ed., Perspectivesin Vernacular Universityof Californiafor the researchand writing of the dissertation, Architecture,II, Columbia, Mo., 1986, 12-23; W. L. Lebovich,America's andthat of the Universityof Arizona'sCollege of Architecturefor the CityHalls, Washington, D.C., 1984;and A. Gulliford,America's Country preparationof illustrations. Schools,Washington, D.C., 1984.

JSAH L:359-383. DECEMBER1991 359

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 360 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER1991

ing the war.While theirmiddle-class contemporaries continued to supportmoral reform movements (like the YMCA)as a means of encouragingsocial cohesion, very wealthy men who had pulled themselvesup the social scale tendedto be less enthu- siastic about social constraintsimposed from above.4 Instead, theseself-made millionaires were attractedto librariesand other culturalinstitutions as meansof promotingindividual development from within. GeorgePeabody (a London-basedfinan- cier), Walter L. Newberry(a Chicagoreal estateand railroad promoter),and CharlesBower Winn (who inheritedthe small fortunethat his fatherhad accumulatedin the leathertrade in Massachusetts)were among the wealthy men who financed librarybuilding in the secondhalf of the nineteenthcentury.5 Despite geographicaland temporaldifferences, each of these nineteenth-centurylibrary builders cast himself in the role of Fig.1. CarnegieLibrary, Xenia, Ohio, 1907. Exterior (courtesy of the the patriarchof an extendedfamily, while the recipientsof his GreeneCounty Room, Greene County District Library, Xenia, Ohio). giftsplayed the partsof dependentrelations. The philanthropist nurturedthis illusion by extending his benevolenceonly to towns with which he had some sortof personalconnection. If In the caseof Carnegielibraries, there is muchto be saidfor he sharedWinn's inclination,he might also choose to invest filling this gap.As Santmyer'swords suggest, Carnegie libraries his endowmentwith a memorialfunction, inviting citizens of have enteredthe nationalconsciousness. Indeed, their ubiquity the recipienttown to sharein his grief and giving them access and their family resemblance(the very qualitiesthat preclude to a level of intimacyusually reservedfor family members.6 theirart historical consideration) provided generations of Amer- Althoughhis giftsto Baltimoreand to the Massachusettstowns icanlibrary-users throughout the countrywith remarkablysim- of Danvers,North Danvers,and Newburyportdid not fulfilla ilar experiences.What is more, these experiencesand the ar- memorialfunction, Peabody expressed this familialrelationship chitecturalcontainers that shaped them were substantially by referringto the educationalmission of his gifts as "a debt differentfrom their earlier nineteenth-centurycounterparts. due from presentto future generations."'7Recipients of these Touchedby the enthusiasmfor efficiencythat characterizedhis gifts also participatedin the metaphorwhen they welcomed age, AndrewCarnegie reformed the practicesof Americanphi- Peabodyto town with bannersthat read, "One Generation Shall lanthropy,redirected the courseof Americanlibrary design, and PraiseThy Works to Another."8 redefinedthe natureof libraryuse. This essay is intendedto Althoughpaternalistic philanthropy required both benefactor demonstratethe interactionsamong these threedevelopments. andrecipient to addressthe otherwith exaggeratedgraciousness, Librariansvs. architects the kind of fatherlyprotection offered by Peabodyand others The detailed described classically librarybuilding by Santmyer 4. For middle-classphilanthropy in the post-Civil War era,see R. was hardlythe conventionallibrary type before 1900. Indeed, H. Bremner,The Public Good: Philanthropy and Welfare in theCivil War in the decadesbefore the Civil War, it is difficultto speakof Era,New York,1980, chap. 8; M. B. Katz,In theShadow of the Poorhouse: A Social in America,New York, 1986, 3; andP. an Americanlibrary building type at all. Only in the 1870sand Historyof Welfare chap. Boyer,Urban Masses and Moral Order in America, 1820-1920, were for Cambridge, 1880s conditionsright the inventionof an American Mass.,and London,1978, chaps.7, 9, and 10. librarybuilding type. In thoseyears, widespread passage of pub- 5. For post-Civil War culturalphilanthropy in general,see K. D. Noblesse and in lic librarylaws (at least in New England)provided the legal McCarthy, Oblige:Charity CulturalPhilanthropy Chicago, 1849-1929, 1982, and H. L. Horowitz,Culture and the for librariesin while Chicago, City: apparatus creatingpublic greatnumbers, CulturalPhilanthropy in Chicagofrom the 1880s to 1917, Chicago,1976. postwarprosperity and the professionalizationof both librari- For Peabody'sphilanthropic career, see F. Parker,George Peabody: A anshipand architectureensured that these new librarieswere Biography,Nashville, 1971; for Newberry,see Horowitz,Culture and the for see A. M. "The PublicLibraries housedin City,35-36; Winn, Gilkerson, permanent,professionally designed buildings.3 of H. H. Richardson,"honors thesis, Smith College, 1978, 71-72. Typically,late nineteenth-centurylibrary buildings were the 6. The Winn MemorialLibrary in Woburn,Mass., was dedicated to productof localphilanthropy, gifts of men grownwealthy dur- Winn's father,Jonathan Bowers Winn. Gilkerson,"Libraries of Rich- ardson,"71. 3. The storyof this developmentis told in detailin K. A. Breisch, 7. Quotedin Parker,Peabody, 59. "SmallPublic Librariesin America1850-1890: The Inventionand 8. Proceedingsat the Reception and Dinner in Honorof GeorgePeabody, Evolutionof a BuildingType," Ph.D. diss., Universityof Michigan, Esq., of London,by the Citizensof the Old Townof Danvers,October 9, 1982. 1856, Boston, 1856, 32.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK: CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICAN LIBRARY 361

Fig. 2. HenryHobson Richardson, Winn MemorialPublic Library, Woburn, Massachusetts, 1876-1879. Exterior(photograph by BaldwinCoolidge, courtesy of the Societyfor the Preservationof New England Antiquities). like him exacteda heavyprice. At the Danversparade in Pea- body'shonor, a battalionof pupilsfrom the DanversportGram- marSchool carried banners that read,"We owe him gratitude; we will not repudiatethe debt," remindingall present that 111 Io o ...... I...... Peabody'sgift carriedwith it certainobligations.9 Nineteenth- A F like its re- 0 1 1 1 1 0 ...... centuryphilanthropy, parentallove, imposedupon -0 cipientsa debtof gratitudethat they hadnot askedto incurand oo oo o 0 that,no matterhow hardthey tried,they couldnever adequately repay. When it cametime for these to paternalisticphilanthropists Fig.3. WinnLibrary. Plan: A, library;B, readingrooms; C, librarian's house theirbenefactions, they consistentlyturned for adviceto desk;D, alcove;E, picturegallery; F, museum;G, vestibule;H, porch the new generationof professionalarchitects trained either at (redrawnfrom M. G. VanRensselaer, Henry Hobson Richardson and His Works,New York,1888, home or abroadin the compositionalprinciples of the Ecoledes 69). Beaux-Arts.Chief amongthem was HenryHobson Richardson, who designedmultipurpose cultural institutions for four cultural architectural that he had learnedin philanthropistsin easternMassachusetts, almost single-handedly composition Paris,Rich- ardsonarticulated each of the functions in creatinga building type that met the needs of these library building's separately founders.1o both plan and elevation(Figs. 2 and 3). The museum,for in- was housed in an room at one end of Begun in 1876, the Winn MemorialLibrary in Woburn, stance, octagonal the Variationsin andorientation Massachusetts,is a case in point. Drawingon the approachto building. proportion distinguished the rectangularrooms of the picturegallery, reading rooms, and libraryproper. These distinctionswere reinforcedin the ele- 9. Ibid.,33. vationof the building,as Richardsonvaried the height, 10. areWinn of Woburn,Oliver Ames, of North Easton, shape, They Jr., and orientationof the roofsover each of the rooms AlbertCrane of Quincy,and ElishaSlade Converse of Malden.Gilk- ridge major erson,"Libraries of Richardson,"18, 71, 98, 134. in orderto isolateeach functionwithin a distinctvolume.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 362 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER1991

Fig. 4. Winn Library.Bookhall (courtesy of the Societyfor the Preservationof New EnglandAntiquities).

Richardsonorganized these functionalvolumes along two designedby architects.As earlyas 1879, librarianWilliam Poole perpendicularaxes. Aligned with the building'slong axis, the told an audienceof his colleaguesat the fourth annualALA museum,picture gallery, and libraryproper provided a monu- conventionhis rule of thumb for planninga library:"Avoid mentalvista from one end of the buildingto the other(Fig. 4). everythingthat pertainsto the plan and arrangementof the Their orientationand scalereveal the importancethat architect conventionalAmerican library building.""11 and patronalike assignedto roomsdevoted to the storageand If architectstook Poole'scomments as a directattack on their displayof culturalor naturalartifacts. In contrast,the public professionalacumen, they did nothingmore than interpret the readingrooms were perceived as of secondaryimportance; thus, spirit of his words. In fact, Poole's commentswere only the they sit on the building'scross axis (Fig. 5). Unlike their more opening shots of a long, intensebattle between architects and monumentalcounterparts, these rooms have an almostdomestic librariansover which professionalgroup should prevail in mat- scale, thanksto their alcoves,inglenooks, and lower ceilings. tersof libraryplanning. By assertingtheir particular aptitude in At the intersectionof these two axes stood the deliverydesk, this area,librarians hoped to enlargethe body of knowledgein staffedby the librarian,who mediated,both literallyand figu- which they could claim expertise.In doing so, they soughtto ratively,the user'sexperience of the books. advancetheir strugglefor professionalrecognition, even as ar- Finally,Richardson clothed the buildingin a formalvocab- chitectswere seekingto consolidatetheir own hold on profes- ularyborrowed from theRomanesque. This stylisticmode had sional stature. two advantages.First, it seemedappropriate to the buildingtype, Despiteits competitivenature, the debatewas firmlyrooted giventhe library'spredecessors in medievalmonasteries. Second, in practicalconsiderations of libraryadministration. While it a style thatoften juxtaposed elements of differentsizes was well took severaldecades for librariansto settle on the ideal form suitedto a buildingin which so manydifferent functions would for a smallpublic library, they agreedfrom the starton the evils be expressedon the exterior. of the alcovedbookhall.12 Unimpressed by a pedigreethat ex- Yet, in the veryyears that Richardson was refining his library tendedback to sixteenth-centuryEurope, librarians complained formula, professionallibrarians emerged as another force in about every aspectof this distinguishedbook-storage system. Americanlibrary design. Fromthe moment the AmericanLi- braryAssociation was foundedin 1876, librariansbegan using 11. W. F. Poole,"Library Buildings," LibraryJournal, IV, 1879,293. theircollective voice to condemnthe physicallayout of libraries 12. Breisch,"Small Libraries," 147.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK:CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICANLIBRARY 363

Fig. 5. Winn Library.Reading room (photographby BaldwinCoolidge, courtesy of the Societyfor the Preservationof New EnglandAntiquities).

