INTERVIEW WITH T. CLIFFORD NOONAN

Interviewed by Betty J. Blum

Compiled under the auspices of the Architects Oral History Project The Ernest R. Graham Study Center for Architectural Drawings Department of Architecture The Art Institute of Chicago Copyright © 1995 Revised Edition Copyright © 1995 The Art Institute of Chicago This manuscript is hereby made available to the public for research purposes only. All literary rights in the manuscript, including the right to publication, are reserved to the Ryerson and Burnham Libraries of The Art Institute of Chicago. No part of this manuscript may be quoted for publication without the written permission of The Art Institute of Chicago.

ii TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface iv

Preface to Revised Edition vi

Outline of Topics vii

Oral History 1

Selected References 24

Curriculum Vitae 25

Index of Names and Buildings 26

iii PREFACE

Since its inception in 1981, the Department of Architecture at The Art Institute of Chicago has engaged in presenting to the public and the profession diverse aspects of the history and process of architecture, with a special concentration on Chicago. The department has produced bold, innovative exhibitions, generated important scholarly publications, and sponsored public programming of major importance, while concurrently increasing its collection of holdings of architectural drawings and documentation. From the beginning, its purpose has been to raise the level of awareness, understanding, and appreciation of the built environment to an ever-widening audience.

In the same spirit of breaking new ground, an idea emerged from the department's advisory committee in 1983 to conduct an oral history project on Chicago architects. Until that time, oral testimony had not been used frequently as a method of documentation in the field of architecture. Innumerable questions were raised: was the method of gathering information about the architect from the architect himself a reliable one? Although a vast amount of unrecorded information was known to older architects, would they be willing to share it? Would their stories have lasting research value to future scholars, or would they be trivial? Was video-recording a viable option? How much would such a project cost? With a grant from the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts, we began a feasibility study to answer these questions.

Our study focused on older personalities who had first-hand knowledge of the people and events of the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s—decades that have had little attention in the literature of Chicago's architectural history. For nine months in 1983, I contacted more than one hundred architects in Chicago and suburbs and visited most of them. I learned not only that they were ready, willing, and more than able to tell their stories, they were also impatient to do so. Many thought such a program was long overdue.

For each visit, I was armed with a brief biographical sketch of the architect and a tape- recorder with which I recorded our brief exchange. At that time, we considered these visits to be only a prelude to a more comprehensive, in-depth interview. Regretfully, this vision did not materialize because some narrators later became incapacitated or died before full

iv funding was secured. Slowly, however, we did begin an oral history project and now, more than twelve years later, our oral history collection has grown into a rich source of research data that is unique among oral history programs worldwide. With the completion of these interviews our collection of memoirists now numbers more than fifty and the collection continues to grow each year. This oral history text is available for study in the Ryerson and Burnham Libraries at The Art Institute of Chicago, as well as in a complete electronic version on the Chicago Architects Oral History Project's section of The Art Institute of Chicago website, www.artic.edu/aic

This interview is one of several dozen short interviews that were recorded in 1983 during the feasibility study. Surely each one of these narrators could have spoken in greater depth and at greater length; each one deserves a full-scale oral history. Unfortunately, thirteen of these twenty architects have already died, which makes these short interviews especially valuable. These interviews were selected for transcription, despite their brevity, because each narrator brings to light significant and diverse aspects of the practice of architecture in Chicago. We were fortunate to receive an additional grant from the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts to process this group of interviews.

Thanks go to each interviewee and those families that provided releases for the recordings to be made public documents. Thanks also go to Joan Cameron of TapeWriter for her usual diligence and care in transcribing; to Robert V. Sharp of the Publications Department and Maureen A. Lasko of the Ryerson and Burnham Libraries at The Art Institute of Chicago for the helpful suggestions that shaped the final form of this document; and, once again, to the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts for its continuing support, with special thanks to Carter Manny, its former director. Personally, I would like to thank John Zukowsky, Curator of Architecture at The Art Institute of Chicago, for his courage in taking a chance on me as an interviewer in 1983, when I was a complete novice in the craft of interviewing. Since then, I have learned the art and the craft and, more importantly, I have learned that each architect's story has its own very interesting and unique configuration, often filled with wonderful surprises. Each one reveals another essential strand in the dense and interlocking web of Chicago's architectural history.

Betty J. Blum 1995

v PREFACE TO REVISED EDITION

Since 1995, when the previous preface was written, advances in electronic transmission of data have moved at breakneck speed. With the ubiquity of the Internet, awareness and demand for copies of oral histories in the Chicago Architects Oral History Project collection have vastly increased. These factors, as well as the Ryerson and Burnham Libraries' commitment to scholarly research, have compelled us to make these documents readily accessible on the World Wide Web. A complete electronic version of each oral history is now available on the Chicago Architects Oral History Project's section of The Art Institute of Chicago website, http://www.artic.edu/aic, and, as before, a bound version is available for study at the Ryerson and Burnham Libraries at The Art Institute of Chicago.

In preparing an electronic version of this document, we have reformatted it for publication, reviewed and updated with minor copy-editing, and, where applicable, we have expanded the biographical profile and added pertinent bibliographic references. Lastly, the text has been reindexed and the CAOHP Master Index updated accordingly. All of the electronic conversion and reformatting is the handiwork of my valued colleague, Annemarie van Roessel, whose technical skills, intelligence, and discerning judgment have shaped the breadth and depth of the CAOHP's presence on the Internet. This endeavor would be greatly diminished without her seamless leadership in these matters. Publication of this oral history in web-accessible form was made possible by the generous support of The Vernon and Marcia Wagner Access Fund at The Art Institute of Chicago; The James & Catherine Haveman Foundation; The Reva and David Logan Family Fund of the Community Foundation for the National Capital Region; and Daniel Logan and The Reva and David Logan Foundation. Finally, to the Ryerson and Burnham Libraries at The Art Institute of Chicago and its generous and supportive director, Jack P. Brown, we extend our deepest gratitude for facilitating this endeavor.

Betty J. Blum February 2005

vi OUTLINE OF TOPICS

The Office of Graham, Anderson, Probst and White 1 Principals of Graham, Anderson, Probst and White 2 Changes in the Firm of Graham, Anderson, Probst and White in 1936 10 Projects 12 From Design to Administration 12 About the Century of Progress International Exposition, 1933-1934 15, 20 Attitude About Entering Competitions 16 Graham, Anderson, Probst and White After 1942 18 Influence of Technology and Other Factors 20 , Chicago 22

vii T. Clifford Noonan

Blum: Today is September 21, 1983, and I'm with Mr. T. Clifford Noonan in Chicago. You were saying how Alfred Shaw came into Graham, Anderson, Probst and White.

Noonan: Alfred Shaw was a friend of Tom Johnson's, who was a close personal friend of Ernest Graham's. Johnson enjoyed an excellent reputation in the marble industry, represented many marble firms in Boston and he recommended Alfred Shaw to Mr. Graham at that time. He was looking for another designer because I think he was beginning to have problems with Mr. Beersman from the standpoint of cooperation.

Blum: Was this in 1922?

Noonan: About 1922 or 1923, I think. I can't say for sure but it was before I came, so it was in the early 1920s. I joined the firm in 1924.

Blum: You went to the University of in 1920 and 1921?

Noonan: That is correct.

Blum: And then you got a degree from Notre Dame in 1924?

Noonan: Yes, I went to Notre Dame in 1922.

Blum: And then you went straight from Notre Dame to Graham, Anderson, Probst and White.

Noonan: I was hired by Mr. Graham.

1 Blum: How did you decide to go to them? Why did you select that firm?

Noonan: I knew the firm's reputation. It was broad, extensive and good in the architectural profession. And my uncle who was the chief engineer of the Chicago Railway Terminal Commission had urged me to think about going with that firm. He wrote a letter of introduction to Mr. Graham and I hand carried it over there. He said, "Are you thinking of any further education?" I said, "No, I would like to come in here and learn all that I can learn." He said, "All right, consider it a temporary job. We don't know whether you're going to like us, and we don't know whether we're going to like you." So he said, "Think of it as temporary."

Blum: In what capacity were you hired?

Noonan: As a designer within the design department. Went to work for Alfred Shaw.

Blum: What kind of a firm was it at that time? What size firm was it?

Noonan: At the time there was a waiting list of approximately a hundred people wanting to get in. There were probably 150 to 175 people in the organization. In fact, they had a high volume of work. They were doing all this work in Cleveland—the terminal, the banks, the insurance building, those things down there—so their volume of work was very high.

Blum: Now when you came to the firm in 1924, everyone but Mr. Anderson was still active.

Noonan: That is correct. Mr. Anderson had died, as I recall, in the spring or the winter of 1924. I started there, and as I recall it was about the first of July.

Blum: And among the remaining principals in the firm—Graham, Probst and White—how did they coordinate their responsibilities, as you understood it?

2 Noonan: Mr. Graham was the business-getter, the developer, who had the contacts that were nationwide, maybe international. After the designs were determined, after the preliminaries were approved by the owner, that was the area where Mr. Graham functioned with the designers to develop a scheme to solve the owner's problem. After that was finalized—what we would call the design development stage today—it was then transferred over to Mr. Probst, who was responsible for production with the engineering, for all necessary construction details and construction documents, they were prepared based on the approved sketches. And after they were completed, they were turned over to Mr. White and bids were taken. They were either negotiated or advertised or competitive bidding was used depending upon the client or what the problems were at the time. And then after the bids were submitted, they were opened in the presence of Mr. White and Mr. Graham, and an award was made based upon whatever was to the owner's advantage at that time. And from then on Mr. White handled the progress of the work until the completion of the job.

Blum: So that when Mr. Anderson died, it really knocked out the design component.

Noonan: That is correct. He was the designer. See, he and Mr. Graham worked together. Mr. Graham was always out getting business, and he had Peirce Anderson at his arm to interpret the client's wishes, the client's needs, to develop the program and then resubmit it, make the presentations and get an approval, and then we'd go with it. And it was then that Mr. Probst took over. There were always four complete divisions of responsibility.

Blum: It seems like that was a nice marriage.

Noonan: It was ideal. It worked perfectly.

Blum: But then after Anderson died, what was the situation when you arrived in the design department, probably as a very junior member?

Noonan: Yes, very junior.

3 Blum: Who was in that design department who stepped into Mr. Anderson's spot?

Noonan: Well, Mr. Beersman, of course, was there.

Blum: Would you describe his personality in terms of how he worked with people?

Noonan: I think he was a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania school of architecture. Mr. Beersman was a very strong, forceful personality who had the courage of his convictions and to the extent that he was almost intolerant of suggestions that would modify his own thinking.

Blum: He had great pride in his own work.

Noonan: He had great pride in the way he saw things and was a good designer.