The alcoves, they noted, were impossible to supervise from a Despite the time and attention that librariansdevoted to the single vantage point, requiring libraries of this design to bar question of libraryplanning in the last decadesof the nineteenth patrons from entering the bookhall itself. Responsibility for century, they rarely had a chance to put their own ideas into retrieving books fell to a library clerk, who, in order to get a practice. Whether clothed in its original Romanesque mode, in book from the upper level, had to cross the length of the hall, the Queen Anne style, or even in classical garb, the Richard- climb a precarious spiral staircase,locate the book at the upper sonian type equipped with the alcoved bookhall served as the level, and retrace his steps to the librarian stationed at the de- model for small public libraries.15 livery desk in the next room. As if exhausting the clerk were The question, then, is, Why was the Richardsonian type so not bad enough, galleried bookhalls threatened the safety of the popular?It is tempting to explain the phenomenon as the result books as well. As librarianslike Poole were quick to point out, of a childlike innocence on the part of library trustees. After it was impossible to heat the ground floor of a galleried bookhall all, many towns that received library buildings in this era had to a comfortable temperature without overheating the upper neither an existing librarynor a resident librarian.In many cases, levels and damaging the books.13 the trustees did not think about hiring a librarianuntil after the In addition to these specific grievances against the bookhall, building was under construction. librarians took offense at the general state of affairs in which Contemporary librarians were much less generous in their visual effect took precedence over the requirements of easy li- assessment of the Richardsonian phenomenon. Poole himself, brary administration. At the 1882 ALA meeting, for instance, at yet another ALA conference, painted the typical board of Poole condemned Smithmeyer and Pelz's design for the new library directors as a group of dullards who tended "to look Library of Congress, not only because of its galleried book- but also because it would "make a show build- storage system, 15. Romanesqueexamples of the type includethe RichmondMe- ing" and would be "needlessly extravagant" in its search for morialLibrary in Batavia,N.Y., byJ. C. Cutler(1887-1889); the Acton is called effect.' MemorialLibrary in Acton,Mass., by Hartwelland Richardson (1888- "what falsely 'architectural ",14 1889); and the AnsoniaPublic Library in Ansonia,Conn., by George Keller(1891). The Easthampton(Mass.) Public Library by Peabodyand 13. Poole, "LibraryBuildings," 293. Stearns(1880-1881) and the Greenwich(Conn.) Public Libraryby 14. W. F. Poole, "Progressof LibraryArchitecture," LibraryJournal, Lamband Rich (1895-1896) are Queen Anne and classicalversions, VII, 1882, 132. respectively.Breisch, "Small Libraries," 267-268, 285-288.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 364 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991 aroundfor a librarybuilding which had galleriesand alcoves, in 1835, the myth emphasizesthe direstraits of the linen weav- and to reproduceits generalplan, and as much of its detailsas er's family impoverishedby the adventof the power loom. It they could pay for. They usuallycopied its worst features."'16 follows thirteen-year-oldAndrew's immigration to the United The tenor of his other commentsmake it clearthat Poole and Stateswith his family in 1848, and it stressesthe inexorable most of his colleaguesharbored the suspicionthat donorsand qualityof his riseto greatness.His promotionsfrom bobbin boy architectsalike shareda love of the monumentalfor its own in a textile factoryto telegraphoperator to railroadsupervisor sake. to millionairesteel manufacturerare presented as plausibleand While it is easy to imagine a donor relishing the comparison inevitable.In most accounts,the rags-to-richesmyth ends in of his gift to one of the great European librariesof the past, the 1901, when Carnegiesold his steel companyfor $480,000,000 appeal of Richardson's library formula is more deep-seated than to J. P. Morgan,who thereuponcongratulated his longtime mere vanity. Richardson'slibraries were so popular because they rival on becoming"the richestman in the world."'"18 were particularly successful at articulating the family metaphor The Carnegiemyth is historyof a highly subjectivesort, the that sustainednineteenth-century philanthropy. While the dou- factsof Carnegie'sbiography manipulated in orderto servethe ble-heightbookhall lent the buildingthe monumentalscale of story'srhetorical logic. The immigrantboy's poverty,for in- a public place, the fact that userscould not enter the hall re- stance,is exaggeratedin orderto throwthe steel manufacturer's mindedthem that they had accessto these fine libraryfacilities wealth into bolderrelief. At the sametime, by attributingCar- only by the graceof the donor.At the sametime, the reading negie's meteoric rise to his strength of character,the myth room, with its inglenooksand its massivefireplace (typically obscures Carnegie'sconsiderable contributions to American with a portraitof the donor over the mantel),had a domestic businesspractices. One must readbusiness history to discover scaleand the cozinessthat played such an importantpart in the that Carnegieinvented cost accounting,pioneering the practice Victorianideal of home. Libraryusers were at once in a public on the railroadand later using it in steel manufacturingto institutionand in the bosomof theirextended family. In short, undersellhis competitorswithout undercuttinghis profitmar- the architecturalproducts of nineteenth-centuryphilanthropy gin.19 workedin tandemwith the culturalassumptions that supported Despite these manipulations,the Carnegiemyth is basedin benevolentactivities. fact,and the young Scot'searly interest in philanthropyis borne out by the historicalevidence. Indeed, Carnegie was a young Andrew entersthe Carnegie philanthropicgame man of thirty-threewhen he firstexpressed his intentionto use When askedto explainwhy he chose to channelhis phil- his surpluswealth for charitable purposes. An inveterateplanner, anthropicenergies into the buildingof publiclibraries, Andrew Carnegiesketched out in writing a futurefor himself that in- Carnegiealways told the story of ColonelJames Anderson of cludeda few years'study at Oxford,followed by a well-ordered AlleghenyCity, Pennsylvania.One dayeach week, in the years existencein London,"taking a partin publicmatters especially beforethe Civil War, Andersonhad opened his personallibrary those connectedwith education& improvementof the poorer to the workingboys of his neighborhood.As one of thoseboys, classes."20 young Carnegietreasured the time he spent in the Colonel's In fact, Carnegie's future did not correspond directly with library.In his Autobiography,he creditedthe librarywith in- this 1868 daydream. His study-sojourn in Oxford never ma- stilling in him a love of literature,with steeringhim "clearof terialized, and he delayed another eighteen years before taking low fellowshipand bad habits," and with openingto him "the up philanthropyin earnest.Yet the date of the daydream,its precioustreasures of knowledgeand imagination through which London locale, and its educationalemphasis are indicativeof with and for a man like youth may ascend."'17Since Carnegieunderstood this ascentin Carnegie'sfamiliarity respect George both spiritualand materialterms, he felt he owed a greatpart Peabody.Although Carnegiebrought ideas of his own to his of his undeniablematerial success to the educationthat Colonel careerin benevolence,his earliestphilanthropic efforts were Anderson'slibrary had affordedhim. informedby the example of postwarphilanthropists of Pea- Carnegie'sanecdotal explanation is often repeated,in large body'silk. partbecause it fitsso closelywith the Carnegiemyth. Propagated Carnegie'smature ideas about benevolencewere first pre- by Carnegiehimself and perpetuatedby a host of subsequent sented for public consumptionin two articles,"Wealth" and the resemblesHoratio writers, Carnegiemyth closely Alger's 18. Morgan'scomments are quoted in H. C. Livesay,Andrew Carnegie rags-to-richestales. Startingwith Carnegie'sbirth in Scotland andthe Rise of Big Business,Boston and Toronto, 1975, 188. 19. For the facts of Carnegie'sbiography, see J. F. Wall, Andrew 1989. For a briefintroduction to busi- 16. W. F. Poole,"Small Library Buildings," LibraryJournal, X, 1885, Carnegie,Pittsburgh, Carnegie's 250. ness practices,see Livesay,Carnegie and Big Business. in and 17. A. Carnegie,Autobiography, Boston and New York, 1920, 46- 20. Carnegie'snotes to himselfare quoted Livesay,Carnegie 47. Big Business,72.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK: CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICAN LIBRARY 365