Blum: Did you work under Mr. Beersman?

Noonan: Not very much. I worked under Al Shaw. Al was then moving along in that spot and there was that competitiveness between the two of them and then personalities got the better of them and, of course, Al Shaw had the backing of Mr. Graham.

Blum: Isn't that to be expected that designers are the artists who really have the privilege of being a little more individual in their personalities?

Noonan: Well, I think to have the ability to create, they've got to be strong. They've got to be sure of what they're doing and they've got to be proud of what they are coming up with and feeling that their ideas are the best.

Blum: Unfortunately, it isn't always easy to work with people like that in a group. They are individuals.

Noonan: That is true. For personalities of that type, it makes relationships sometimes really strained.

4 Blum: You say Alfred Shaw had Mr. Graham's backing?

Noonan: That's right. Al was a much more pleasant individual. If I could describe Beersman's personality, I'd say he was just a little bit rough in a personal exchange. He wasn't warm. Al Shaw had a very warm, outgoing personality but he, likewise, was very sensitive about his own creations and he wasn't too tolerant of outside suggestions either. But that's a characteristic of strong designers in an architectural firm.

Blum: Was Mario Schiavoni also there as a designer?

Noonan: Yes, he was there, but he wasn't as strong a personality as either one of them. He was a very capable designer. He was a graduate of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts in Paris, and he had a traditional background in architectural education.

Blum: You were in Chicago after 1924. Were you a member of the Chicago Architectural Club or Sketch Club?

Noonan: No, never was.

Blum: May we back up to a fundamental question? Why did you decide to go into architecture?

Noonan: Well, that's curious. It will take me back to the age of seven. My father was one of the builders of the city hall down in LaSalle, Illinois, where I was born and raised. And he and my mother went to a dedication of that building. It was sort of an open house on New Year's Day, as I remember—it might have been another day, but it was in the winter, anyhow. When we came home, they were telling me about it, the experience of it, and I said, "Dad, how did you know how to build it? What did you work from?" And he said, "Well, Victor Matteson was the architect." And I said, "What's an architect?" He said, "He's the man that designed the building, made all the drawings, the plans"—as they were called in those days—"and built the building." And I said, "Is that a good

5 job?" He said, "Oh, yes." And I said, "Well, how is he paid?" And he said, "They get a percentage of the total cost of the building." And I said, "That's sounds as though that's something I might like to do." I got into drawing and I got into manual training and other things like that. So, it just went on that way.

Blum: And that started when you were seven?

Noonan: Yes. I was six or seven. That is where the seed was planted.

Blum: And when you were in school did you have any mentors?

Noonan: Oh, you see, the first year at the University of Illinois, Marvin Probst and I were in the same class. That's where I first met Marvin.

Blum: Well, it had to be in the twenties, 1920 or 1921?

Noonan: No, I'll tell you. I went down there in 1919, because I graduated from high school in 1919. I went down there my first year. And Bill McCaughey, who used to practice out in Park Ridge, was one of the teachers down there. And he was a wild man.

Blum: A wild man? What do you mean?

Noonan: Well, he used to help the girls out, and he used to shine around them. We had girls in our class—there were landscape architects in our design class.

Blum: Oh, that was pretty early for women to be in architecture.

Noonan: Yes, it was. As I recall there were three girls in our class, and one of them was Elizabeth Fleming. She came to work for the firm and she was working at the firm when I was working there. She got relegated into doing perspectives and doing the basic work and that sort of thing. But I was only going to add, to complete what I said, I started in 1919. In the spring of 1920 I had appendicitis, a very serious emergency. And I had emergency surgery and didn't complete

6 the second semester. I went home and intended to return in the fall of 1920. My father died that September, which upset my apple cart. And my mother had died when I was thirteen and I had a sister who needed care because she was three years younger, so we went to live with my grandmother over in Ottawa, Illinois, which is sixteen miles from LaSalle. And I went to work for Jason Richardson, who was the only architect in town. He was a very kindly, friendly man. He sort of took me under his wing. He was a practical man. Again, he had no formal training, but he had a flair for design and he knew people and he got business and he could put a building together. So, I worked for him for one year and decided the only way I could go was to go back to school. Then money became a problem, and through the suggestions of a couple of people, I was able to get a job at Notre Dame. Then got a scholarship and developed a few sources of income of my own while I was at Notre Dame.

Blum: Did you work for any architects to make money?

Noonan: No, no. I finished there in 1924. That's when I came to work at Graham, Anderson, Probst and White.

Blum: Would you say that Mr. Richardson was, perhaps, one of your mentors?

Noonan: Yes, I would say he was one, and so was Victor Madison. He had offices in both Chicago and LaSalle, but he spent most of his time in LaSalle. Then in later years, he spent all of his time in Chicago. I used to see him when I came up here. I'd come in to see him when I was here in the summer. He had an office—as I recall, it was 7 South Dearborn—Victor Andre Matteson. He was a graduate of the University of Illinois. He was a Sigma Chi.

Blum: Why, when you graduated, didn't you go to Mr. Matteson for a job?

Noonan: Oh, I did. He was too small an office for me. And he had some reservations about my going to Graham, Anderson. He said, "Well, that's so big. I'm just afraid you're going to get lost over there."

7 Blum: How many people were in the firm?

Noonan: About 150 or 175.

Blum: Pretty big.

Noonan: Oh, it was a big place. So, anyhow, I used to keep in touch with him. He came out to my house and we had dinner, and then after I was married and after I was working, and he used to come over to see me and he'd talk to Mr. Graham. Then one year Mr. Graham, who was taking him to the American Institute of Architects, and Mr. Matteson was active in that behalf—I don't know when that was but I would say it was in the late 1920s or early 1930s—and he came over and chatted and stayed.

Blum: Did the firm of Graham, Anderson, Probst and White have any contact with Burnham's successor firm, D.H. Burnham and Company, the two Burnham sons?

Noonan: Yes. They were Hubert and Daniel.

Blum: Yes. Was there much exchange? I realize they had gone their separate ways.

Noonan: Oh, I think there was a tension between them. It wasn't a friendly separation. Charlie Murphy could tell you better than I on that, and I think he would say almost the same thing.

Blum: What happened to the reputation of Daniel Burnham, Sr.? Did it rest with Graham, Anderson, Probst and White, because Ernest Graham was so close to him? Or did it go with his sons because they carried his name?

Noonan: I don't know how to answer that question. I think it's like having a reputation that is not perpetuated unless your friends see to it that you've got business reasons for keeping it active.

8 Blum: When you looked at our Chicago Architects Design exhibition catalog, you had some comments about the page with the principals.

Noonan: I was looking at the early history of Ernest Graham. It was the page devoted to Graham, Anderson, Probst and White. It is my impression that Mr. Graham started in the construction industry at an early age and developed a proficiency in the masonry end of the business. This knowledge and experience broadened and strengthened his own career with the Burnham organization. In later years, he was recognized by Coe College of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and the University of Notre Dame at Notre Dame, and awarded a doctorate in engineering.

Blum: Would you comment about what you know of Peirce Anderson's background?

Noonan: I know very little about Mr. Anderson's background, as he was deceased about six months before I came in the firm, and all I knew of Mr. Anderson is what I had read in architectural periodicals.

Blum: And Edward Probst?

Noonan: Edward Probst I knew from my experience in the firm, but did not have a great deal of direct professional contact with him. I did, on a few occasions, and they were always pleasant and profitable.

Blum: It says here that he received his training… Well, it doesn't say where he studied. Well, that's probably a matter of record. The catalog mentions some of the firms he worked with, some of the old Chicago firms, Wheelock and Clay especially.

Noonan: Oh, I was going to tell you an interesting thing about reputation of men, whether they die or whether they survive for some period of time. When we were selected as the architects as part of a joint venture with the State Department building in Washington, we had many meetings with the Fine Arts Commission in Washington, and we were very cordially received by the head of the commission. Actually, he wasn't the head, he was the

9 administrative head of the commission. We went into our first meeting with the commissioner, and after the meeting Mr. Probst—Marvin Probst—commented on the reproduction of a painting of Mr. Burnham, who was the first chairman of the Fine Arts Commission, appointed by President Taft. And Mr. Probst advised Mr. Finley—Mr. Finley was the man's name—that he thought Dan Burnham had the original of the painting, and Mr. Finley expressed great interest in its whereabouts and whether it could be obtained. Well, Mr. Probst contacted Daniel or Hubert Burnham—I believe it was Hubert—in California and set forth his request and the original painting ultimately was sent to the Fine Arts Commission in Washington.

Blum: So they did retain some of the property of the firm?

Noonan: Oh, yes. Because they knew.

Blum: Unless that was considered personal family property.

Noonan: Well, it was family property. It's the same as you've seen in Hines's Burnham of Chicago. Well, that picture is the one I'm talking about. Anders Zorn did the portrait in England. Sir William Orpen did one of Mr. Graham. That one used to hang in the office.

Blum: Do you know what has happened to that?

Noonan: I would say the Graham Foundation may have it. That would be my surmise.

Blum: You joined the firm in 1924 and stayed with the firm for fifty years, as it went through subsequent changes. You were there when Ernest Graham died in 1936, which was also the year that White died.

Noonan: They died three weeks apart.

Blum: And after Mr. Graham died, various people left the firm.

10 Noonan: Yes.

Blum: Was that by their own design? How did you go from draftsman in a huge firm to senior vice-president? You were working under Alfred Shaw when you first came to the firm. What was your experience as you moved up the ladder?

Noonan: That was when Al Shaw and Charlie Murphy and Sigurd Naess left.

Blum: That was in 1936. And the Burnham brothers?

Noonan: Well, all the Burnham brothers had left prior to my getting there. So, they [Shaw, Naess and Murphy] started and they were in the same building. And I guess they're still in the same quarters on the sixteenth floor of the Railway Exchange. And we went through a series of changes, and my interests in developing business developed through experience under Mr. Graham and in the office with clients.

Blum: But you came in as a designer?

Noonan: I came in as a designer and made many sketches in the preliminary design of many of the big buildings, because I was working technically under Mr. Graham's direction, although I was assigned to the design department.

Blum: Did you work under Alfred Shaw?

Noonan: That's where I was, or I worked with Sigurd Naess. They were all in the design department, and they would sometimes bring in people from the drafting room to assist us. And then other times Mr. Graham had a number of pet projects that he was involved in and I was working in a so-called secret service department, where you were under lock and key. Mr. Graham and myself were the only ones who had the key to the room.

Blum: What kind of projects were given to you?

11 Noonan: There were a number of projects that we started there. They were started in the preliminary stage, but they didn't want them nosed around in the drafting room. They didn't want people to be knowing about them and talking about them.