"The Best Fields for Philanthropy,"published in the North played a significantrole in the donor'slife.24 Allegheny City, AmericanReview in 1889 andlater published together under the Pennsylvania,had been Carnegie'sfirst home in the United title "TheGospel of Wealth"and Other Timely Essays.21 Aimed at States,and in 1886 it becamethe firstAmerican city to receive the educatedreadership of the Review,these articlesoutlined a Carnegielibrary gift. The next gift went to Pittsburgh,the lessonsthat Carnegiehoped his fellow millionaireswould take city just acrossthe Allegheny River and the site of the head- to heart.In Carnegie'sown words, quartersof Carnegie'ssteel empire. Subsequentgifts went to three other Pennsylvaniatowns: Johnstown, near the South Themain consideration should be to helpthose who will help them- Fork and Club, to which Carnegiebelonged; selves;to providepart of the meansby whichthose who desireto Fishing Hunting and Braddockand both sites of steel improvemay do so; to givethose who desire to risethe aids by which Homestead, Carnegie theymay rise; to assist,but rarely or neverto do all.22 works.25 Having patternedhis initial foraysinto philanthropyon the In short,Carnegie warned the philanthropistto protecthimself paternalisticmodel of the late nineteenth century, Carnegie againstthe riskof throwingaway his moneyon someonewith- adopteda similarattitude toward the architecturalform of his out the strengthof characterto makethe best use of it. librariesas well. This attitudeis particularlyapparent at the Going on to explainthat "neitherthe racenor the individual CarnegieLibrary of Allegheny City. There, responsibilityfor is improvedby almsgiving,"Carnegie hinted at the terrible the buildingfell to a librarycommission comprised of six mem- resultsof an ill-spentphilanthropic dollar. Not only did it risk bers,half appointedby Carnegieand half appointedby the city. the ruinof individuals;it alsothreatened the inevitableprogress Fixing upon a competitionas the best meansof securingplans of the age. The dangerwas particularlydire at the individual for the building, the commissioninvited seven architectural level, where indiscriminatecharity would certainly the "sap firmsto Two of those firmshad Richardsoniancon- foundationof of the compete.26 manly independence" not-yet-deserving nections: Rutanand was Richardson'ssuc- and his chanceof the of Shepley, Coolidge poor destroy reaching requisitestage cessorfirm, and C. L. Eidlitz had servedas Richardson'scol- deservedness.23 laboratoron the New York State Capitol in Albany. Their Inherentin Carnegie'sstatement was the contradictoryidea appearanceon the list of invitees revealsthe extent to which that only those who did not need help were eligible to receive the librarycommission acknowledged Richardson's town library it. In Carnegie'sdefense, he did not manufacturethis contra- designsas appropriatemodels for AlleghenyCity. diction;rather, he inheritedit froma long traditionof Protestant Anotherfirm invitedto competewas Smithmeyerand Pelz, liberalism,a traditionthat revealsitself againand againin the whose principalswere still involvedin the designof the Library Biblicalrhetoric of "The Gospel of Wealth." Like his prede- of Congress.This choice not only confirmsthe commission's cessors,Carnegie believed that wealth was a clear sign of the pretensionsto grandeur;it is also revealingin what it saysabout intellectualand moral capacityof the wealthy, whose natural the board'sattitude toward the librarydesign controversythat place it was to act as the stewardsof their wealth for the good was ragingabout them in the late 1880s. Perhapsthe commis- of the community. sionersdid not recognizelibrarians' complaints about the book- If Carnegie'sconcern with distinguishingthe deservingpoor hall as an indictmentof Richardson'selegant buildings.It is fromtheir undeserving fellows would havebeen familiarto any impossible,however, to imaginethat they misreadPoole's un- of his nineteenth-centurypredecessors, his actionswould have equivocalcondemnation of Smithmeyerand Pelz's Libraryof seemed equally conventional.Like Peabodyand others, Car- Congressdesign, publishedfour yearsearlier in the ALA'sLi- negie beganhis philanthropiccareer by extendinggifts only to braryJournal. towns with which he hadsome sortof personalconnection. An Was this a deliberatesnub to librarians,or merelya product 1881 to Dumfernline,Scotland, the weaver'sson gift gave poor of the commissioners' aboutthe currentdebate? Ex- a chanceto flaunthis millionsto the residentsof his hometown. ignorance Overthe next includedthe UnitedStates twentyyears, Carnegie 24. The exceptionis Fairfield,Iowa, which receiveda relativelysmall in his librarybenefactions, offering relatively large cash gifts to grantof $30,000 in 1892. G. Bobinski,Carnegie Libraries: Their History a handfulof towns on both sides of the Atlantic.Five of the andImpact on AmericanPublic Library Development, Chicago, 1969, 13. 25. Althoughit did not receiveits Carnegiegrant until 1901, Du- six Americantowns to receiveCarnegie in this had gifts period quesne,Pa., was the site of anotherCarnegie-owned steel plant and was treatedjust as Braddockand Homesteadhad been a decadeearlier. 21. A. Carnegie,"Wealth," North American Review, CXLVIII, 1889, Bobinski,Carnegie Libraries, 77. 653-664; "The Best Fieldsfor Philanthropy,"North American Review, 26. They were C. L. Eidlitzand George B. Post,both of New York; CXLIX, 1889, 682-690. Reprintedin A. Carnegie,"The Gospelof Shepley,Rutan and Coolidge of Brookline,Mass.; J. W. McLaughlin Wealth"and Other Timely Essays, New York, 1901. of Cincinnati;E. E. Myersand Son of Detroit;William HalseyWood 22. Carnegie,"Wealth," 663. of Newark;and Smithmeyerand Pelz of Washington,D.C. L. Wales, 23. Quotedin T. W. Koch,A Bookof CarnegieLibraries, White Plains, Souvenir-Openingof Carnegie Free Library and Carnegie Hall Presentedby N.Y., 1917, 7-8. Mr. AndrewCarnegie to AlleghenyCity, [AlleghenyCity], 1890, 15.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 366 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991

in December1886.29 As built,the buildingwas an asymmetrical mass dominatedby a clock tower and cloakedin a medieval vocabulary(Figs. 6-8). The entranceto the libraryproper was on the western,Federal Street, faCade. It gavedirectly onto the lobby dominatedby a largemarble stair (Fig. 9). To the south of the lobby,the small,square trustees' room enjoyeda prominent locationin the baseof the clock tower.To the eastof the lobby lay the deliveryroom, the library'sorganizational core (Fig. 10).As originallyplanned, the roomsnorth of the delivery room were off limits to the public.On axis with the delivery room, the largestof these staff rooms was the bibliographic room, which gave accessto the three stackrooms and a repair room to the west. The main readingroom, endingwith an octagonalbay, was south of the deliveryroom and on axis with it and with the bibliographicroom. East of the readingroom was the much smallerladies' reading room, from which opened the ladies' toilet. Eastof the deliveryroom were the men'stoilet and the librarian'soffice. Since both the librarycommission and the architectsassumed that librarianshipwould remaina malepro- fession, these last two rooms communicateddirectly with one another,as well as with the deliveryroom. The usablearea of the library'ssecond floor was limitedby the skylightthat illuminatedthe first-floordelivery room (Fig. Fig. 6. Smithmeyerand Pelz, Carnegie Library and Music Hall, Al- The roomson the secondlevel were northof the 1886-1890.View from 8). principal leghenyCity (now Pittsburgh), Pennsylvania, stairhall and includedthe art the stack southwest(Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh). gallery(above rooms) and print gallery(above the repairroom). The areaabove the bibliographicroom, not interiorspace when the buildingwas isting informationabout the programdevised as a guidefor the first completed,was left availablefor subsequentexpansion. competitorssuggests some of each.The programoriginally sent South of the lobby,above the trustees'room, a stairhall in the to competingarchitects in July 1886 no longer exists,but the clock tower led up to a room designatedfor scientificlectures requirementswere murkyenough to prompta numberof com- (abovethe main readingroom) and anotherset aside for the commission petitorsto write for clarification.27In response,the storageof chemicalapparatus used duringlectures (above the resolvedthat "plans may provide for placingof booksin alcoves ladies'reading room). or stacks,in whole or in part."28The imprecisenature of the Without interiorcommunication with the library,the music commissionerswere originalprogram suggests that the ignorant hall had a separateentrance on Ohio Street.The lobby,with that attachedto the choice of a of the importance librarians cloak room and ticket office, led into the music hall proper, book-storagesystem. Their clarification, however, continued to where an organ (paid for by an additionalCarnegie gift of allow the use of alcoves,mentioning stacks almost as an after- $10,000) loomed over the stage in the far wall. Cantilevered The it were un- thought. commissioners, seems, fundamentally galleriesprovided a secondlevel of seating,reached from stairs concernedabout the issuesinvolved. on eitherside of the lobby. lavish in the forthe "refined" Despite praise professionalpress Despitethe commissioners'initial nonchalance about library FrenchGothic design submittedby the local architectW. S. administration,the buildingconstructed under their aegis cor- Frazer,Smithmeyer and Pelz's designreceived the unanimous rected many of the worst errorsof conventionalnineteenth- approvalof the buildingcommittee, and of Carnegiehimself, centurylibrary design. Gone were the alcovedbookhalls dear to Richardson'sheart. In theirplace, single-height stack rooms 27. Giventhe historyof conflictbetween the libraryand architectural mitigatedthe damagingeffects of centralheating and saved the professions,it seemsironic that architectsraised the questionof book stepsof libraryassistants sent into the innersanctum to retrieve storage.Yet Poole'spointed critique of the Libraryof Congressmay requestedvolumes. Even the officialresponse of the professional have promptedSmithmeyer and Pelz and their fellow competitorsto pay particularlyclose attentionto this aspectof the program. 28. Wales, Souvenir,17. 29. Ibid., 17.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK:CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICANLIBRARY 367

I --ls

- M C •"0000" G . H m ~ |L J ooo 0 0

Fig. 9. CarnegieLibrary, Allegheny City. Lobby(Photo Archivesof the AlleghenyRegional Branch, The CarnegieLibrary of Pittsburgh). 010 2?0 40

Fig. 7. CarnegieLibrary, Allegheny City. First-floorplan: A, music hall;B, lobby;C, librarian'soffice; D, men'stoilet; E, women'stoilet; F, ladies'reading room; G, bibliographicroom; H, deliveryroom; I, readingroom; J, repairroom; K, L, M, stackrooms; N, stairhall;0, trustees'room (redrawnfrom the LibraryJournal, XVIII, 1893, 289).

P1------

I P Fig. 10. CarnegieLibrary, Allegheny City. Delivery room, c. 1930. Thebookshelves and railing are not original; they were probably added c. 1915,when an addition to thenorth side of thebuilding prompted a shiftin roomuse (Photo Archives of theAllegheny Regional Branch, The CarnegieLibrary of Pittsburgh).

Creditfor these innovationsinto the o 10 20 40 Ft incorporating building belongs to Smithmeyerand Pelz, whose Libraryof Fig. 8. CarnegieLibrary, Allegheny City. Second-floorplan: P, upper Congress partof musichall; Q, apparatusroom; R, lectureroom; S, printroom; experiencemade them uniquelyand acutelyaware of Poole's T, artgallery; U, upperpart of stairhall(reconstructed from the Library ideas of libraryplanning. Indeed, there are many similarities XVIII, 1893, Journal, 289). betweenthe AlleghenyCity plan and an idealplan for a small librarythat Poole had publishedin the Libraryournal just nine monthsbefore the AlleghenyCity competitionwas announced library community, published in 1893 in the LibraryJournal, (Fig. 11).31 In both schemes,the user came first into a lobby steered clear of the vituperative attack that many other library that gaveaccess to the trustees'room and staircase. In both, the buildings elicited from librarians.30 entrancewas on the building'sshort axis, while thebook-storage 30. "The CarnegieFree Library,Allegheny, Pa.," LibraryJournal, XVIII, 1893, 288-290. 31. Poole, "SmallLibrary Buildings," 250-256.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 368 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991