Blum: Were they competition entries?

Noonan: No, not necessarily. But until the client was locked in, they didn't want it known. For instance, I spent six months with about three other men working on a project for the site in New York where Rockefeller Center is today. The Van Sweringens of Cleveland, who were the firm's clients—they were responsible for development in Cleveland—envisioned a transcontinental railroad. They had interests in the Chesapeake and Ohio, they had the Erie, they had interest in the New York Central, and they envisioned a gigantic rail terminal on Fifth Avenue in New York. The trains would terminate over in New Jersey, and pedestrians would come across below the river in a tunnel or whatever way was finally determined. Well, when the Van Sweringens died, the project died, too.

Blum: Was that a competition or just a project that the firm was working on?

Noonan: A project they were working on. And then the Van Sweringens died and the project died. But, I'm only citing that as a project, how my own progress had moved along because of what I was exposed to and how I acquired some of the techniques. Gradually I went into getting business where I had friends who were potential clients. And I knew that I couldn't stand on my own because I didn't have enough background or didn't have enough resources, but I felt that I could bring the reputation of the firm into a project, so that is what I did.

Blum: Is that what you meant before, when you said that you felt it opened doors?

Noonan: It opened doors, and that is what came about. And then it really developed, I'd say, since the war. Since 1941 that's about all I was doing.

12 Blum: So you moved into the business development end?

Noonan: That is correct. I'll cite a story. I was going to Washington frequently and regularly before we got into the war, and then when we got into the war, I went down there even more. And I had friends in the navy and I had friends that made friends for me at the right places in Washington. That was particularly true of the navy. We did about $300 million worth of work for the navy during the war. And I was responsible for getting it all. I used to call on Admiral Ben Moreell—he was the chief of the Bureau of Yards and Docks down there, that's the top construction agency in the navy department. And I was dealing with Barney Hunter and also with Admiral Burns, who were captains in divisions. I went to Admiral Moreell, who was the top man, and I'd see him about every two weeks just to let him know that we're around. But I was chasing this job in Hastings, Nebraska, which was a $75 million ammunition depot. The information that was fed to me was that we were one, two, or three of the firms that were seriously being considered for the job. So, I went to see Moreell. I went to see him and made a presentation. I was doing this alone, and they had our file and our records and everything else down there. And he was always receptive and pleasant. One day when I knew they were close to a decision, I said, "Admiral, I'm in town, and I just wanted to check and see what the status of this project is." He said, "Noonan, I want to assure you that you are going to get every consideration for this job." I said, "Admiral, I don't want to be facetious, but you can save the consideration for somebody else. Give us the job." He said, "Get out of here." Well, we had the job about ten days later. I went back to Chicago at the weekend, then came back to Washington. And I was there every day, making my calls to the extent I hoped that it would be beneficial. Friday came and no decision. My friend Hunter was keeping me informed, and he said, "It's very close, but I don't know what to tell you." Then Hunter calls the hotel. It wasn't very convenient, but I had decided I'd stay over the weekend. So, I was in Captain Hunter's office on Monday, and I told him I stayed over the weekend but that I had concluded all I could do at this time. I wanted to be available if I could be of any help, otherwise I'd go back to Chicago. And he said, "Why don't you go

13 back. If anything happens I'll call you." I went back. I was nervous. The trains worked fine in those days. I got off the Capital at nine o'clock and walked in the office. There was Hunter calling long distance. He said, "Well, do you want to make another trip to Washington?" And I said, "For a job." And he said, "Well, you've got it." So Probst and I celebrated. We had to scurry around and we couldn't get on the Capital going back so we had to take the Liberty. And the only thing that was available was the two staterooms in the observation car, so we had a private shower, bath, and we had the observation car to ourselves.

Blum: Now, you went to Washington with Marvin Probst, one of Edward Probst's sons?

Noonan: I was with Marvin. He was the son who ended up as the head of the firm. The Probst family had control of the whole thing. We did periodic traveling together, but he just couldn't go in and ask people for a job. He just couldn't do it. He got all thumbs.

Blum: He needed someone like you who could do it.

Noonan: Yes, that's right, that's right. He knew that. So he said, "You go ahead and do it. It'll be easier that way."

Blum: You said that Mr. Beersman was—I don't remember the word you actually used to describe his personality—very definite...

Noonan: Very strong and forceful.

Blum: Word has it that so was Alfred Shaw, only you say you found Shaw easier to work with.

Noonan: Yes, I think that's very true. I would use almost the same words to describe him.

Blum: How did you work with him?

14 Noonan: I worked very well with him. I got along very well with him.

Blum: You must have been very flexible.

Noonan: Well, you have to be in this business. You have to be in life. You can't just go down this one line.

Blum: Did Mr. Beersman go down one line?

Noonan: No, you can't do that. Well, Al Shaw had a more pleasing personality, and he and I developed a rapport and he sort of cultivated a relationship that was mutually agreeable.

Blum: Shaw has been described as very colorful, very imaginative but very unpredictable.

Noonan: I think that is correct. Now, I'll tell you, that's what caused the split with him and Charlie Murphy. I'm sure at the time it was a strained relationship, but it was because they had the housing job on the South Side, one of the first public projects. Differences in personalities always existed, from the first time, I knew. Charlie was always the one that was friendly. He had a pleasant personality. Everyone liked Charlie. Sigurd was a very strong personality. Al, likewise, was a strong personality, but more creative, more talented, but absolutely unpredictable. As I recall the story, there was this big housing job all set and working drawings virtually ready to go to bids, and Al came in and he said, "I have another idea. I'm going to change the whole thing. I'm unhappy with it. We're not going to send it out." And Sigurd and Charles said, "Yes, we are." And, of course, they had control to do it. That was it. It may have come to a head at that time, but that was probably it, and it might not have been that alone. It might have been a lot of other things of that type that led up to the split.

15 Blum: What about the Century of Progress? Did the firm have any work at the Century of Progress?

Noonan: We did the Armour building at the Century of Progress in 1933. We did the Armour building, and that was because of a connection. Bill Graham had married Jane Lee, whose father was the chairman of Armour and Company at that time.

Blum: Who was Bill Graham?

Noonan: He was Mr. Graham's adopted son. The second Mrs. Graham's son was William Leffingwell. He discarded the Leffingwell name and took Mr. Graham's name. But he married Jane Lee. I'm trying to recall when that marriage was—it was in the early 1930s, maybe 1932. Then we're going to do the Armour building and the exhibit there. I'm sure Al Shaw designed it, if I remember correctly. Then Mrs. Graham was quite interested in milk funds for underprivileged children, and Charlie did some of that work, and I did some down there in the booth and that sort of thing. The building—I don't remember what it cost and I don't even know what it looked like. Our biggest job at the fair was the Armour building. That was back in 1933. And there was another situation that might be compared to it in 1893. Mr. Graham was so active in 1933 and Burnham was in 1893—he created the whole thing. Well, here was new thinking, new architects, younger ideas, and the attitude that we had our day, let them have their day.

Blum: Did Alfred Shaw design the firm's commission?

Noonan: Yes. The firm's name was on it. But what I was going to say was the firm had a reputation of not competing for work. They would not go into a competition per se. They would compete for work and make every effort to obtain the job if there were others, but a so-called public competition—they wouldn't go in the Tribune competition. I cite that because there were always extenuating circumstances that certain people could benefit from, and that was the firm's policy. They never went into a competition. Their attitude was that winners

16 usually take liberties with the program and come up with a concept that may be impractical, may not meet the needs, but yet at the same time they may have impressed people who might not have the necessary experience or talent to make a good judgment.

Blum: Do you mean the jury?

Noonan: Right, but they were the jury. I think the only competition that I have any recollection of that we went into—and it was a limited competition, we were invited—was for the telephone building on West Washington Street, over on Canal. There were five firms, and the telephone company did it as a goodwill gesture at the time, because they got pressure because Holabird and Root did all their work and had that contract sewed up. Of course, I'll tell you a little bit about the conditions that prevailed with architects and clients. They paid each participant $20,000 to cover their design cost. Holabird and Root had their contract for years, and the telephone company was getting pressure to spread that work around because they were a public utility. So, I think Skidmore was in there. Schmidt, Garden, I believe, was in there too.

Blum: In what year was this?

Noonan: I would say it was sometime in the 1950s.

Blum: Oh, after the Second World War.

Noonan: They gave each firm $20,000 just to cover the cost. The jury convened, and there was some question at the time that they'd have to have an architect on it and the owners would have to accept the decision of the committee, the judgment committee, which they were reluctant to do, but gradually did it. In one hour, they had their answer, and they selected Holabird and Root. I called Bill Holabird and said, "Bill, congratulations for getting the job. After all, they were your client all along, and I'm glad to know that you got it." And he was very gracious. Prior to that time there were certain clients that firms had that nobody else got work from. But we had all the utility work, Commonwealth

17 Edison, the gas company, some public services, banks, office buildings, and estate work. Many firms tried to get that from us, but it was solidly ours. But, I would say, since after the war, architects no longer could count on that.

[Tape 1: Side 2]

Blum: Are you describing a much more competitive situation after the war?

Noonan: Sure, you've got to go after the jobs. And it was the same way during the war years. I got the State Department job.

Blum: Did you campaign for it?

Noonan: I didn't get that alone. We had a man in Washington who worked for us. He had a very close friend inside of GSA who kept us informed of what was going on, and he made his calls. He introduced me to a lot of people. I had my previous contacts, so I just kept them going, you might say, to keep them alive. And when we were selected for the State Department building, we were also put in a joint venture with Harley, Ellington and Day in Detroit. And Mike Class, who used to be a partner at Holabird and Root, went to Washington in the Depression and went to work for GSA and other firms. He had his own practice in Washington and he was a contact. I don't know for what reason, it wasn't necessary, but it helped the political picture, you know.

Blum: When Murphy and Naess and Shaw left Graham, Anderson, Probst and White, it has been said that you were the person who ran the firm. Would you say that's a correct statement?

Noonan: No, that's not a fair statement, because Marv Probst ran the firm. He had control of the firm.

Blum: What happened after Edward Probst died in 1942?

18 Noonan: Well, the two Probst boys, Edward, Jr. and Marvin, took over. They ran the firm. Ed left. He had a heart attack and decided he wanted to retire. I don't know when that was. I developed a line or two in philosophy for my friends and people in the business, "When you think of building, think of Graham, Anderson, Probst and White." Well, it got so people would say, "When we think of Graham, Anderson, Probst and White, we think of Cliff Noonan."

Blum: Well, maybe it was this statement that led to the conclusion that you ran the firm. But you surely did a good selling job.

Noonan: I felt that, and I'd say, "When you've got a project, think of me, call me. This is what we have to offer." Well, no, the Probsts were always in control of the firm. They always ran it. Now, sure, I had a lot to do when a job was there, but if there was any controversy or final decision or anything like that, the Probsts made it.

Blum: Were they much younger than you then?

Noonan: Oh, no, no.

Blum: Were they your contemporaries?

Noonan: Oh, sure, Marvin was my age. He was born in June, and I was born in July. Do you know how old I am? I'm eighty-three. But I don't feel it.

Blum: And you surely don't look it or act it.

Noonan: Sure, Marv was born on the tenth of June, and I was born on the seventh of July, same year. Their sons were, of course, my children's age.

Blum: Did they come into the firm?

Noonan: No, no.

19 Blum: Well, in 1940 you went from designer, or whatever title you had originally, to vice-president. And then, in 1955, you went to senior vice-president.

Noonan: Yes, that's right. That's when I was doing all the circulating and getting all the clients.

Blum: In 1942, you were in Washington selling the projects, and you were only a vice- president then.

Noonan: What's a title?

Blum: Yes, yes. Can we go back to the Century of Progress for a minute? Do you think that the Century of Progress had any influence on what happened to architecture in the years that followed?

Noonan: Oh, I think very definitely it did. It was the forerunner of the so-called contemporary style. As I say, brutal buildings using large flat areas without ornamentation or any embellishments. That was almost inevitable because of the lack of craftsmen, the cost of building, and the terrific cost of using so- called ornament and embellishments. We didn't have the mechanics, and we didn't have a client who was willing to pay for it.

Blum: So the technology, too, was different?

Noonan: The change in technology. For instance, we did the Merchandise Mart—all these gigantic open areas, and they were going to be warehouse spaces. And with the advent of air-conditioning and fluorescent lighting, it changed the whole concept of office buildings. It was in that area that I think the most vital change came about. It enabled the Mart to upgrade all their space with better lighting, air-conditioning, and sell it as good office space in contrast to warehouse space, as it was originally conceived.

Blum: Do you think it was the technology that changed the style?

20 Noonan: Well, I think it was a combination of technology, the lack of adequate craftsmen, the cost of labor, and the cost of the artisans that you might be able to get to do the kind of decoration that used to embellish prior buildings. So from that standpoint, I'd say that the economic sides of development plus the change in technology plus the desire to simplify structures and, doing that, it enables you to develop real estate to its maximum potential. To get back to the question, why did the come about? Well, the skyscraper came about because of the pressure of high land values that had made it economically imprudent or impossible to develop a small project. So, the basic increase in land values forced you into a position of choosing the maximum height. Take the Insurance Exchange, take the Straus building—by all standards, they were all court buildings. They were all court buildings. Why? They were all court buildings because you had to get light on both sides of a centered corridor, an office building with a centered corridor. Well, the code determined that you had to be twenty, and you could not be any further than twenty-five feet from an outside window or occupied space without ventilation. So that established the twenty-five-foot strip of building, and then with a centered corridor, and then you developed an interior court, which is an atrium today.

Blum: That's right. Just has a new name.

Noonan: So when you took a piece of property you had to be sure that at least fifty-five percent of that lot was occupied by building. And if you got sixty percent, then your economics worked better in your favor. So then you had at least forty-five percent of your lot unoccupied with either open space or parking or whatever else it might be.

Blum: What governed the graduated levels of the Field building?

Noonan: Well, sure that was a result of the change in the code. The code heretofore, when we were doing the Continental Bank building, the Old State Bank building, which is now the Central National Bank, and the Foreman, which is now the American National Bank—your height limit was 265 feet to the underside of a roof beam. That was your maximum height. Now, you could go

21 above that if you sloped back at an angle of thirty degrees, and you could get what we used to call attic space, which was used for a variety of functions. All right. The code was changed at the time of the Field building, and we were incorporating stair towers. We got rid of the exterior fire escapes, and then we followed the code up, you know, the four corner towers—they go up and 265 feet, as I recall, was the twentieth floor. Then you take the volume of the lot and you take the gross area of the property and take the height of 265 feet, and that's the total cubic volume of the property. Then one-sixth of that, as I recall, could be built in a structure from above, but it could not exceed 25 percent in area of the lot. See? So, that's how the centered tower was created in the Field building. We got all that space up there, and we did the same thing in the Civic Opera building.

Blum: Was the Civic Opera building designed by Alfred Shaw?

Noonan: Yes, he designed the building. There is no question about that. But, we had the problem of fire exits. We also had the problem of maximum seating in the auditorium and the problem of the stage. We were always trying to develop that into the court area that, by going around the perimeter of the lot, we'd have—but you were fighting it all the time. You couldn't get a good solution because the property wasn't deep enough. Mr. Graham came in one morning, and he said, "I have a new idea." He said, "We're going to take the maximum on Washington Street, on Madison Street, on Wacker Drive, and we're going to leave the rest of it all open. We're going to put the building in there." So, we developed that scheme, and this is the scheme that was built. And then we went up and built the maximum tower on Wacker Drive, which was 20 Wacker Drive—somebody bought it, and it was the Kemper Insurance building after it had been sold—but that was the concept of it. And then you had the stage, you had the auditorium, and Al did a lot of Egyptian embellishment on it. But the big, plain surface, that's on the river side. At the dedication of the opera, I don't know whether you saw the cartoon, but Mr. Insull's sitting there atop the building and the Tribune coined the phrase, "Mr. Insull's seat at the opera." John McCutcheon, I think, did the cartoon. I don't know whether it went to Mr. Insull's office or not, but that was it. Insull was credited, and the question was

22 asked, did Mr. Insull have a hand in doing this? I could start to tell you more about that. We made studies of all the great opera houses in Europe. Mr. Graham was a terrific guy at being thorough in getting prepared for the opera building. He saw La Scala, the one in London, and the Paris opera. We had all the historic books and it was my assignment to take them and redraw these at the same scale when we were making the presentation on the Civic Opera building. For the presentation, we had a curtain that was twice as long as this wall. You know, Mr. Graham thought it was about fifty feet. The curtain was on a wire that you'd stretch out, and we'd walk on and sit back at a conference table to make the presentation. Everybody would be comfortable, and we hung all those drawings we had, and Graham would make the comparison, "Now, this is the site of La Scala, that would accommodate so many people. The stage is this deep, the ceiling is this wide, the height is so much, and so on down along down the line. And this is what we are building for you, Mr. Insull." It was a real persuasive and thorough presentation.

Blum: Mr. Noonan, I want to thank you very much.

23 SELECTED REFERENCES

Chappell, Sally A. Kitt. Architecture and Planning of Graham, Anderson, Probst and White, 1912- 1936: Transforming Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992. "Field Building, Chicago, Ill." Architectural Record 71 (April 1932):277. Grube, Oswald W., Peter C. Pran and Franz Schulze. 100 Years of Architecture in Chicago. Chicago: J. Philip O'Hara, 1973. Heise, Kenan. "T. Clifford Noonan, 90, Retired Architecture Executive." , 9 August, 1990, 8. (obituary) "Merchandise Mart, Chicago." Architecture and Building 63 (March 1931):66. Sengstock, Frank F. "The Largest Building in the World: a Description of the Merchandise Mart and What Makes this Structure Possible." Western Architect 39 (December 1930):205-207. The Architectural Work of Graham, Anderson, Probst & White, Chicago and Their Predecessors, D. H. Burnham & Co., and Graham, Burnham & Co. London: B.T. Batsford, Ltd., 1933. "The Builders Building, Chicago," Through the Ages 9 (March 1932):36-40. "The Field Building, Chicago's Newest Skyscraper." Architectural Record 76 (August 1934):120-128. Zukowsky, John, editor. Chicago Architecture and Design 1923-1993. Munich: Prestel-Verlag, 1993.

24 THOMAS CLIFFORD NOONAN

Born: 7 July 1900, LaSalle, Illinois Died: 6 August 1990, Tucson, Arizona

Education: University of Notre Dame, B.Arch., 1924

Professional Experience: Graham, Anderson, Probst and White, 1924-1974 T. Clifford Noonan, Consultant, 1974-1978

Honors: Honorary Membership, Illinois Society of Architects, 1951

Service: Director, Illinois Society of Architects, 1953-1957

Selected Projects: American Dental Association Building, Chicago, Illinois Continental Bank, Chicago, Illinois Field Building, Chicago, Illinois Merchandise Mart, Chicago, Illinois Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago, Illinois Museum of Science and Industry, Chicago, Illinois St. Thomas the Apostle Catholic Church, Tucson, Arizona State Department Building, Washington, D.C.

25 INDEX OF NAMES AND BUILDINGS

American Institute of Architects (AIA) 8 Kemper Insurance Building, Chicago, American National Bank, Chicago, Illinois Illinois 22 21 Anderson, Peirce 2, 3, 9 La Scala Opera House, Milan, Italy 23 Lee, Jane 16 Beersman, Charles 1, 4, 5, 14, 15 Burnham, Daniel H, Jr. 8, 10, 11 McCaughey, William (Bill) 6 Burnham, Daniel Hudson 8, 10, 16 McCutcheon, John T. 22 Burnham, D.H., and Company 8 Matteson, Victor Andre 5, 7, 8 Burnham, Hubert 8, 10, 11 Merchandise Mart, Chicago, Illinois 20 Moreell, Ben (Admiral) 13 Central National Bank, Chicago, Illinois Murphy, Charles Francis 8, 11, 15, 18 21 Century of Progress International Naess, Sigurd 11, 15, 18 Exposition, 1933-1934, Chicago, Illinois 16, 20 Probst, Edward 9, 18 Century of Progress International Probst, Marvin 3, 6, 10, 14, 18 Exposition, 1933-1934, Armour Building, Chicago, Illinois 16 Richardson, Jason 7 Civic Opera House, Chicago, Illinois 22- 23 Schiavoni, Mario 5 Class, Michael 18 Schmidt, Garden and Erikson 17 Continental Illinois Bank, Chicago, Illinois Shaw, Alfred 1, 2, 4, 5, 11, 14-15, 16, 18, 22 21 Shaw, Naess and Murphy 11, 14 Straus Building, Chicago, Illinois 21 Field Building, Chicago, Illinois 21-22 Finley, Mr. 10 Van Sweringen, Oris Paxton 12 Fleming, Elizabeth 6 Wheelock and Clay 9 Graham, Anderson, Probst and White 1- White, Howard Judson 3, 10 23 Graham, Ernest R. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, Zorn, Anders 10 16, 22-23 Graham, William Leffingwell (Bill) 16 Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts 10

Harley, Ellington and Day 18 Holabird and Root 17, 18 Hunter, Barney 13-14

Insull, Samuel 22-23 Insurance Exchange Building, Chicago, Illinois 21

Johnson, Tom 1

26