ganizedcollection of rooms,the deliveryroom of the Allegheny City libraryfocused inwardon a massivefireplace. Above its mantel a portraitof Carnegie,donated by the commissioners from their personalfunds, invited libraryusers to pause and pondertheir debt to Carnegie'sliberality. At the sametime, the Smithmeyerand Pelz buildingwas also moreintimate and inviting than Poole's ideal. In the realbuild- C DE ing, the entranceto the deliveryroom from a doorin the corner mitigatedthe ritualisticquality that might have resultedfrom a more formal, axial approach.The speciallyshaped reading room and the alcove that servedas the ladies' readingroom were alsoimportant physical reminders of domesticity,intended F G to convey a sense of homeynessto the readers. As built, the Allegheny City libraryreminded library users thatthey were nearthe bottomof a libraryhierarchy that started with Carnegieand descendedthrough the trustees,to the male librarian,to the femalelibrary clerks, and only then to the library Small 1885.Plan: Fig.11. WilliamPoole, librarybuilding, project, A, users.Even here, the social and spatialhierarchy favored male referenceroom; B, ladies'reference room; C, bookroom; D, delivery readersover female ones. Yet, at the same time, the homey room;E, periodicaland newspaper room; F, librarian'soffice; G, lobby; H, directors'room (redrawn from the Library Journal, X, 1885,253). touchesencouraged the readerto think that the hierarchywas sustainednot just by dint of bruteeconomic power but also by mutuallove and as in an extendedfamily. The library room,the deliveryroom, and the largestreading room (in Poole's respect, user then look Carnegieas a rich uncle, who de- plan, identifiedas the periodicaland newspaperroom) were might upon served obedience,and affection,and whose affectionin organizedon the long axis.32In both, the deliveryroom was respect, return classresentment. locatedat the intersectionof thesetwo axes.Finally, both Poole's precludedany An articlethat in the PittsburghBulletin schemeand the AlleghenyCity plan maintainedthe practiceof anonymous appeared at the time of the librarydedication reveals that contemporary gendersegregation.33 observers the building'smeaning in just this way. Despitethese planning similarities, the Smithmeyerand Pelz interpreted Althoughthe bulkof the articleis a straightforwarddescription plandeparted from Poole'sideal in tone andcharacter. In order of the new scatteredcomments reveal the author's to accommodatethe complex relationshipbetween the donor building, of the building'sspatial and social hier- andthe user,the AlleghenyCity librarywas moremonumental preciseunderstanding The trustees'room, for he describedas "ahigh- thanPoole's ideal. In the realbuilding, for instance,an imposing archy. example, wainscoted,dignified-looking apartment sacred to the one which stairwaydominated the lobby,instead of hiding demurelyin a its name a room that "the enters ... in a dim stair tower that would have been all but invisibleto anyone implies," light way, through stainedglass windows high above the enteringPoole's hypotheticalplan (Fig. 9). Likewise,the de- religious floor." Likewise,when the writercalled the book stacks"the livery room at Allegheny City was an imposingroom with a Holy of Holies in this literarytemple," he usedreligious terms high ceiling and ampleproportions; at 36 ft. x 40 ft., it was to articulatethe that the building'sdesign conveyed to more than twice the size of Poole's(Fig. 10). In addition,each message users:mere mortalswere not welcome in every part of this surfacewas elaboratelydecorated: overhead was a skylight of culturalinstitution.35 stainedglass, underfoot were mosaicfloors covered in "chaste The monumentalityof the two main public spaceswas not arabesquessurrounding the words... 'CarnegieFree Library,' " for and on the walls was a friezelikeblind arcadeinscribed with lost on the reporterfrom the Bulletin.He noted, instance, that "the main staircaseclaims notice for its gracefulsweep as the names of twenty-fiveAmerican authors.34 While Poole's well as its solidityand beauty."In the samevein, the delivery deliveryroom was a void at the center of a centrifugallyor- room (he calls it the "receptionroom") seemed to him "a lofty apartment,its ample skylight reachingfrom wall to wall."36 32. In Poole'splan, the readingroom is identifiedas the periodical and newspaperroom; this reflectsa commonpractice in the late nineteenth century,when librariesprovided reading areas for those who could not affordto have the dailypaper delivered to their homes. The c. 1890, 33. Poole even advocatedseparate windows at the deliverydesk, one 35. "AndrewCarnegie's Gift," Bulletin, February pre- Archives for ladies,the other for gents. Ibid.,255. servedin the CarnegieCorporation (CCA). 34. Wales, Souvenir,21. 36. Ibid.,n.p.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK: CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICAN LIBRARY 369 From the even tone of the article, it is clear that the writer 1,679 librariesto 1,412 towns at a cost of well over $41 mil- found these monumentalelements completelyappropriate to lion.39 this type of publicbuilding. Certainly,Carnegie had moved beyond the local level of Yet the writerused the sameapproving tone to commenton giving that was characteristicof his nineteenth-centuryprede- the library'scozy touches-the comfortablechairs, the electrical cessors.In fact,throughout the secondphase of his philanthropic andgas fittings, the sanitaryconveniences-that "make the place career,Carnegie's approach to his charitableendeavors would an ideal one for the enjoymentof a favoriteauthor." In short, have seemedstrange indeed to a GeorgePeabody or a Charles the writerwas undisturbedthat a publicinstitution should also Bower Winn. In contrastto Peabody'ssporadic method of phi- offer its patronsthe "forgetfulnessof care" that was usually lanthropythat dependedso much on the personalwhim of the relegatedto the domesticsphere in the late nineteenthcentury. patron,Carnegie instituted clearly defined procedures that gave Commentingmatter-of-factly that the open fireplace"greet[s] his dealingswith individualtowns the formalityof a contractual the visitor right cheerily from the base of a monstermantel- agreement.For his part,Carnegie would give a libraryto any piece," the writerwas evidentlyundisturbed by the brutaljux- town with a populationof at least one thousand,the amount tapositionof monumentaland domesticimagery. Deprived of of the gift usually set at $2 per capita.Recipient towns were its functionalpurpose by the building'ssystem of centralheat- requiredto providea site for the librarybuilding and to tax ing, the fireplaceplayed a largelysymbolic role: a shrineto the themselvesat an annualrate of 10 percentof the total gift, the donor,it was the only appropriatespot for Carnegie'sportrait, fundsto be used to maintainthe building,to buy books,and to "anobject that must,on openingday andthereafter, attract the pay the salariesof the librarystaff.40 most roving attention.""37 The advantagesof this kind of philanthropiccontract were By the end of this imaginarytour of the building,it seems numerous,at leastfrom Carnegie's point of view. First,it helped clearthat part of the article'spurpose was instructive;the writer assurehim that the recipientsof his gifts were willing to do hopedto teachhis readershow to thinkand behave appropriately their part towardsupporting the library,or, in the terms he in their new publiclibrary. Referring to the city with feminine himself had used in "The Gospel of Wealth," that he was pronouns,the writerclosed his piece with an admonition.The helpingonly those who helpedthemselves. Second, it provided building,he noted, "is somethingto assuredlymake her hold clear-cutpolicies for administeringthe libraryprogram, allow- in perpetualgratitude the man whose liberalityhas been so ing Carnegieto turn over the drudgeryof the day-to-daypa- fittinglyand nobly embodied. ... Her people,as one man,must perworkto his personalsecretary, James Bertram.41 hope for the munificentdonor, long yearsof health and pros- Indeed, Bertramseems to have been responsiblefor intro- perity,and the openingceremonies must serveto give voice to ducing many refinementsto Carnegie'snew systemof library this feeling, while the yearsto come mustfail to dim the mem- philanthropy.Over the years,he put into place an easily ad- ory of the man whose heart promptedthe gift, and fail to ministeredprocedure for dealingwith requests.Upon receiving eradicateor weaken the sense of obligationwhich [Allegheny an inquiry,Bertram sent a scheduleof questionsto be answered City] must feel towardAndrew Carnegie."38For this anony- by the town's officials.This form askedfor the town's popu- mouswriter, the buildingwas a success.More than a warehouse lation and for informationon the existing library(if any), in- for books,it servedto remindthe citizensof AlleghenyCity of cluding the numberof books in its collectionand the previous theirundying, unpayable debt of gratitude,affection, and respect year's circulationstatistics. It also asked how the librarywas for the philanthropistwho madeit possible. housed(including the numberand measurementsof the rooms and their uses)and the stateof the library'sfinances (including Carnegie'sreform of American philanthropy a breakdownof its receiptsand expenditures).Finally, it asked By the turnof the century,however, there was a shift in the directionof The Carnegie'sphilanthropy. most noticeableas- 39. The expansionof the Carnegielibrary program was not limited pect of this shift was a huge increasein the numberof Carnegie to the United States.An additional828 librarieswere built in many of the librarygifts. In 1899 alone, Carnegiepromised libraries to 26 parts English-speakingworld, including England, Scotland, Can- ada, Australia,New Zealand,South Africa,and the West Indies. F. more than twice the total numberof cities, Carnegie-financed Anderson,Carnegie Corporation Library Program, 1911-1961, New York, buildings built in the previousthirteen years. The numbers 1963, 4-5. 40. continuedto grow, the peak coming in 1903, when Carnegie Bobinski,Carnegie Libraries, 40, 43-45. 41. Bertram was born near offeredlibraries to 204 towns. had James (1872-1934) Edinburghand had By 1917, Carnegie promised workedfor railroadand mining interestsin Scotlandand SouthAfrica before becoming Carnegie'sconfidential secretary in 1897. Bertram remainedin that post until Carnegie'sdeath in 1919, andhe continued to serveas secretaryof the CarnegieCorporation until his own death 37. Ibid.,n.p. fifteenyears later. F. P. Hill,JamesBertram: An Appreciation,New York, 38. Ibid.,n.p. 1936, 15-21.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 370 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991

the amount the town council was willing to pledge for annual Defining "the modernlibrary idea" maintenance if the town should receive a whether there library, This reform of American libraryphilanthropy virtually guar- was a site available, and the amount of collected toward money anteed that the Carnegie librariesbuilt in the twentieth century the new building.42 would differ from their nineteenth-century predecessors. The If the was the annual population large enough, appropriation corporate metaphor that sustained the new philanthropy was and the facilities high enough, existing library poor enough, fundamentally at odds with the family imagery of nineteenth- the town had a chance of a offer from good securing library century libraries influenced by Richardson's designs. What is Bertram then sent a form letter, an offer and Carnegie. making more, Carnegie's philanthropic reforms, and particularly his that the funds would be available as soon as the stating recipient insistence on public support for his gifts, changed the perception town submitted a of the resolution of council copy promising of these buildings in important ways. Elaborate structureswere an annual tax for Once the resolution levy library purposes.43 fine for a library both built and supported by private funding, was in hand, Bertram contacted Robert Franks, treasurerof the but a library maintained with funds drawn from public coffers Steel who established an account in the Carnegie Company, had to convey its fiscal responsibility in its smaller size and more name of the town. towns received their Recipient Carnegie modest demeanor. The new formula for determining the dollar in installments, after Franks an architect's grants only sending amount of each gift ensured that this new generation of Car- certificate that the sum with verifying requested corresponded negie buildings would be smaller and less elaborate than their work. completed predecessors,while Carnegie's new program requirements (lim- These reveal much about at- procedural changes Carnegie's iting the building's facilities to library functions and a small titude toward his activities in this philanthropic period. Jetti- lecture hall) were also intended to help recipient towns stay the model that had his earliest bene- soning family supported within their more conservative budgets. factions, embraced the as the Carnegie corporation driving The timing of Carnegie's reforms is also significant, in that for the entire the metaphor philanthropic enterprise. Applying it coincided with independent changes in the basic philosophy of that he had for his railroad principles efficiency developed of library administration. The traditional understanding of the and concerns, centralized decision manufacturing Carnegie library as a treasure house, protecting its books from untrust- and limited the for making, regularized procedures, possibilities worthy readers, was falling out of currency. Increasingly, the mistakes. Instead of involved with making becoming personally libraryprofession sought to use the public libraryto bring readers the administration of his established philanthropies, Carnegie and books together, rather than keeping them apart. According that allowed others to out his procedures carry policies. Abstract, to librarianArthur E. Bostwick, "the modern library idea" was criteria could be quantitative (which applied by anyone) replaced characterized by public support, open shelves, work with chil- could be made the subjective judgments (which only by phi- dren, cooperation with schools, branch libraries, traveling li- What is these included lanthropist himself). more, procedures braries, and library advertising.44 checks and balances that distributed and ensured responsibility Service to children was the first feature of "the modern library that the smooth of the on no functioning system depended single idea" to receive serious consideration. As early as 1876, librarian person. William I. Fletcher pointed out the inconsistencies between the The of the nature of Car- legal acknowledgment corporate library'sclaim to an educational function and the usual practice reforms came in 1911. In that in the negie's philanthropic year, of barring children under twelve from public library use. Con- music room of his Fifth Avenue in the of his mansion, presence cern for the safety of the books, however, continued to outweigh he over the first of the wife and daughter, presided meeting the educational mission of the library for another ten years. Carnegie Corporation, the corporate body chartered to admin- Even in the 1880s, experiments in this area met with limited ister the library program (Fig. 12). The date is less significant success. In New York City, a children's library established in than the name. After all, Carnegie began reorganizing his phil- 1885 was closed in the early 1890s when adult readers com- anthropic activities around 1899, and in the intervening years plained about the noise that children made as they climbed the he had merely refined the system with Bertram's help. In es- stairs to their third-floor reading room.45The provision for free tablishing one of the first modern foundations, however, Car- access to book shelves got an even slower start. Condemned negie did not have a term to distinguish a corporatebody whose outright by Melvil Dewey in 1877, the practice was still the purpose was to make money from a corporate body whose pur- subject of lively debate at professional meetings a decade later.46 pose was to give it away. Thus, it was, and remains, the Carnegie Corporation. 44. A. E. Bostwick, The AmericanPublic Library, New York and London, 1910, 8-9. 42. Three versionsof this questionnaireare reprintedin Bobinski, 45. H. Long, Public LibraryService to Children:Foundation and Devel- CarnegieLibraries, 203-205. opment,Metuchen, N.J., 1969, 80-94. 43. Ibid.,205-206. 46. Bostwick, AmericanPublic Library,9.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK:CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICANLIBRARY 371

Fig. 12. Firstmeeting of the CarnegieCorporation, 1911. Standing,left to right:Henry S. Pritchett,James Bertram,Charles L. Taylor,Robert A. Franks.Seated, left to right:William N. Frew,Robert S. Woodward, Elihu Root, AndrewCarnegie, Margaret Carnegie, Louise Whitfield Carnegie(used by permissionof CarnegieCorporation of New York).

The 1890s were the turningpoint in both these develop- William Howard Brett reported to the ALA that the practice ments.Although an 1893 surveyof 126 publiclibraries revealed had served to increase the library'scirculation.50 that over 70 percentmaintained an age limit of at leasttwelve By the end of the decade, other writers expanded explicitly years,the librariesthat admittedchildren often madea special upon this theme. By 1897, John Cotton Dana argued that the attemptto providea placefor them. The Hartford(Connecticut) substantial decrease in the cost of modern books made obsolete Public Libraryestablished a cornerof the main readingroom the conventional definition of the libraryas "simply a storehouse for children'suse in the early1890s, while in Pawtucket,Rhode of treasures."Instead of using the delivery counter as a physical Island,a children'scorner was speciallyfitted with low tables and symbolic barrierbetween the readerand the books, the new and chairs.47By 1897, a survey conductedby the editorsof library should allow the reader to move among the shelves, to PublicLibraries revealed that librariesin Boston, Brookline, enjoy "the touch of the books themselves, the joy of their Cambridge,Brooklyn, Buffalo, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Kalamazoo, immediate presence." Comparing book selection to shopping, and Denver all providedseparate children's rooms for their Dana implored his colleagues to treat readers with the same youngreaders; in atleast four cases, these rooms had been opened consideration and trustthat ready-madeclothing stores extended within the previoustwo years.48By the turn of the century, to their customers. The pleasure involved in the open library, mostlibrarians regarded a separatechildren's room as a necessary Dana argued, would not only bring in more readers;it would componentof the publiclibrary.49 also encourage "reading of a higher grade." Farfrom subverting Althoughthe questionof free accessto bookswas still hotly the educational aims of the public library, open shelves would debatedin the 1890s, large urbanlibraries joined the ranksof facilitate their implementation.51 those institutionsexperimenting with open shelves.Of partic- Dana realized that his comparison of cultural and commercial ularnote was the Cleveland(Ohio) PublicLibrary, which of- institutions constituted an abrupt departurefrom conventional fered unrestrictedaccess to all'booksat all hoursbeginning in ideas of library administration. Indeed, he emphasized the rad- 1890. Allayingfears about the wholesaletheft of books,librarian ical nature of this shift in his language, referring to the modern public libraryas "a book laboratory."At the same time, he drew 47. Long,Library Service to Children,80-94. 48. "ReadingRooms for Children,"Public Libraries, II, 1897, 125- 50. Ibid., 10. 131. 51. J. C. Dana,"The Publicand Its PublicLibrary," Appletons' Pop- 49. Bostwick,American Public Library, 13. ularScience Monthly, LI, 1897, 244-245.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 372 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991

in expandingthe rangeof servicesoffered by the modernlibrary, his ideasalso exacerbatedthe problemsof librarydesign.

Designingthe modern library The debatesof the 1890s affectedlibrary architecture at the turn of the century.Whether financedwith Carnegiefunds, with money donatedby philanthropistsworking on the paternalisticmodel, or frompublic coffers, American public libraries reflectedthe unresolvedconflicts over the design and function of the publiclibrary. In general,public libraries of this erawere stylisticallymore Fig. 13. Smithand Gutterson, Carnegie Library, Ottumwa, Iowa, opened consistent (Figs. 1, 13, 14, 16, and 18). In the Architectural 1902. Perspectivedrawing (Architectural Review, IX, 1902, 30). Review's1902 compilationof the best modernlibrary design, a full fifty-sevenof the sixty-sevenpublic libraries included were on this analogy from the industrial world to suggest changes in classicallydetailed, while only five employedthe Romanesque library design. Moving beyond what had become a standard modepopularized by Richardson.54Dana and subsequent writers critique of "architectural effects, ... imposing halls, charming on librarydesign attributed this wholesaleshift to classicismto vistas, and opportunities for decoration," Dana also explicitly the influence of the Ecole des Beaux-Artsand the World's rejected "the palace, the temple, the cathedral, the memorial ColumbianExposition in Chicago.55While many prominent hall, or the mortuary pile" as appropriateparadigms for library libraryarchitects were trainedin the principlesof the Ecole, design. Dana suggested looking instead to "the workshop, the thattraining was primarilyconcerned with an approachto plan- factory [and] the office building" as better models for "the book ning and composition;it did not promote classicismper se. laboratory." The attraction is easy to see: the architectural ex- Richardson'sRomanesque Revival library designs, for instance, pression of these buildings was not based on older building types; were the productof the Ecole's teaching. The shift toward rather, it had been developed in conjunction with modern func- classicismis moreaccurately explained as the Ecole des Beaux- tional requirements. More forcefully than any of his contem- Arts responseto the new emphasison the publicnature of the poraries, Dana called for the modern library to break with the library.Classical elements had long been part of the Ecole's architectural traditions previously established for the building meansof expressingthe caractkreof a public buildingand had type.52 enjoyedan early association with suchpioneering public libraries Dana's more specific suggestions, however, point to the dif- as the BibliothequeSte.-Genevieve in Paris and the Boston ficulty of forging new planning solutions, while rejecting ev- Public Library.The classicalmode also offeredmore specific erything that came before. Although Dana admired the exterior symbolicopportunities; many classical libraries were gracedwith forms of industrial and commercial buildings, his ideal library a dome that literallyand figurativelytransformed the centrally did not follow the principles of open planning that characterized placeddelivery desk into the locus of publicenlightenment. their interiors. Holding fast to the conventional idea of the Even in buildingswith similarclassical detailing, however, library as a series of functionally specialized rooms, he called libraryplanning was anythingbut consistent.At the Parsons for a delivery room (with a delivery desk, information desk, and MemorialLibrary in Alfred, Maine, for instance,the perfect access to toilets and cloak rooms), a catalogue room, book rooms, symmetryof the frontfaqade disguised the factthat the interior a children's room with open shelves, a reference room, and the arrangementswere essentiallythose of a Richardsonlibrary; the librarian's office, all in close proximity to one another. In ad- deliverydesk servedto keep readersout of the double-height, dition, there were to be resting rooms for assistants,class rooms, alcovedbookhall, while the referencearea with its fireplaceand mending and binding rooms, and periodical and newspaper rooms. Although these rooms could be situated farther from the delivery room, they were to be located near the reference room.53 54. C. C. Soule, "ModernLibrary Buildings," Architectural Review, 1-60. Since no illustrations accompanied his article, it is impossible IX, 1902, 55. Dana,"The Publicand Its 249; L. Wheeler and A. to know how Dana would have these rooms to meet Library," J. arranged M. Githens,The American Public Library Building: Its Planning and Design his demands for efficiency. Dana's progressive ideas may indeed withSpecial Reference to ItsAdministration and Service, New York, 1941, American have made the library more responsive to the public's need; yet, 5; H. G. Montgomery,"Blueprints and Books: LibraryAr- chitecture,1860-1960," LibraryJournal, LXXXIV, 1961, 4,078. Dana's assessmentthat the World'sColumbian Exposition "delayed our [i.e., 52. Ibid.,247. America's]architectural emancipation by many a long day"antedates 53. Ibid.,249-250. LouisSullivan's similarly dire pronouncementsby twenty-sevenyears.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK: CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICAN LIBRARY 373

o PARfON5 MtMORIALLBRxp-

C, NIr.5 P T.__F_ A.==W

Fig. 14. Hartwell,Richardson and Driver,Parsons Memorial Library, Alfred, Maine, opened 1903. Ele- vation (ArchitecturalReview, IX, 1902, 54).

-.I--SI-O PLAN----*

5ECOND FLOOl PLAN

FIM- FLOOD- PLAN

Fig. 15. ParsonsLibrary. First- and second-floorplans (Architectural Review, IX, 1902, 54).

flankingwindow seatsprovided a cozy readingspace distinct to books (Figs. 18 and 19). Designersof many other libraries from the largereading room (Figs. 14 and 15). at the turn of the centuryfollowed no establishedtype, exper- Other plan types provedmore adaptableto new ideas.The imenting insteadwith uniqueplanning solutions (Fig. 20). ReyersonPublic Libraryin GrandRapids, Michigan, for in- The varietyin approachesto libraryplanning illustrated in stance, was plannedaround a centralhall that led to reading these examplesis evidentin Americanpublic libraries generally roomson eitherside andto a smallstack room at the rear(Figs. at the turnof the century.57To be sure,late nineteenth-century 16 and 17). Althoughthe T-shapedarrangement had been pop- debateshad made some impact on librarydesign; over 85 percent ular since the 1880s, Shepley,Rutan, and Coolidge used it in of the public libraryplans includedin the ArchitecturalReview the Grand Rapidslibrary with greatersensitivity to current surveyfollowed newer practices,providing reading rooms for librarydebates, including a children'sreading room equal in specializedmaterials (including newspapers, maps, historical lit- size to the periodicalreading room.56 Juvenile readers, however, erature,and unspecified special collections), and over 75 percent did not have free accessto books;like their adultcounterparts, includeda fully fitted children'sroom. Yet the debatesof the they were requiredto requesttheir readingmaterial at the de- 1890s had resultedin consensuson few other planningissues. liverydesk opposite the mainentrance. A variationof thisscheme The questionof public accessto books,remained particularly replacedthe rectangularbook storageroom with a radiallyar- problematicat the turnof the century.Only abouta quarterof ranged,open shelving area,allowing readerssupervised access

57. Academicand other private libraries were not subjectto the same 56. For the developmentof the T-plan,see Breisch,"Small Librar- debates.More trusting of theirlimited constituencies, they often allowed ies," 134-139, 271-280. readersaccess to books,even in alcoves.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 374 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991

IAI F- --7~t

AIL--

Fig. 16. Shepley, Rutan and Coolidge, Ryerson Public Library, Grand Rapids, Michigan, opened 1904. Elevation (ArchitecturalReview, IX, 1902, 45).

c o Ci~~i~GAO ;?~--~-?- ? j~jjj~c Ci

0 D 1111 1~ 0 Q li10 !y ~? t~-~ ttttc; C)?4

Fig. 17. RyersonLibrary. First- and second-floorplans (Architectural Review, IX, 1902, 45).

the librariessurveyed followed Dana'scall for completelyopen Carnegie'sreform of Americanlibrary architecture accessto theirbook collections.Over half of the main- sample This somewhatconfusing pattern of librarydesign holds true closed while another15 tainedcompletely stacks, percentpro- for Carnegielibraries as well. Indeed,since Carnegielibraries accessto a small of their collections. vided open only portion accountfor just over40 percentof the 1902 ArchitecturalReview there was no clear aboutthe use At the sametime, agreement sample,they playeda significantrole in defining the general for and of separaterooms for referencereading, cataloguing, tendenciesoutlined above.58A directcomparison of the plans of the libraries for trustees'meetings: only 58 percent surveyed of Carnegieand non-Carnegielibraries, however, reveals that includedthese rooms. Other room types cateringto uses not associatedwith the book collection (roomsfor group directly 58. The largeproportion of Carnegielibraries in this sampleis not study,exhibition rooms, lecture halls, and club rooms) appeared surprising,given the factthat Carnegie had offered to fundthe building in fewer than a third of the librariesin the sample. of 316 publiclibrary buildings in the threepreceding years.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK: CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICAN LIBRARY 375

......

LIMESTONE, Bill 3Ill C&vecL Millc

pa- ap.a~r/s A(4meMilrt J k~"Pe ,l~orR

Cbujrfda?CytmoI L. ~~,M:~~urMved L~~L~sne _44dnrn Jn? -L+nrsw o pr ~ ~ ^al~?rVL !PL L ti L;HpI

fL VLS3h*ro p PLI Oi iKli

-Brck 3:'-?a?ib' ?d1 aa-Co.-!~I~~il-# [ ?A~ ~t~t~il~ a~;~#--;n4s~i. - ~r-3~-~~~-~-~-r~~t~3~-IU:d?i~i~~d-bSIilI- I.,a ~ P

Fig. 18. Penn Varney,Free Public Library, Schenectady, New York, opened1903. Elevation(Architectural Review, IX, 1902, 34).

AJJrnMLYMAL TCMkO M~m AHIL LIDILARJAh VE3TI15ULE DELIVEMYLM~A~ llrsrnir l I?Vft oo m POILM COAL~NT )W~

Fig. 19. PublicLibrary, Schenectady. Basement, first- and second-floorplans (Architectural Review, IX, 1902, 34).

Carnegie-financedbuildings tended to put greateremphasis on closedstacks. All told, the Carnegielibraries in the 1902 survey roomsdevoted to publicservice. Carnegie libraries, for instance, were 25 percentmore likely to providefree accessto the books were more likely to includechildren's rooms, reference rooms, than their non-Carnegiecontemporaries. and lecturehalls, and less likely to reservea room for the use Despite these progressivetendencies in Carnegielibraries at of theirtrustees, than libraries funded in otherways. Particularly the turnof the century,a clearlyarticulated policy towardCar- interestingis the issue of public access to their books. Like negie librarydesign developed only graduallyover the first librariesfunded from other sources, more Carnegie libraries had decadeof the century.Ironically, the originalimpetus behind closedstacks than had open access to all books;yet the preference these developmentshad to do morewith economythan with a was statisticallyvery small, with only 44 percentusing closed fully developedsense of public service.As Bertramlater de- stacks,while 40 percentallowed open access.In comparison,a scribedthe situation,"Almost every community which received truemajority (68 percent)of non-Carnegielibraries maintained a donationfrom Mr. Carnegiein yearsgone by to erecta library

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 376 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991

ard Brett, Bertrambegan to see that cost overrunswere the resultof inefficientlibrary planning, rather than the productof inept financialmanagement. The planningprinciples espoused by the libraryprofession became Bertram's catechism, and the spreadof what he called"effective library accommodation," his holy mission.62 - With the intensityof a religiousconvert, Bertram internalized ?-i , not only the librarians'dogma but also their prejudices.Long consideredthe naturalenemy of the librarian,the architectbe- came Bertram's bate noire. With Poole's admonition o personal . . . . to "avoideverything that pertainsto the plan and construction of the conventionalAmerican library building" ringing in his ears,Bertram suspected even the best-intentionedarchitects of ooon leadingtheir clients astrayin mattersof libraryplanning. Ber- O~ i tram'sattitude was succinctlyexpressed by Mrs.Percival Sneed, the librarianof the CarnegieLibrary in Atlanta,who did her best to explainthe situationto the editorof the Ocala(Florida) Banner.As Sneed it, ,* put I wouldlike to straightenout the completemisunderstanding as to theattitude of the CarnegieCorporation in thematter of plans.... Mt. New Fig.20. EdwardL. Tilton, Carnegie Library, Vernon, York, The wholematter of planswith them hinges on the factthat they 1903.First-floor plan(Library Journal, XXIX, 1904, frontispiece). wishthe towns to getthe best value for their money and they know, asall trained librarians know, that there are almost no architects who arecompetent to drawthe interiorof a libraryso thatits adminis- trationwill be easy and economical, unless the architect has the advice that had used the bilding [sic],came back with the plea they of anactive librarian. ... It is impossiblethat any person whould [sic] mony [sic]in the bilding [sic]and had no mony [sic]left to havea graspof whatthe plan should be unless that person has actually purchasebookstacks and furniture."59Additional gifts to cover administereda library and has done work in it. Thisfact is unques- tionableand well knownto all membersof the such exigencieshad, of course,been a regularpart of American perfectly library philanthropywhen donors had thought of their relationship profession.63 with their beneficiariesin familial terms. Under the tightly Sneedleft no doubtthat Bertramhad decided to put Carnegie's definedrules of however,such requests corporatephilanthropy, supportbehind librariansin their battle with the architecture constituteda breachof the new philanthropiccontract. Starting profession. about 1904, Bertram the for buildings began reviewing plans At first, Bertramspread the gospel of "effectivelibrary ac- thatran over 1908, Bertram's was budget.60By approval required commodation"on a case-by-casebasis, but eventuallyhe took on the of allbuildings constructed with Carnegiemoney.61 plans stepsto circumventthe inefficiencyof this system.In 1911, in The advicethat Bertram on to the of Car- passed recipients the same year that the CarnegieCorporation was chartered, was new, and not of his own device. negie'sgifts hardly certainly Bertramrecorded the collectivewisdom on progressivelibrary Rather,it was baseddirectly on ideasabout library administra- planning,codified it into a set of six standardplans, and issued tion that librarianshad in the previoustwenty years. espoused it in a pamphletentitled "Notes on the Erectionof Library Drawingon the writingsof Poole, Dana,and others, as well as Bildings [sic]."64 The production and printing history of this on his conversationswith Cleveland'slibrarian, William How- pamphletis somewhatmurky; Edward L. Tilton, a New York architectspecializing in librarydesign, may have had a handin 59. Bertram,Letter to L. K. Johnson,8 Feb. 1916, CCA. What at producingthe schematicplans, while a numberof librarians first to be are the result of a appear misspellings simplifiedspelling were able to critiqueboth plans and text beforethe pamphlet schemethat librarian Melvil Dewey convincedCarnegie to supportand use. Thus, in some originalsources quoted in this articlebuilding is renderedas bilding,money as mony,effective as effectiv,built as bilt,are as ar, haveas hav, and doubtas dout.In the balanceof the article,these wordshave been convertedto standardEnglish spellings. 62. [J. Bertram],"Notes on the Erectionof LibraryBildings [sic]," 60. The 1904 date is suggestedby Bertram'scorrespondence with [New York, 1911], n.p. Ocala 11 Cambridge,Ohio, on 30 Jan. 1904, and with Taylorville,Ill., on 5 63. Mrs. P. Sneed,Letter to FrankHarris, Editor, Banner, Nov. 1904, CCA. May 1915, CCA. 61. Bobinski,Carnegie Libraries, 57. 64. [Bertram],"Notes," n.p.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK: CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICAN LIBRARY 377

was issued.65Updated and refined five times in the next seven ditionalconcerns of the architect.True, the insistentsymmetry years, the "Notes" accompanied all formal offers of library gifts of the plansand the referenceto "goodtaste in building"suggest from 1911 on.66 that Bertrammay have had in mind a restrainedversion of the Two of the pamphlet's four pages were given over to text. classicismthat had been popularin public librariessince the Mustering what tact he could, Bertram began by explaining turn of the century.At the sametime, one of Bertram'smajor why the pamphlet was necessary. Library committees were ill reasonsfor writing the pamphletwas to pressurecommunities prepared to select an appropriate library design, he explained, into forgoing the high domes, classicalporticoes, and monu- because they "are frequently composed of busy men who [lack] mentalstairs that had gracedthose earlierbuildings. After years time or opportunity to obtain a knowledge of libraryplanning." of strugglingwith architectswho encouragedtheir clients to Architects, he warned, were equally unreliable since they "are go over budget, Bertramhad understandablybegun to equate liable, unconsciously, no doubt, to aim at architectural features architecturewith extravagance.In the pamphlet'ssingle para- and to subordinate useful accommodation." Libraryboards and graphon the designof libraryexteriors, Bertram acknowledged their architects would do well to remember the following rule the need for "the communityand architect[to] expresstheir of thumb: "Small libraries should be planned so that one li- individuality,"but he immediatelywarned against "aiming at brariancan oversee the entire library from a central position."67 such exterioreffects as may make impossiblean effectiveand The text goes on to explain how the Carnegie Corporation economicallayout of the interior."'69Architecture, Bertram im- determined the amount of the gift, with the admonition that plied,was mostapt to get in the way of effectivelibrary planning "there will be either a shortage of accommodation or of money and could be avoidedcompletely with no ill effects.70 if this primary purpose is not kept in view, viz.: TO OBTAIN By maintainingthis distinctionbetween architectureas the FOR THE MONEY THE UTMOST AMOUNT OF EFFEC- expressive,stylistic elements on the exteriorof a building,and TIVE ACCOMMODATION CONSISTENT WITH GOOD buildingas the practicalaccommodation of heating, lighting, TASTE IN BUILDING." According to the text, the usual and structuralsoundness, Bertram revealed that his ideasabout mistakes stemmed from giving too much space to the entrance architecturewere highly conventional.Bertram, however, re- area, delivery room, cloak rooms, toilets, and stairs.68 The new versed the usual nineteenth-centuryhierarchy that assigned philanthropy encouraged neither the large expenditure nor the greaterimportance to the expressivequalities of architecture. complex symbolism that served to impress Allegheny City's Echoingthe LibraryJournal's1891 statementthat "it is farbetter library users with the donor's generosity. that a libraryshould be plain or even ugly, than that it should Conspicuously lacking in Bertram's "Notes" is any mention be inconvenient,"Bertram insisted that practicalmatters take of or style any discussion of beauty-in short, any of the tra- precedenceover artisticexpression.71 The planningideas Bertram espoused were presentedin the 65. Tilton's contributionto the "Notes" remainsunclear. Bertram "Notes" both in text and in schematicdrawings. The ideal certainly his andin 1911 respected librarydesigns early (while working Carnegielibrary was a one-storyrectangular building with a on the "Notes")mentioned him to grant as an architectwho recipients small vestibule had "successfullydesigned many Carnegielibraries recently." Tilton, leading directlyto a single large room;where however,was not alonein this honor;Carnegie's brother-in-law, Henry necessary,this room was subdividedby low bookcasesthat sup- D. Whitfield,and the firmof Pattonand Milleralso Chicago received plementedthe bookshelvesplaced around its to hold Bertram'sunofficial endorsement in 1911. Tilton'sown articleon "Sci- perimeter the collection. In additionto book this entificLibrary Planning," published in the Libraryournal in 1912, does library's storage, room not advocatethe sort of open planningpresented in the "Notes," fo- providedreading areas for adultsand childrenand facilitiesfor cusing insteadon formulasfor calculatingsquare footage of library the distributionof books. The basementhad a lectureroom, a facilities,stack size, and electricaland Neither heatingrequirements. heatingplant, and "conveniences" for staffand Bertram contemporarylibrary literature, architectural periodicals, Carnegie Cor- patrons. porationcorrespondence, nor the pamphletitself mentionsTilton's in- even went as faras to suggestceiling heights(9 to 10 ft. in the put. The firstmention of Tilton'sname in connectionwith the "Notes" 69. Ibid.,n.p. datesfrom 1941,when Wheelerand Githens credit Tilton with drafting 70. Neither the CarnegieCorporation nor the more loosely orga- the for the "Notes" plan arrangements (AmericanPublic Library, 218). nized body that precededits incorporationin 1911 ever sent As Tilton'sformer ready- partner,Githens was ostensiblya reliablesource, and madeplans for librarybuildings. As a result,none of the elevationsthat several authorshave linked Tilton's subsequent namewith the "Notes." graceCarnegie libraries across the countryoriginated with the sincehis with Carnegie Yet, partnership Tilton did not beginuntil 1920, Githens Corporation,although their plans conform more or lessto the schematic lackedfirsthand of theseevents. knowledge By the time Githenslinked diagramscontained in Bertram'spamphlet. Far from to force Tilton's name with the attempting "Notes," those who could have verifiedthe a certainmode of buildingupon towns common facts hapless (a misperception (includingBertram, Carnegie, and Tilton himself)were already aboutthe Carnegielibrary that still Bertramturned dead. program persists), down frequentrequests for ready-made plans. J. Bertram,Letter to Mrs. 66. Bobinski,Carnegie Libraries, 58. N. C. Ensign,of Madison,Ohio, 24 Nov. 1916, CCA. 67. [Bertram],"Notes," n.p. 71. C. C. Soule,"Points of Agreementamong Librarians as to 68. Library Ibid., n.p. Architecture,"LibraryJournal, XVI, 17.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 378 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991

F0 IUIlIb.K&AA1 -r 01L.rr llrL NTRElJj ElE

Lr0TtJRZ F,0M),t -TAII 00

MA=XQ0W lE lE

VASEMEN IIR STFI

BASEMENT FIRST:]Dr-lvr-Ry FLOOR T~r-CTU=0?,&jD0_L R90M ...L4Na ADULT EIZ nTSArrRpa om ~ I ADIGrYQB LL LL l~r-T D0tG MQ0M &JAMIOXTR. OU21-ETl Llh~~

CHLD0ZN5

______IV=T.

BAS EMENT KIXfR A DVL-r.5FIRST FLOOR PA- 03A0JN 3tr-ADINC~R-00KRQN! TZD0ADG ~a -PM-0

-LT'j hoL3'! El B J r--r

SCA&M Oe-A.Z

& JANfrrov-7rM.=7 -JTA-rV.QPM

BASEMENT FIRST FLOOR

Fig. 21. JamesBertram, "Notes on the Erectionof LibraryBildings [sic],"1911, schematicplans A, B, and C (usedwith permissionof CarnegieCorporation of New York). basement; 12 to 15 ft. on the first floor) and the placement of were closestto Bertram'sideal-a simplerectangular building windows (6 ft. from the floor, to allow for shelving beneath). with a centralentrance on the long side.The nexttwo responded Six plans accompanied the text (Figs. 21 and 22). Diagram- to unusualsites. Plan C was meantfor a site that was deeper matic in nature, they gave no indication of wall thicknesses or than it was wide, while Plan D sought to adaptthe same ar- window placement. Although Bertram claimed that these plans rangementsto a cornerlot. Plans E and F used an off-center were "suggestive rather than mandatory," he warned in the entranceand a single readingroom to provideaccommodations same breath that "those responsible for building projects should for very small libraries.Despite these differences,each plan pause before aiming at radical departures."72 Variations in the followed Bertram'splanning rule of thumb,allowing a single plans accommodated differences in size and site. Plans A and B librarianto overseethe entirelibrary. These plansare telling of Bertram'sdebt to late nineteenth- 72. [Bertram],"Notes," n.p. centurydebates about library planning. The unwaveringcom-

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK: CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICAN LIBRARY 379 D'- ZTArr-P0i

TOIL "TAND

,D, ,DO

BASEMENT FIR3T FLOOR SCALU

TOILMT I 2

BAS EMENT FIRST FLOOR

V I -I -F rL r-lr--1r Fbo-LzK -I ICZr'•TZ TOL• PZADWING L •1. rR,0RO.

___- L - _____ BASEMENT FIR3ST FLOOR

A a! zeL-u -- e-ALu 11, !T--- l

NOTE: Elevations of plans submittedfor approval should clearly sho the floor and celing lines of basement and main floor, and the natural and artificial grade lines. Floor plans should sho, clearly designated, all roof supports and similar obstructionsof the accommodation. Fig. 22. JamesBertram, "Notes on the Erectionof LibraryBildings [sic],"schematic plans D, E, and F (usedwith permissionof CarnegieCorporation of New York).

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 380 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991 mitmentto open accessto all the books in the collection and building'sclassical frieze. Set in a classicalframework high over- the emphasison a children'sreading room equal or nearlyequal head,these wordsprovided only the most abstractreminder of in size to the readingroom for adultswere, afterall, ideasfirst Carnegie'srole in libraryaffairs. Inside the library,the donor employedin the 1890s. Perhapsthe greatestcontribution of the was all but invisible.By deleting all fireplacesfrom his ideal "Notes"was to translatethe rhetoricof the 1890s into graphic plans,Bertram neatly removed the temptationto transformthe formsthat couldbe adaptedto a wide varietyof circumstances. hearthinto a shrineto the benefactor.74In the reformedlibrary, At the sametime, however,Bertram's pamphlet went beyond therewas no donor'sportrait gazing intently down on the read- the writingsthat inspired it, pursuingthe implicationsfor plan- er. ning that were left unexploredin the libraryliterature of the As the donor'slieutenants, the trusteeswere also made less 1890s. In 1897, Dana had suggestedthe factoryand the office visible. Deprived of a separateroom reservedexclusively for building as appropriatemodels for the modernpublic library their use, the trusteeswere obligedto meet in a room that did building.Although Dana hoped for a similarlyfresh approach quadrupleduty, servingas a work room, a staffroom, and club to librarydesign, his moreconventional understanding of plan- room as well. In contrastto the place of honor the trustees' ning preventedhim from advocatingany radicalchanges in the room receivedin AlleghenyCity, the basementlocation of this arrangementof libraryinteriors. Only in 1911 did Bertramand room was a literaltranslation of the trustees'figurative drop in the othersinvolved in writingthe "Notes"apply Dana's analogy the library'ssocial scale. to the realm of planning.Subdivided only by low bookcases, The librarian(by 1911, more likely to be a woman than a with glasspartitions to buffersound without interferingwith man) found herself in an ambiguousposition. The open plan visualcommand of the interiorspace, the six plansincluded in put herinto a spatialsituation comparable to thatof the manager the "Notes" all used open plans like those alreadyin place in of a factoryor an officebuilding. From her post at the delivery departmentstores, factories,and skyscrapers.Having already desk, the librarianwas at the center of libraryactivities. Not made the connectionbetween philanthropyand corporateor- only did she survey the entire building, but she herself was ganization,those associatedwith the Carnegieprogram were always in view as well. In their basementmeeting room, the in a good positionto see a similarconnection between library libraryboard maintained a centralrole in establishinglibrary design and the buildingsdesigned for corporate,commercial, policy, but the librarianupstairs personified the institutionfor and industrialuse. most libraryusers on a dailybasis. Despite the librarian'srise in statusrelative to the library thenature use Redefining of library trustees,these gainswere undercutby other aspectsof the Car- The architecturalforms advocatedby the CarnegieCorpo- negie Corporation'sideal plans. The basementlocation of the rationwere intendedto improvelibrary efficiency. Yet they also staffroom, for instance,suggests that the librarystaff had dropped meantfundamental changes in the way thatpeople experienced lower in the libraryhierarchy, with respectto libraryusers, both the library,whether they were librarians, library board members, physicallyand symbolically-a demotion that was reinforced or readers.Through these plans, Carnegie,the corporatephi- by the multipurposenature of the staffroom. Instead of reigning lanthropist,encouraged activities different from those earlier over an inviolateinner sanctumof their own, membersof the encouragedby Carnegie,the paternalisticphilanthropist. In the librarystaff had to sharetheir room with both the trusteesand paternalisticlibrary, the donor himself had occupiedthe apex membersof local clubs. of a pyramidalsocial structure,followed by the trustees,the The arrangementof the firstfloor tells even more aboutthe librarian,and the libraryassistants, with maleand female library loss of professionalprestige sufferedby librariansin the first usersat the verybottom. Bertram's ideal plans reveal a different decadeof the twentieth century.By the end of the previous set of priorities.They offereda spatialblueprint for a re-sorted century,professional men usedcontrol over their workspaceas socialhierarchy that minimizedthe differencesamong the sev- one of the symbolsof their authority,symbols that were care- eralparties. fully orchestratedto intimidatelaypersons and make them more In the reformedlibrary, for instance,the donor'spresence receptiveto expert advice.75Having made an appointmentto was substantiallyless palpable.Unlike theirpredecessors in Al- these laterlibraries were intendedto be shrinelessis borne leghenyCity, laterrecipients of Carnegiegifts were not required 74. That out events. In 1935, a later generationof Corporation on the When by subsequent to inscribethe donor'sname building'sexterior.73 officialsmarked the hundredthanniversary of Carnegie'sbirth by send- recipientsdid opt to acknowledgeCarnegie's contribution, they ing each librarya portraitof its donor.Although these portraitsstill officialshave had typically chose to include his name in an inscriptionin the hang in many Carnegielibraries, library difficulty findingappropriate places for them in the reformedlibrary. 75. B. J. Bledstein,The Cultureof Professionalism:The Middle Class Educationin New York, 1976, 73. J. Bertram,Letter to Hon. B. Smith, of Macon,Ga., 22 Nov. and the Developmentof Higher America, 1915, CCA. 98-102.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK: CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICAN LIBRARY 381 see a doctor or lawyer, even the most promptof clients was The statedpurpose of this arrangementwas to allow a single shown into an outer office. Left there to wait, the client had librarianto supervisethe entire library;its practicalresult was time to perusethe impressiveframed certificates hanging on the to deprivethe librarianof the spatialcontrol that was an im- walls or even to peerat the spinesof the leather-boundtextbooks portanttool in maintainingprofessional authority. The power on the shelf. As if these signs of eruditionwere not enough to to determinethe timing andextent of professionalconsultations inspirethe client'sawe, the practitioneralso maintainedcontrol now restedin the handsof librarypatrons, who enjoyedunlim- overthe timing of the consultation,either by enteringthe room ited accessto the librarian.This new libraryarrangement was himself or by having a receptionistusher the client into his the physicalcounterpart to the transformationof librarianship room. Working to gain their own professionalrecognition, to a demand-orientedactivity and its accompanyingloss of pro- nineteenth-centurylibrarians used similar ploys. Even the head fessionalprestige. librarianof the AlleghenyCity libraryhad a privateoffice and This drop in prestigewas most completelyembodied in the the spatialcontrol that was a sign of his professionalism. chargingdesk. Although the design of the desk receivedlittle By the turn of the century,however, the face of American specificcomment in Bertram's"Notes," its centrallocation and librarianshipwas changing as male libraryleaders tapped the its role as the control center of the libraryguaranteed that it large pool of unemployed,well-educated women for library was chargedwith symbolicmeaning. Resembling desks mar- work. Invokingthe acceptedideology that women commanded keted by the LibraryBureau, the desksof Bertram'splans are a specialtalent for transmittingculture, library leaders success- evocativeof the symbioticrelationship between the librarian fully broughtwomen out of their acceptedrealm of the home and her desk;each was incompletewithout the other (Fig. 23). and installedthem in the library.Indeed, by the turn of the Fittedwith speciallyshaped drawers to accommodatecard files century,Melvil Dewey was predictingthat the librarianof the and the other specialequipment necessary for the efficientdis- futurewould be a woman.76 tributionof books,the deskwas fully functionalonly when the The feminizationof librarianshipproved to be an insidious librarianwas seatedwithin its embrace.At the same time, the process,one in which the qualificationsof the professionwere librarianwas tetheredto the desk, unableto completeher job degradedin order to meet what were perceivedas the lesser without the tools built into its cabinets.A silentpresence in the intellectualcapabilities of its femalepractitioners. Having once library,the chargingdesk nonethelessspoke volumes about li- claimedprofessional recognition based on a masteryof abstract brarianship-atonce aidingin the implementationof its tech- knowledge,librarians saw theirjob redefinedas the practiceof niquesand testifying to the limitedcompass of that newly fem- technical skills. Strippedof its intellectualbasis, librarianship inized profession. could no longer exercisethe authorityof other professions.It Forlibrary patrons, male and female, young andold, the new becamea servicecareer in which librariansplayed a passiverole, libraryoffered a pleasantsurprise. From the outside, the em- waiting to meet the demandsof the reader.77 phasison symmetryhelped identify the buildingas a publicone; Carnegie'scontribution to the transformationof librarianship readerscould enterfreely, safe in the knowledgethat they were was indirect.Indeed, most of these changeswere the product welcome. Inside,the architecturalexperience had been evened of developmentswithin the professionitself. Nonetheless,the out. Ceilingswere of a uniformheight, and rectangularrooms Carnegielibrary program was responsiblefor translatingthe were evenly lit from windows that startedsix feet from the new realitiesof a librarian'slife into physicalform. At the most floor. Gone were the speciallyshaped reading rooms with their prosaiclevel, the proximityof the women'stoilet and the staff auraof Victoriandomesticity. Gone were monumentalvistas room in plansA, B, and C suggeststhat Carnegieand Bertram into largepublic rooms. If the experiencewas less dramatic,it sharedDewey's assumptionthat small-townlibrarians would was also less intimidating. be female.'"More important,in the ideal libraryespoused by Libraryusers were confrontedwith neithera glimpse of a Carnegie,the librarianno longerhad a self-containedoffice but sumptuoustrustees' room nor a shrineto the donor.The physical occupiedonly an open work areabehind the chargingdesk. boundariesthat in earlierlibraries separated them from the librarystaff had disappeared.Most important,they were allowed to fetch their own books directlyfrom the shelves lining the 76. D. "The Tender Technicians:The Garrison, Feminizationof walls that surroundedthem. They had enteredinto a relation- PublicLibrarianship, 1876-1905,"Journal of SocialHistory, VI, 1972- 1973, 132-136. ship of trustwith the powersthat be. 77. Ibid., 147-152. For women and children,the new libraryoffered unfamiliar 78. women had been into the Although accepted workplace,the freedom.Women were no longersegregated into ladies'reading situationof their toilet facilitiesshows of Victorianstandards vestiges rooms or of propriety;where fundspermitted-i.e., in PlansA, B, C, and D- treateddifferently from their male contemporaries. the women'stoilet was insulatedfrom the publiccorridor by its own Whereasearlier libraries had been exclusivelyadult affairs with vestibule. separatereading rooms for male and female readers,only the

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 382 JSAH, L:4, DECEMBER 1991

::;:: "I

Fig. 23. LibraryBureau charging desk, c. 1902 (LibraryCatalog: A DescriptiveList withPrices, [Boston], 1902, 50).

Fig. 24. PublicWorks Administration, Public Library, Allenstown, New Hampshire,1934. Exterior (Na- tionalArchives).

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions VAN SLYCK: CARNEGIE AND THE AMERICAN LIBRARY 383

smallest of the new libraries failed to provide a special reading room for the use of children. Young readers found in the children's room a of the that reading portion public landscape ca- ; tered directly to their needs. WOkK kOOM

Conclusion

No new Carnegie library grants were issued after 1917. Trus- tees had already begun to reassessthe mission of the corporation when f A escalating building costs caused by wartime of ROOM shortages tADINCHILD0EI "vOOM 0 materials and labor made it y•. YAD•ING impossible to continue the library UDULT" program along established lines. After a period of reappraisal and planning that lasted until 1925, the corporation began a new program of library support, extending grants to the Amer- ican Association and Library comparable professional organi- ICAL L IN PATP zations in other English-speaking countries, to library training schools, and to academic libraries. 25. Public Allenstown.Plan Yet the impact of the Carnegie library program extended far Fig. Library, (PublicBuildings: Architecture underthe Public WorksAdministration 1933-1939, the Washington, D.C., beyond 1,679 buildings constructed with Carnegie funds. 1939;reprint, New York,1986, 110). Carnegie's example and his published statements explaining the rationale behind his actions encouraged other American philanthropists to support libraries, usually at a local scale. Far from librarianJoseph L. Wheeler and architectAlfred Morton Gith- viewing this as an intrusion into his area of philanthropic ex- ens devoteda full chapterof their book on libraryplanning to pertise, Carnegie welcomed their involvement. He was careful an analysisof what they dubbed"the Carnegierectangle," af- not to extend an offer to a town where another philanthropist firming the faith of their respectiveprofessions in the "sound had expressed an interest in establishing a library." Indeed, part common sense"of the "Notes."81 of the attraction to philanthropy for Carnegie had been the The changesthat Carnegie wrought in the directionof Amer- opportunity to demonstrate how the field as a whole might be ican philanthropyand Americanlibrary design were mutually made more systematic and more efficient. As with his business supportive.Old-style philanthropy, which castthe recipientsof ventures in railroadingand steel manufacturing, Carnegie seems the gift in the role of perpetuallygrateful dependent relations, to have derived great satisfaction from having others imitate his found its parallelin unreformedlibraries, where the user was innovations, seeing this not as a challenge to his achievements foreverreminded of his placeat the bottomof the library'ssocial but as an acknowledgment of the superiority of his methods. hierarchy.The reformedlibrary, a single room dominatedby a The influence of the Carnegie program was even more in- centrallyplaced circulation desk and lined with six-foot book- tensely felt in the area of American library planning. Indeed, shelves, was the physical embodimentof the contractualar- "Notes on the Erection of Library Bildings" was remarkably rangementbetween the philanthropistand the recipientsof his effective in promoting the open-plan library, with its centrally gifts, an agreementthat strictlydefined the limitationsof grat- located charging desk and flanking reading rooms, as the ideal itude.82 for small public libraries until World War II. In the 1920s, postwar prosperity prompted many communities to finance their own library buildings, often hiring architects whose plans revealed their libraries. previous experience designing Carnegie brary buildings based on the planning ideals codified in the "Notes." In the lean years of the 1930s, the Public Works Administration Public Buildings:Architecture under the Public WorksAdministration 1933- 1939, D.C., 1939; New filled the financial void left by the demise of the Carnegie library Washington, reprint, York, 1986, 108-139. 81. Wheeler and Githens, AmericanPublic Library,215-225. program, funding small, symmetrical, detailed classically li- 82. The current condition of many Carnegie buildings bears out the brarieswith open plans (Figs. 24 and 25).80Even as late as 1941, program's success at cultivating local attachment to the library, both as an institution and as a landmark. Although many Carnegie libraries have been torn down, this is often a sign that steady financial support caused book collections to outgrow their architectural containers. In 79. The initial from St. for was denied request Paul, Minn., example, even more cases, the Carnegie library has been altered beyond recog- on the that local had an interest in grounds philanthropists expressed nition or converted to another use, suggesting that the building itself matters. Bobinski, 39. pursuing library CarnegieLibraries, had become so important to the people of the community that they 80. Harrison, N.J.; Allenstown, N.H.; Topsfield, Mass.; New Phil- were unwilling to part with their Carnegie building, even when their and adelphia, Ohio; McMinnville, Ore., all received PWA-funded li- needs had far outstripped its capacity.

This content downloaded on Thu, 20 Dec 2012 11:47:52 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions