Society of Architectural Historians University of California Press

"The Century's Triumph in Lighting": The Luxfer Prism Companies and Their Contribution to Early Modern Architecture Author(s): Dietrich Neumann Source: Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 54, No. 1 (Mar., 1995), pp. 24-53

Published by: University of California Press on behalf of the Society of Architectural Historians Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/991024 Accessed: 25-10-2015 18:45 UTC

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].

Society of Architectural Historians and University of California Press 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 from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions "The Century'sTriumph in Lighting": The Luxfer Prism Companies and their Contributionto Early Modem Architecture

medium to another, as from air to water or, in this case, glass. DIETRICH NEUMANN, BrownUniversity Throughoutthe eighteenth and nineteenth centuriesconically characterize this new prism as one of the most shaped glassesalready had been used to redirectlight into dark .L remarkable improvements of the century in its bearing rooms in basementsor in ships.5Thaddeus Hyatt, one of the on practical architecture, is to speak but mildly. In the opinion pioneersofAmerican concrete construction, patented different of some of the foremost architects of this country the Luxfer systems of glass cones and lenses in metal or reinforced prism is destined to work an entire revolution in planning and concrete framesfor sidewalksfrom 1845 onwards.6They were to necessitate very extensive changes in construction."' The so successfulthat many earlyAmerican building codes recom- building material that was so enthusiastically praised by the mended these so-calledHyatt Lights as a fireprooflight source Inland Architectin 1897, and shortly after was even proclaimed for basements.7Translucent, light-diffusingglasses such as to be the "century's triumph in lighting," was indeed about to rough plate glass, ground on both sides, or corrugatedglass have a considerable impact on the commercial architecture of with horizontalgrooves were used from the 1880s onwardsto America's urban centers.2 The idea seemed surprisingly simple. provide factorieswith an evenly distributedlight. Corrugated Window glass with horizontal prismatic ribs on the inside would glass had the additionaleffect of refractinga large part of the redirect the light from outside and cast it deeply into a room, light deeper into the room and gained some success in New thus bringing the surplus of light near the window into areas England'sfactories as "factoryribbed glass."8 that it had not previously reached [Figure 1]. The material was The product that came closest to the development of the offered as the ideal solution for the developers of commercial new prism glass was the so-called stallboardlight, which had architecture caught between the need for large floor areas and been developed in Englandin 1883 and quicklyhad become a the quest for well-lit offices. The promotional brochures claimed standard feature in British commercial architecture.It con- the that prismatic glass provided so much light in the back of a sisted of squareglass tiles with horizontalv-shaped ribs on room that one could not only save the energy of artificial inside,which were set in rowsin a metal frame,adjacent to the wall or above the lighting but often could gain additional floor space by omitting pavementlights at the bottom of the exterior these light wells in the center of a building or by using well-lit display window. The brilliance created by prismatic basements as offices. stallboardlights was reportedlyso powerfulthat the employees blinded the Prismatic glass was the most sophisticated and complex had to rearrangetheir desks in order not to be by at the development among the many attempts in the last decades of sudden surplus of light.9 Similarideas were patented in the nineteenth century to bring more daylight into the dark same time by a numberof individualinventors both Europe interiors of factories and densely built urban centers.3 Innova- and the U.S.1' Among them was the British inventorJames in which was tive approaches included reflective white enameled terracotta Pennycuick, who filed a U.S. patent 1882, for the walls of light courts and large mirrors to reflect light eventually to provide the basis for the Luxfer Company's on the from the falade into the interior. Numerous new glass products success.He proposedwindow glass with prismaticridges of reflection or for building purposes were developed in Europe and the U.S. inside, which would "double the quantity of the same After Among them were early prototypes of hollow glass blocks and illuminationof the plainwindow-glass size."I1 at commercial heavy load-bearing slabs of glass bringing light into basement a number of unsuccessful attempts finding rooms from the floor above, or into staircases in light wells.4 support for his "improvementin window glass," Pennycuick of in 1896 Several products made use of the well-known optical prin- founded the "RadiatingLight Company" Chicago of local This ciple that light changes its direction when it passes from one with a small group entrepreneurs.'2 company

24 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1 :2

modem architecture. The new, expensive product appeared on the market at a moment when a widespread enthusiasm for the accomplishments of modem technologies was joined by a growing awareness for the values of a simple life in harmony with nature. 15 Prismatic glass was praised as both a product of scientific progress and a remedy for some of the negative effects of modem civilization, such as the disadvantages of artificial light or the darkening of streets due to skyscrapersand elevated railroads. The material was presented as a natural, healthier, and even more spiritual alternative to current technologies: "Prisms,without loss, without any cost of maintenance, displace FIG.I (Top):Principle of refractionthrough prismatic glass, from Die BaugildeII gas and electric lights, and in their place give pure, healthful (1929):389. light. Heat, noxious vapors, dirt and disease give way before the FIG.2 (Bottom):Luxfer Prism, from CanadianLuxfer Prism Co., ed., Prismsfor Creator's pure light of day."16 LightingBuildings of everyDescription (Toronto, n.d.), 2. The company hired the prominent physics professor and spectroscopist, Henry Crew of Northwestern University, and succeeded in winning the support of a number of prominent his assistant, Olin H. Basquin, not only to develop the product Chicago businessmen, including William H. Winslow, Edward further and to explore its potential applications, but also H. A. Charles H. C. Waller, Cyrus McCormick, George Fuller, to signal the scientific intent of its enterprise.'7 Through a Wacker, and Levi Z. Leiter. The company's first president was series of experiments Basquin established the average bright- John Meiggs Ewen, one of the leading building engineers of ness of the Chicago sky, which directly influenced his calcula- Chicago.1' In April 1897 the company adopted the name tions for the Luxfer Prism designs. He is still credited today "Luxfer," referring to the Latin lux for light and ferre, meaning with being the first person to record daylight measurements to carry.'4 scientifically.18 In contrast to the existing applications such as corrugated Luxfer Prisms glass, stallboard lights, or Pennycuick's patent, Crew and was the factor The financial power of Luxfer's shareholders key Basquin aimed at a precisely predictable light refraction. They in the behind the enormous success of the product following developed mathematical formulas to calculate specific, indi- years. It provided the means necessary to refine the prismatic vidual "prescriptions"for a building's lighting needs, similar to glass technically, to develop a full product range, to submit and the way eyeglass prescriptions are precisely adjusted to a a defend patents, and, perhaps most importantly, to develop patient's imperfect vision.19 Crew claimed that their products comprehensive and sophisticated marketing strategy. Unlike took direct inspiration from August Fresnel's mathematically other building materials prismatic glass was advertised with an exact system of prismatic lenses, which since 1821 had been the ambitious concept clearly aimed at the concerns of prosperous standard equipment for lighthouses all over the world. In architects. and educated downtown businessmen and their January 1898 Crew and Basquin published the Luxfer Compa- in Luxfer promised substantial savings thanks to an increase ny's PocketHand-Book of UsefulInformation and TablesRelating to available space and better working conditions, and it claimed the Use of Electro-GlazedLuxfer Prisms, which presented the full the of that prismatic glass would contribute to development product range, a number of calculation tables, technical details

NEUMANN:LUXFER PRISMS 25

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions for the installation of the product, and numerous examples of "sky-angle," calculated from the height and distance of the successful applications.20 The company offered three produc- buildings opposite.24 For those architects who shied away from tion lines: conventional prismatic basement lights, stained this rather time-consuming procedure, an average angle of 570 glass, and the widely advertised Luxfer Prisms. was suggested. Very soon Luxfer began to offer prismatic glass Due to the complicated production process, the prism glass with this average angle in larger sheets of up to 36 x 84 inches could initially only be produced in small, 4 x 4-inch tiles (larger for factories.25 The glass tiles were prefabricated on commis- plates either tended to crack when they were pressed into the sion by different glass manufacturers such as the Pressed Prism mold, or, if they were too hot, to burn off the sharp edges of the Plate Glass Company in Morgantown, West Virginia and then mold).21 The prisms were flat on the outside and equipped with assembled according to specification by different local metal twenty triangular horizontal ribs on the inside [Figure2]. They workshops with galvanizing capacities or in Luxfer's own were about 3/32 inch thick with an additional 3/32 inch for the manufacturing workshop at the corner of Elizabeth and Fulton triangular ribs. Luxfer offered three quality grades of glass and Streets on Chicago's West Side.26 nine degrees of refraction to respond to different lighting In the year 1897 the Luxfer Prism Company submitted 162 situations.22The tiles were assembled into metal frames, usually design and mechanical patents for different versions and two to four feet high and as wide as the opening required, held technical details of the prism tiles, the frames, canopies, and the by a grid of thin metal bars of soldered zinc caming and production equipment.27 The basic principle of light refraction cement, or the new, sophisticated, and very expensive method through prismatic glass as such could not be patented, since it of copper electroglazing (see below).23 These prism plates was commonly known and by no means new. would then be installed in the upper sashes of windows, often The most significant new invention among Luxfer's patents replacing the transoms that had previously provided ventila- was the process of electroglazing, which had been developed in tion, or in front of a window as a separate screen, called a Chicago in 1897 by William H. Winslow, a local iron manufac- "forilux." In narrow alleyways a protruding canopy could be turer and one of Luxfer's shareholders.28 Here, the prisms were installed to capture direct light from above (so-called zenith- placed between thin copper ribbons (ca. 3/8 inch wide and light) [Figures3, 4, 5]. Often the horizontal bands of prism-glass 1/32 inch thick) and exposed to an electrolytic bath in copper would illuminate a store from an installation above the awnings sulfate for thirty-six to forty-eight hours. During this procedure that at the same time protected the display windows from direct additional copper molecules were deposited on the edges of welded the sunlight. the copper bands, forming flanges that eventually diameter of The prospective client or architect would use the tables in copper and glass tiles firmly together. The small to at least inch the company's handbook to calculate the type of prism and the these flanges (less than 1/8 inch compared 3/16 in in square footage needed in his building, based on the size of the of lead or zinc bars), resulted considerable savings weight obscured about 25 room, the required brilliance (for desk work, fine merchandise, compared with other metals, and percent claimed that this narrow metal general merchandise, or storage) and, most importantly, the less of the prism plate. Luxfer

FIG.3: Threetypes of installationsfor prismaticglass: replacing the windowglass, as a separatescreen in frontof it, or as a protrudingcanopy, from Canadian Luxfer Prism Co., ed., Prismsfor LightingBuildings of every Description (Toronto, n.d.), 14, 18.

26 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 'W1? i s ;Ja eA 4~

''AL

1 "NI

FIG.4: Holabird& Roche,McClurg Building, Chicago 1898-99. LuxferPrisms above the awning,from Sweet's Architectural Catalogue (1906), 263. frameworkrendered the plates more capableof resistingwind "a fine textile-like effect" would be produced, so that the pressure,hail, and rainthan a piece of ordinarywindow glass of appearanceof the product was that of a "highlyinterwoven the same size. In addition, these composite structureswere crystalfabric, as delicateand brilliantas the most exquisiteof provento be fireproof,because the prismtiles held by the metal cut glassware."3' grid could expand more flexiblyunder heat than could large The company hired the young Chicago architect Frank expanses of single sheets of glass.29As a consequence,electro- LloydWright as a productdesigner, whose office at that time glazing set out on a career of its own beyond prism glass was on the same floor of the RookeryBuilding in Chicagoas installationsand was frequentlyemployed for art glass of all that of the Luxfer Prism Company.32Luxfer's concept must kinds and as a fireproofglazing method employing ordinary have had a strongappeal for Wright,since it embodiedhis own windowglass.30 The method was, however,twice as expensive sensitivityto the naturalenvironment and his interestin new as the customarilyused lead or zinc glazing. building materials and technologies. Wright provided two Significantlythe majority(96 of 162) of the patentsheld by differentkinds of designs:those for the single 4 x 4-inch prism Luxferwere design patents,which did not protectan invention, tiles and those for entire prism plates [Figures6, 7], which in but only a product'sshape and appearance.A large numberof most cases requireda numberof differenttiles to complete an them (41) were solely concerned with ornamental patterns overall pattern and would have complicated planning and to be applied on the outer surfaceof so called "Iridian"prisms assemblageconsiderably. Most of Wright'sforty-one designs to enliven the appearance of the assembled prism plates. were simple ornamentalline drawings,somewhat reminiscent This ornament did not enhance the refraction-in fact it of the systemof geometricaland organicornament developed probablyobstructed it slightly-but the companyclaimed that by his formeremployer, Louis Sullivan. They clearlyresembled

NEUMANN:LUXFER PRISMS 27

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions I? a? w~;t:' ~ ,, 5:I z " ;:

?, , ?, 5.?? "?. %I *"''(...".?*,? ~~? * aC,. ?s\ 1*L:._ ''"w? ?.$r?. ?~~??~?) )*" 'LF.I ? Ir ii i (i ~: ? I I? 1.1??... I iL~ 'L ~. 1 ?? `~ ?-~L. ? ;i * ~L ?u~ ? y "? . .;~L.:* I. ?'?r~ 'I " C 1., Z Y ?' 9?..~r?I?:,a?rl-,,Y'; * ~ J' ( ~;???~ ~ " n~3 '' '. )??? r '? r r "*Jril..e C "~ `1??r i c?? * ui r ?r r ,. ,e i" 'I'?cJ_ "Icnl d i I'. ??.r ?i? , n I - * I;. -I 1 71- 11 ~C rr wrr:*i'i: t i r .1 J 9 f IhZ r t

..

y~a? ?IX~- -? ?~ '"YY ~? ?~L;I~ ?? ~u~. ?~; ~. ?~ r*C '''*' ~ux. 'jre ,rr*??cl ~ ~h? I*L-- .,1 *u *III?; "nyrr* : ~B:0: ;~?? r* ? --- Y *rr;w~ ?r -~ rr ?? p;r *rrr* ?LI*.., rull 1C?r 'U"-:~"" FIG.5: LuxferPrisms in a canopyinstallation, from Sweet's Architectural Catalogue (1906), 264.

Wright's other ornamental work at that time, such as his "newbuilding material" Luxfer Prisms could be made part of illustrationsfor two books he published in the winter of the surface decoration of a building and fight the current 1896-97 withWilliam H. Winslowat theirAuvergne Press.33 At deteriorationof architecturalstyle. "Thisopens a new field to least one of Wright'spatented designswas mass-producedand the artisticdesigner, and offers a wide range of possibilitiesto can still be found on storefrontsthroughout the United States the architectwho has heretoforebeen forcedto cut his building [Figures8, 9].34 Its simplelinear pattern consists of interlocking to pieces in order to light it, and has been confined to the squaresand circles based on a simple sequence of numbers: decorationof the meager wall surfacesaround monotonous withinthe 4 x 4-inch frame of the prism-tilesits a squareof 3 openings in the walls.When LuxferPrisms are used as a filling 1/2 inches,within that a circleof three inches diameterand in for the window openings, their action and effect is totally the center a square of two inches in length.35Wright also differentfrom that of glass...they havean appearanceof being designed and patented one of the verticalbrass frames (the opaque,with as richand substantiala surfaceas any partof the above-mentionedforilux) for holding a set of prismsin frontof wallof the building.""38These argumentswere clearlymeant as a window.36 a response to the emergenceof the soberaesthetic of contem- porary office buildings with their enormous windows,which "Architectural possibilities of the Luxfer Prism"37 Luxferconsidered a "necessaryevil." By reintegratingparts of Apart from the claim that prismaticglass was a sophisticated the windowinto the surfaceof the fagade,Luxfer contributed a optical invention, the firm's publicationsemphasized that its competingand lessradical aesthetic vision to the intensedebate products contributedto the stylisticdevelopment of modern aboutthe influenceof steel and plate glasson the development architecture.Luxfer's Pocket Hand-Book, which was sent to each of a modern style.39In 1896 DankmarAdler had describedthe prospectiveclient, explained what the companyexpected: as a new style of architecturaldesign as being "foundedupon the

28 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions discoveryof the steel pillar,the steel beam, the clear sheet of was not required,they argued, the narrowmetal grid would plate glass,electric light and mechanicalventilation...." Adler provide stabilityagainst wind-pressure and fire. Most impor- had acknowledgedthe challenge that "the unpromisingand tantly, however, openings covered by prismaticglass would garish sheet of plate glass" presented to the designer, but provide "a screen to preventpersons within from looking out, suggested that a sensible applicationcould turn "theseutter- and also to prevent those without from looking in.... In ances of scientificprose into the languageof poetryand art."'40 buildings,where the view is unpleasantor disagreeable,its use It was this notion of a poetic applicationof modern, machine- may provide not only a means of shutting out unpleasant made materials,that Luxfer wanted to suggest: "Whenthe sights, but a beautifuland interestingsubstitute."43 Transpar- material used is that which is known as 'Iridian,'the effect ency would be replaced by translucency,an office or store produced by means of the interactionof prism and pattern is brightlylit by daylightcould be isolatedfrom the realityof the that of prismaticcrystal, indescribably rich and susceptibleto as cityoutside. beautifultreatment as ornamentalcarvings on the stone or the Buteven if only the transomswere filled with prismatic glass, ornamentalwork on the terracottaof the elevation."41Such its effecton the structureand appearanceof a buildingcould be romanticdescriptions suggest that the authorswere familiar considerable.Luxfer frequentlypointed out that light shafts with the numerous accounts of utopian glass architecture, could be rendered obsolete and valuablefloorspace would be common among architectsand writers in the 1890s in the gained as a response to the new surplusof light. Basements United Statesand Europe.42Luxfer urged its customersto fill could be brightlylit and used as valuableoffice space, and in the entirewindow opening with prismaticglass and to use the new buildings the average story height could be reduced prisms in each story as "one of the principle ornamental considerablysince enough light would reach the back of a featuresof the building."Even in cases where additionallight room.44

DECICN. F. L. WRIGHT, PRIM LIGRT. No. 27,9890 PatentedDea, 7s,1897.

; ::;J?;? '--:_' 7; &-"? : 4v~ 'k- gar*

r" ~~`~''"694Z 0000Iiu?rdr' iI

Ir I A

Olt J&<

FIG.6: FrankLloyd Wright, design patent for singleprism light, 1897. FIG.7: FrankLloyd Wright, design patent for prismplate, 1897.

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 29

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions DESIGN. " F. L. WRIGHT, PRISMPLATE. No. 27,995. PatentedDeo, 7, 1897,

:i

:I

: :' ";

?;I

i

4) ? FIG.9: LuxferPrism, ornamental design by FrankLloyd Wright, 1897. -10 /0,. 1----0.j ,1 columns beginning at the second floor level. These columns also carry electric lights. The entire surfaceof the first and second storyfronts, underneath the canopiesis of plate glass, showingthe structuralmembers behind."46 In the top storyfive ~iT~j~ yy. ornamentalsquares, each surroundinga centralwindow, clearly echo the of and mass- -7-2Ia"~iz/d~/4k'-? geometric patterns Wright'spatented produceddesign for individualprisms on a largescale, thereby establishinga type of trademarksignature for the company. FIG.8: FrankLloyd Wright, design patent for singleprism light, 1897. The more advancedand daring design no. 1 takes this idea further.Wright changed the structuralsystem from fivebays to In January 1898 the companylaunched a nationwidecom- six bays to achieve an even 11 x 11-foot-squaregrid in all petition to illustrate"new possibilitiesin the use of Luxfer stories.This was neither practical nor economical,but it allowed Prismsas a buildingmaterial, considered from the standpoint Wrightto turn the whole fagadeinto an enlarged representa- of the owner'sinterest, as well as that of good modem architec- tion of the prism installationsthat it advertised.The prelimi- ture."45Some of Chicago'smost prominentarchitects were on nary pencil drawingfor the fagadeshows two circularlines in the jury: Daniel H. Burnham, William Le Baron Jenney, the center, indicating that Wright played with the idea of WilliamHolabird, and Frank LloydWright, as well as Henry applyinghis geometricdesign for the individualprism tiles to Crewof NorthwesternUniversity. To encourage the competi- this fagade as well [Figure13]. His choice of an 11-foot grid tors, the announcementwas accompaniedby illustrationsof reflected Luxfer'sclaims that prismaticglass would allow a two visionaryprojects for office buildingsusing LuxferPrisms reduced story height. Wright also responded to the firm's [Figures10, 11]. No architect'sname was given for either suggestionthat the entireopening between structural members design, but "designno. 1"was later republishedby Wrightas shouldbe filledwith Luxfer Prisms and that theywere best used his own. "Designno. 2," similarin characterand overalllayout, in each storyof the building,although neither the refractionof was drawnby the same draftsman.This design, too, was in all light close to the floor nor the use of prism glass in the top probabilitycreated by Wright.Framed by a heavyornamental storieswould have been veryefficient. The prismsworked most band, this fagadeis the more conventionalof the two designs effectivelywhen they sat flush with the wall, unobstructedby with five clearlymarked bays and major and minor support any reveals or cornices above. Wright demonstratedthis by members.The prismaticglass is shownin its usual application moving the prism screensof the first two floors in front of the in transomsand canopies. "The first and second stories are stanchions, and making the square prism fields protrude providedwith canopies swungfrom the top of ornate posts or slightly."The structural members in the firstand secondstories

30 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions are screened by the prism surfaces which are carried in front of The reception and interpretation of design no. 1 over the them. The plate glass is retained in the lower part of the first years gives insight into how contemporary historiographers story for show window purposes and for the same reason a plate tried to present Wright as a key figure for the origins of the glass center is inserted in the second story forilux, also covered modem movement, an identity Wright himself claimed as well. by a canopy."47 In Wright's designs both the application of Forty years passed before Wright published design no. I again. the material and the pattern of the fagade itself are clearly He presented it in theArchitecturalForum in 1938 as a predeces- dictated by the fagade's function as an advertisement for a sor for his St. Mark's Tower project for New York City of 1929, specific product and are not the result of Wright's apparent thereby linking it to his early attempts at designing a true ability to foresee the architecture to come, as has often been curtain wall.48In 1942 Henry-Russell Hitchcock, adopting this assumed. view, called the scheme "epoch making" without taking into consideration that the design had been essentially unknown for forty years. Nikolaus Pevsner followed in 1949, recognizing in it a "personal paraphrase of Sullivan's ideas."49Grant Carpenter

FIG.10: Frank Lloyd Wright, Luxfer Prism Skyscraper, Design No. I, 1897,from FIG. I : FrankLloyd Wright (?), LuxferPrism Skyscraper, Design No. 2, 1897, The InlandNews and ArchitectRecord (January 1898). from The InlandNews and ArchitectRecord (January 1898).

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 31

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions that this fagade "has since appeared in many guises in many countries. A type of fagade now fashionable."53Wright's puri- fied 1957 version has since been republished many times by historians and biographers, always as the prophetic late- nineteenth-century design that Wright would have liked us to believe it was.54 An early sketch for the design, the above-mentioned pencil drawing, was published for the first time in 1962 by Arthur Drexler in conjunction with an exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art [Figure 13].55 Wright had partially changed this drawing as well. He divided it in the middle, showing his new version on the left side (the traces of the eraser and of the former design are still visible), but half of the original design with the corner turret remained on the right side. Probably at this moment Wright added the handwritten note in the lower right corner dating the drawing 1894-95.56 It is much more likely, however, that the design was done in 1896 or 1897 (the dates given by Wright when he first published it in 1938 and in A Testament in 1957), concurrent with Wright's geometric patterns for the prism plates and in conjunction with the Luxfer competition.

FIG. 12: FrankLloyd Wright, Luxfer Prism Skyscraper, Design No. I, 1897, as redrawnby Wrightin 1957.

Manson, one of Wright's collaborators, described how in 1957 he had to stop Wright from altering his 1897 drawing with eraser and pencil before it was photographed by Manson for his book, Frank Lloyd Wrightto 1910.50 Manson succeeded in intercepting Wright and the drawing appeared unharmed in that publication the following year, accompanied by a text that further enhanced its legend. Manson claimed that the design was not only a predecessor for Sullivan's Carson Pirie Scott & Co. building, but even for the "glass-fronted box of modem practice," such as the UN building in New York.51What had originally been conceived as an alternative to the emerging aestheticof steeland plateglass architecture was now claimed as a forerunnerof exactlythat. It is alsountrue, of course,that Wright'sdesign represents an earlyexample of a glasscurtain wall,but the notionhas been frequently repeated since then.52 Afterthe incidentwith Manson, Wright changed his drawing anyway,publishing a purified(or rather, cleaned-up) version in 1957 in his own book, A Testament[Figure 12]. Wright erased both corner turrets, most ornamental features, and the com- plete attic story. He left the design dated as 1897, and claimed FIG.13: Frank Lloyd Wright, Luxfer Prism Skyscraper Design, initial sketch, 1897.

32 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Luxfer Prisms would reach the maximum of effect considered from the standpoint of light power, as well as that of a new production of modern architecture. The suggestion is devel- oped in two designs, one based upon ten stories and a divisional unit of 11 feet 10 inches; the other, for a twenty-four story building, surmounted by a restaurant, roof garden, and obser- vatory, with a plan especially adapted to the use of Luxfer Prisms."63 Much more radical than Wright's proposals for the Luxfer Prism building, the Boari drawings actually do represent what seems to be the first design for a virtual glass curtain wall for a skyscraper, and certainly deserved the attention of later critics concerning themselves with the search for a predecessor of the modern office building. The smaller design clearly entered into a dialogue with Wright's proposal. It has the same proportions, the same number of stories, the same eleven-foot structural grid. But instead of merely placing prismatic glass between floor and ceiling, Boari attached a homogenous glass screen in front of the entire structure, thus increasing the glass surface by 20 percent. This increase might have been his main objective, in line with the company's desire to sell as much of their product as possible, but in doing this he also created a glass FIG. 14: Robert C. Spencer, entry, Luxfer Competition 1898, from The Inland curtain wall. The screen curves outwards at the bottom, gaining Architectand News Record,September 1898. more light from above similar to Luxfer's canopies, and demonstrating the ephemeral quality of the glass sheathing. Frank Lloyd Wright himself, it seems, hardly ever used prismatic glass, since he rarely had opportunities to design the office buildings and warehouses for which the material was mainly intended.57 The characteristic square pattern of his Luxfer no. 1, was used in his (unexecuted) facade, design again designs for the Sarabhai Calico Mills Store in Ahmedabad, India, in 1946 and in the administrative offices of the Guggen- heim Museum in New York in 1951. Probably due to a poor response to the company's competi- tion, an extension was granted until 15 June 1898, and the final result was published in September 1898.58 Robert C. Spencer received the first prize for the design of a Chicago-style warehouse with an internal glass-covered arcade [Figure 14].59 In its restrained treatment of ornament and glass ceiling it was comparable with Otto Wagner's Postsparkasse in Vienna, which was designed at around the same time.60 The third prize was given to Solomon Spencer Beman for a huge convention hall with rings of prismatic glass in its roof.61 the two most entries, second Undoubtedly exciting winning 41r prize, came from the thirty-five year old Italian architect, Adamo Boari two different Boari.62 designed skyscrapers--ten iiiI? and twenty-four stories high-whose were entirely facades VT,,. covered with Luxfer Prisms [Figures 15, 16]. His designs were air accompanied by a short explanatory text: "Our effort has been ? ,.... to use the Iridian Luxfer Prism as the whole surface, practically FIG. 15: Adamo Boari, ten-story version of a skyscraper for the Luxfer Competi- eliminating openings and reveals. Consequently the use of tion, 1898, from The InlandArchitect and News Record,September 1898.

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 33

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions ?-~~•++:---;W:~E :,+'+

'+•,'+mii-

xlk

. •,?x -t ..... ++>+++++•++ :+ +2i ,,; ?

+ ? ++:• L&A i,

8'"" ~-~ N... :,i5,{

+;+I ?Y:

Z ' 2:...... ?"

EY •• 5 •: i + ++•", +,:? , :..... , ~~ ~ ~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~ - ++ a;+•+•,•++• ..

FIG.16: Adamo Boari, twenty-four-story version of a skyscraperfor the LuxferCompetition, 1898. The ten-story version is visibleon the left.

34 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Both versions appeared in an illustration drawn after the one can read ordinary print at the farthest end of the room."70 competition for inclusion in the 1899 exhibition of the Chicago Many of these letters made it perfectly clear that Luxfer Prisms Architecture Club, which was published in the accompanying were by no means a cheap purchase: "I want to say that while catalogue." The freestanding twenty-four-story tall skyscraper the prisms are away and beyond the most expensive item in our seems to be a cluster of five columns on a tapered base, entirely building, and my friends think I've been awfully extravagant in wrapped in a translucent glass curtain wall. It provided the lighting up for a morning newspaper, I am perfectly satisfied vision of a magnificent, shimmering building as the centerpiece that the expenditure will more than pay. Our basement is the of a contemporary city. brightest, purest-atmosphered and sweetest scented in town, and the men have had a better average health than for the five The application of Luxfer Prisms years past," wrote the owner of the Ohio State Journal in The immediate success of Luxfer Prisms must have been Columbus, Ohio.71 Luxfer claimed in its advertisements that astounding. In November 1897, after less than a year on the between 25 percent and 100 percent of the installation costs market, the company announced that "179 premises of aver- would be saved each year by a reduction in the expenses for age size have been equipped in the city of Chicago, and four artificial light. Compared to simple plate glass, prism glass costs thousand two hundred and ninety-six arc, incandescent and were indeed very high: in 1903 plate glass cost about five cents gas lights have been extinguished during the daylight hours. per square foot, "factoryribbed" glass nine cents, and prismatic The cost of the artificial light saved during the period of one glass up to fifty cents per square foot.72 year is in a majority of instances equal to the cost of the Although the letters quoted above can hardly be considered equipment of Luxfer Prisms."65Half a year later an article in hard evidence, there can be no doubt that Luxfer's prismatic the Chicago Economistclaimed: "The aggregate of business glass worked astonishingly well in many situations. A number of executed during the past year has been upward of half a million independent tests between 1900 and 1913 reported the materi- dollars. Some 1500 different installations have been made in al's daylighting capacity in the depth of a room to be between nearly 100 different cities of the country."66Luxfer had estab- five and fifty times as high as that of ordinary glass.73 However, lished local offices in ten different American cities.67 The the success of the material depended strongly on specific local majority of buildings equipped with Luxfer Prisms in the first circumstances. Basquin described the characteristics of the year was located in Chicago, followed by New York, Philadel- ideal (albeit unlikely) room for the most efficient application of phia, St. Louis, and a number of smaller cities. They were prismatic glass: "The room most easily lighted is one with a mostly commercial structures, but Luxfer products were also high ceiling, with perfectly plain walls unbroken by offsets of in applied residences, schools, and hospitals. In a vast any kind, with whitewashed walls and ceiling, and, finally, a of cases majority only the first floor was equipped with room devoid of furniture."74For rooms less than fifty feet deep Luxfer Prisms. The prisms were equally popular for the several reviewers recommended using the simpler and much of retrofitting existing buildings as well as a feature in newly cheaper corrugated glass instead. Vertical prism installations edifices. planned Old photographs of American urban reached their limits if the building opposite was higher than centers often show how the appearance of entire streets was twice its distance from the fagade. In such cases protruding and changed unified by the application of prismatic glass to canopies were recommended. They could deliver sufficient almost every building. light for storage in rooms overshadowed by a building up to five Luxfer printed numerous, carefully chosen letters from times as high as the width of the street. Prism installations were satisfied clients in its sales brochures:68 "The Luxfer Prism not necessary when the street width was at least three times the Company has done more to furnish light in our buildings than height of the building on the other side (or, of course, if there all the high-building ordinances our council has been able to was no opposite farade at all, as was often the case with the devise," wrote an enthusiastic store owner in Chicago. A upper stories of tall buildings). "A simple test as to whether Chicago tailor sent "a gas bill of 1896 and the corresponding Luxfer Prisms will improve the light in a room is to stand at the ones for 1897, covering the period which the Prisms have been rear end and look through the window. If little or no sky is in store. my They speak with more force than I can. I am visible, prisms will effect a saying in the artificial lighting bill."'75 confident that I shall not find it necessary to use gas or artificial Luxfer's calculation tables assumed the even brightness of an light during the day at any time the coming season."69 A overcast sky. If sunlight struck the prism plates directly from housewife reported the improvement that had been made in above it would still be cast deeper into the room, however, it her dining room: "This room was so dark at times during the could also cause a strong, unpleasant glare and increase the day that persons passing through it were in danger of knocking temperature in the back of the room. Basquin recommended articles off the dining room table, as they could not distinguish installing 'white Holland shades' in such cases and found them sitting there, but, since your Prisms have been installed, consoling words for his prospective clients. When a customer

NEUMANN:LUXFER PRISMS 35

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions entered a store with the bright light behind him, making "his them, and that his workers seemed "to be more cheerful under face hard to recognize as long as he keeps his back to the the improved conditions."80 window," Basquin reassured the salesmen that "this inconve- Retrofitting existing structureswith prismatic glass provided nience is little detriment to trade, for [...] the customer is the advantage of a measurable success of the installation by perfectly at his ease and the whole interior looks bright and comparing the new to the former lighting conditions. In such cheerful to him."76 cases however, Luxfer's contributions to a new architecture Prominent examples of buildings that were retrofitted with were least likely to be convincing. The retrofitted prism plates prismatic glass in the early years were the Rookery and Home and canopies often had the appearance of inappropriate repair Insurance buildings [Figure 17] in Chicago in 1897, the Stern work and revealed to the public that the interior lighting had Bros. Department Store in New York in 1897, and the trading been insufficient. room in Adler & Sullivan's Chicago Stock Exchange in 1908 Holabird & Roche's group of the three McCormick Build- [Figure 18].77 Even Philadelphia's City Hall received a number ings of 1898 [Figure 19], on Chicago's Michigan Avenue, of prismatic glass installations. Luxfer's stockholders set ex- became one of the first examples for an application of the amples by immediately applying Luxfer Prisms to their own material in a new structure. The three buildings were situated buildings. Cyrus McCormick, for example, installed Luxfer on a lot 168 feet wide and 160 feet deep. Luxfer Prisms were Prisms in his office building in 120 State Street and in two of his originally specified for every story in all three buildings.8' residences in Chicago.7" Harlow N. Higinbotham equipped the Eventually only the northernmost fagade of the group, de- entire first floor of the Second Leiter Building on State Street in signed by Louis Sullivan for Gage Bros. & Co., was equipped Chicago (William Le Baron Jenney, 1889-91) with prismatic with Luxfer Prisms in every story. This reduced application of glass.79 William H. Winslow replaced all the windows in his the new material might well have been due to the influence of Chicago factory with the new product early in 1897 and Edward A. Renwick, Holabird & Roche's supervising site- reported in a letter to the Luxfer Company that their efficiency architect, who had severe reservations about the effect of the had not been impaired by the amount of dust accumulated on prisms: "One of our clients wanted Sullivan to design the fagade of a building, but wanted us to do the inside and erect the building. It was for a millinery business and, when artificiallight was poor as it was in those days, it was important that there be as much daylight as possible. Now we would have run the windows up just as far as they could go, for the light at the top carries farther. But against our judgment Sullivan insisted on putting four feet of ornamentation at the top of the windows. He said to the owner, 'If I came to you for a hat, I'd use your judgment.' The owner let him go ahead and the store was ruined for a good many years--until artificial light approximating daylight had been developed."82 Renwick'scriticism was not unfounded. The location on Michigan Avenue was crucially different from the Gage Brothers' former address, where a narrow street and an elevated train track had justified installing prisms in several stories the year before.83 Here, however, all the upper floors enjoyed an unrestricted view of Lake Michigan; skylight would enter horizontally through the windows and on average over- cast days the advantage of prismatic glass over plate glass was negligible. In the morning hours the fagade was exposed to direct sunlight from above which was refracted deeply into the room. Contemporary photographs show that Basquin's advice to use white Holland shades for sun protection was gladly accepted by the inhabitants. Clearly, here it was mostly the material's potential as a new architectural feature that had been the reason for its display at such a prominent location. The FIG. 17: WilliamLe BaronJenney, Home InsuranceBuilding, Chicago, 1885, disagreement between Renwick and Sullivan and a comparison retrofittedin 1897with LuxferPrism plates and canopiesin the second andthird between the adjoining fagades is telling. Holabird & Roche's floor,ca. 1897(demolished in 1931). fagades proudly show large expanses of glass and the stark,

36 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FIG.18: Louis Sullivan, Stock Exchange, Chicago, Trading Room, when it was remodeledas ForemanBrother's Banking Co. ca. 1908-23, LuxferPrism canopies visible at the outside. unornamented brick cladding of the structural skeleton. Louis tenants wanted them had to get some contractor to insert Sullivan used richly ornamented buff-colored terracotta and them above the show windows."85 introduced comparatively small individual windows under- Apart from the prism's impact on the aesthetics and propor- neath the horizontal bands of prism glass (gradually reduced in tion of the fagade, the company claimed that the additional height from forty to twenty-seven inches in the upper stories), influx of light could render light courts in the center unneces- illustrating the alternative approach to modern architectural sary and the prisms would thus have a profound impact on design advocated by the Luxfer Prism Company and coincid- floor plans and sections as well. "Architects! By Luxfer Prisms ing with his own philosophy of design.84 When Holabird & you can bring in daylight without the use of large light Roche added four stories to Sullivan's existing structure in wells" was a slogan frequently used in the firm's advertise- 1902, they again installed bands of prismatic glass in order to ments.86 In how many cases architects might have left out remain faithful to the original design. originally considered light courts after discovering the The architect William Gray Purcell later remembered qualities of the new material is difficult to determine. Three that traditional architects were often not receptive to the examples in Chicago can be documented, however. Hola- idea of Luxfer Prisms: "Beaux Arts architects back there in bird & Roche described in December 1897 one of their 1900-and that meant practically all the architects in the recently completed buildings at 84 Wabash Avenue in world except about two dozen-had a mind, a sort of Chicago: "The building is seven stories high and erected on collective mind that just hated Luxfer Prisms. The Greeks a lot twenty-five (25) feet front and one hundred and sixty hadn't had Luxfer Prisms and the Romans hadn't had (160) feet deep. Our original plans contemplated a light Luxfer Prisms. So how could you put them in a building shaft in the center of the building, occupying about 20 x 35 without destroying your prestige?. .. Regular architectsjust feet. This shaft we finally left out, and [we] put in the wouldn't touch Luxfer Prisms and building owners whose Prisms. The result has surpassed our expectations, as each

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 37

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Olil;

"aim

]VI ::?it

RL~ i' :.: ?~,-?-.?m " r~-q?;,?:~: ao:?_::;

FIG.19: Louis Sullivan, Holabird & Roche,McCormick Buildings, Chicago, 1898. floor is perfectly lighted throughout; thus saving about This merger of commercial improvements and new architec- forty-two hundred square feet of rentable floor space."87 tural sophistication sparked an immediate reaction. The cel- Shortly afterwards, in 1898, the great department store of ebrated opening of the Mandel Brothers store on Memorial the Mandel Brothers on State Street in downtown Chicago was Day in May 1898 was greeted on the same day by the completely remodeled by the firm of William Le Baron Jenney announcement that a million-dollar department store out of [Figure20]. Luxfer Prisms played a pivotal role in this renova- marble and bronze would be built directly across the street. One tion. The original colonnades in the first two stories were year later, construction was begun on the Schlesinger and removed and "new steel columns, with steel lintels of long span, Mayer store (now Carson Pirie Scott & Co.), by Louis Sullivan. formed a frame for immense pieces of plate glass," which the William H. Winslow's firm did the ornamental ironwork, and Inland Architectconsidered "a new style of architecture, entirely the Luxfer Prism Company supplied prism plates for the American...." Above the display windows a continuous band fagades in the first two floors [Figure21]. The successful use of of Luxfer Prisms, about five feet high, was introduced, to send prism glass at the Mandel Brothers store, with its subsequent the exterior light to the rear of the store, thereby completing gain of more interior floor space, clearly served as a model "the development of a new style in commercial architecture." for the application of Luxfer Prisms in general and especially But again the impact of the Luxfer Prisms did not stop at the for the decision not to provide any lightshafts for the interior of fagade: "Originally two light shafts were in use, but these are the Schlesinger and Mayer store. It was generally expected that dispensed with and about eight hundred square feet of floor the gain in additional floor space would pay for the investment space secured on each floor above the first."'88 of forty thousand dollars for Luxfer Prisms in less than two

38 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions years. The important role prismatic glass played in the design By the turn of the century several firms with similar products becomes obvious from an advertisement for the opening, in were competing with the Luxfer Prism Company, marketing which Luxfer tiles appear next to a view of the building on left their products under names such as "Luminous Prism,""Ameri- and right [Figure 22].89 Louis Sullivan's drawings show how can 3-Way Prism," "Searchlight Prism," "Daylight Prism," or carefully he integrated the prismatic glass installations into the "Solar Prism."They were fiercely pursued by the patent lawyers ornamental pattern of the metal frames around the display of the Luxfer Prism Company.94 In the early 1920s, prismatic windows."90 glass was offered by all major glass producers.95 By then it was In the following years innumerable new office buildings produced not only in small 4 x 4-inch squares but also in the throughout the United States were equipped with the material. form of sheet glass up to 60 x 100 inches. The large firms Holabird & Roche continued to apply Luxfer Prisms in their simplified the application procedure by cutting down the commissions, usually to the transoms of the first-floor display variety of available prism angles to two or three.96 After a few windows. Examples include the McClurg [Figure 4] and the years, the material, which had started as an exclusive possession Ohio buildings at Wabash Avenue in 1898 and 1906-7 and the of prosperous businessmen, had become a widely popular Born Building on Fifth Avenue (now S. Wells St.) in 1908.91 Hill device that even store owners in small towns could afford. The and Woltersdorf equipped all twelve stories of the Church above-mentioned cases, where the prisms were installed in all building on Wabash Avenue with prismatic glass in 1903, and stories of a building or caused the abandonment of a planned Ernest Flagg's Singer Loft building (1904) on Broadway in New or existing light court remained exceptional. Judging from the York City featured a large protruding canopy above the large number of prisms still in place, however, they must have entrance.2 Louis Sullivan used the material again in 1913-15 been produced by the millions. in his Van Allen and Son department store in Clinton, Iowa. The American Luxfer Prism Company merged with one of Here Luxfer's product was applied in a "continuous band of its competitors, the American 3-Way Prism Company, on 17 prismatic glass originally set like a clerestory around the November 1926 and still existed in the late 1930s under the room."93 name, "American 3-Way Luxfer Prism Company," of Cicero,

tlEll

A i* At% vaen rr40.

oi ~t I~1 -. #B4w

111110r MI 9 n j ul'F Ijk

FIG. 20: William Le Baron Jenney, renovation of Mandel Brothers store, Chicago, 1898. Luxfer Prisms were installed in the first five floors. The main entrance to the Carson Pirie Scott & Co. (formerly Schlesinger and Mayer) store is visible on the right, from a contemporary post card.

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 39

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions A~ two?~-* ? 1 l 6 If' fl Aa * 0 ',

?A. 4 muapnol~asaA. ga

'I' fc A

A&ILfrv If pvIN 40c 4, 4 ?vvv 'tP

04r ALC"~~;i4P9aI~; ?~.C)~~~~pr4?au~ ~l i

FIG.2 1: LouisSullivan, Schlesinger and Meyer Store, Chicago, begun 1899, from Architectural Record, 16 July 1904.

40 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions new and different architecturalmodernity had become an old-fashionedway of lighting.

Luxfer companies abroad In when the Luxfer Prism the Now " 1897, Companyentered U.S. OOL*16. market it also patented its major ideas abroad in Canada, toIVA Js~r.ill r Mexico,Russia, India, Australia, and Europe.99Branches were established in several countries shortly afterwards.'00They offered a product range similarto that in the United States, consisting of pavement lights, art glass, and prismaticglass. Soon brass plates with the name "Luxfer"appeared next to on sidewalksin citiessuch as c?/ '"\*1,~E *ut basement-lights majorEuropean t. London,Vienna, Leipzig, and Budapest.Buildings in placesas far apart as Copenhagen, Denmark,or Jaromer (now in the Czech Republic)displayed the prism tiles in their i. , T f orml opa of dic&ISe"Sor V Myortrltle totlywork &(vwsd facades.'01 ,, G ..,,c-, Cl. r. . it..t • , h . ,. stepI'"mervoot-le*;'.,i lifeachicoo, Wehatreagroat stor. slow t6WAultour Ithash., 6"u The for the brancheswas 6"'1t.,4,"Ctj &Zl = to&.I t6wW-- ,loa of monr prismaticglass European produced to aos'oo, To ma atilltioa we Itavelivests 6t la war,los::-. Laces Ajloaemloee ToeachtLorof porsfecta t~or factont6+ig inour wesay:t?has the Val St. Lambert factoriesin in and .1 W,otowt16 "06As"voisso,evletelI rw 1 se P114 orowulltson 1c;~ ~ by glass Liege Belgium, n y sistr at FIcuc l to• w of.O theor- • .. store. the St. Gobain factoriesnear Paris,France.'02 a,t-J Ass,,•, nossolln&4 ,rrw11os m&AcTolc16 .. III &ad o6 e.... saw. i glass .m,.. Tt..d 1r? ,a,.,...... j~ov, r~-,1!rtt wou sm"... t6 s1Y'*4*,* toMA*lr',- ...... -litv~r (to" Like their American parent company, the European 'rh..pilshkP\tvitivise' tomak ItselfItat iw" in Lthat lar(1I ul branchesclearly aimed at high publicvisibility by participating ...... I•,,+,l Ircoy cque.3,q~ pIP",l. 01"....., rv a..ing ,i,•t ?.+.,,..I avul opetua.,... ., ! i:--,+ .-,-,:++ tI 14N,-i t"V?W,1drrhymurraw asul WeA" Y~.Olctoller 12th. in major trade fairs and activelyseeking the attentionof the I'llgut,46rdunytlw lwitI*~~~'ls"" architecturalprofession. In 1899 the Frenchbranch launched a competition among French and Belgian architects,modeled after the successfulcompetition in the U.S. the previousyear. FIG.22: Advertisementfor the openingof the new Schlesingerand MeyerStore They enlisted prominentarchitects, such as Jean-LouisPascal fromChicago Tribune, 12 October 1903. and PaulNenot, asjurors.'03 Numerous reports about success- ful applicationsappeared in trademagazines and architectural Illinois. However, its product line concentrated on other journals through the following decades, among them the structural glass applications.97During the 1920s prismatic account of the successful illuminationof a newly installed glass slowly began to lose its impact. Apart from the rise of stained-glasswindow in London'sSouthwark Cathedral, over- electricity, technical disadvantagescontributed to the dwin- shadowedby an adjacentwarehouse, but brightlylit after the dling success of the prisms. Contrary to the company's installation of Luxfer Prisms.'04 In many cases the light- claims, the installationsneeded a certain degree of constant refractingqualities of prismaticglass had an obviousimpact on maintenance. The horizontal ridges on the inside were the formal decisions of the architects,as in the case of the much more difficult to clean than ordinary window glass, enormous sphericalcanopy above the entranceto Hanover's and as a result they darkened and eventuallylet in less light MollingDepartment Store of 1909 [Figure23] or--even more than normalwindows.98 The soldered zinc bands did not age dramatically-in the manifolded prismaticceiling light sus- well and leaks became a frequent problem. None of the pended in the centralcourtyard of Piet Kramer'sDe Bijenkorf canopiessurvived the impactof inclementweather. The compli- DepartmentStore in The Hague of 1924-26. Here the prin- cated procedure of choosing different angles of refraction ciple of light refractionthrough protrudingcanopies, which accordingto local conditionsand the assemblageof smallglass had been applied at the outsideof the store,was reversedand tiles into largerframes was too costlyto be continuedat a time the light was cast sidewaysinto the open stories from the when the buildingindustry was pushing for rationalizationand centrallylocated daylighting device [Figure 24].l05 when electriclighting became generallyaffordable. Fashion for One of the most thoughtful and creativeapplications of storefront designs shifted in the 1930s towards simplified, prismaticglass in Europewas accomplished in a smallbar in the largerforms and grander,illuminated store signs, often cover- center of Vienna. In 1908 Adolf Loos designed the KImrntner ing the transomarea above the displaywindows. The introduc- Bar for a narrowsidestreet, the KarntnerDurchgang. He not tion of airconditioning required generally lower ceiling heights. only employed Luxferbasement lights like his neighbors,but When load-bearing,hollow glass blocks were introduced in he also designed the interior of the bar in response to the 1935, a new, more efficient and cheaper daylightingdevice optical qualitiesof prismaticglass and provided another ex- became available.In sum, what once had been a symbolof a ample of the direct impact that the material'squalities could

NEUMANN:LUXFER PRISMS 41

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Ir~~ ~s;~ ~~-~?- :?II~": ~' * 'L i i:- ?n?- .F "I *~ " ";"ui' ? ~ a r ~Pn~sb` wi-;? " .z ~~ s -.a ~? u ? ~~1:~~.4???;~;~,::AX?r ~j~ a,?,. :~? ra i:

n ~~~:?* ~ *`??r ": a. ,? ~ri~~l $~"~~?IZ)~ -a

j ? P

;,JB

P "r r

i ~1~,~ s??""

~ ~ ~r Ir. "

i ~: :

;"";5~

,:-~,;.?r:;-::::~:-:~S i. ;4 ~x- .i:r~~'"s ,??; y ~~I : i? ' ;iF :??~i;? ~b i?'?;- ~a., ,,, ;'. ..

FIG.23: Hiller& Kuhlmann,Moiling Department Store, Hanover,Germany, 1906, LuxferPrisms are above the displaywindows and in the curvedcanopy above the mainentrance. have on the design of a building.106 Mirrors on three sides of bar's name underneath, he gave the structure itself the form of the room underneath the marble ceiling seem to enlarge the a prism, illustrating the underlying principle. This unusual space optically and to continue it to infinity. From the inside, a canopy was removed during World War II, and has only screen of brown onyx plates, thin enough to be translucent, is recently been restored, using sheets of wire glass in its upper visible above the entrance. On the outside, this screen is half, however. covered by a canopy with a triangular section. Early photo- The Deutsches Luxfer Prismen Syndikat in Berlin became graphs and several of Loos's drawings clearly show the charac- one of the most successful of the foreign branches. Friedrich teristic pattern of 4 x 4-inch prism plates on its upper surface Keppler, its director, had realized that the complicated system [Figures25, 26]. Using the tiles to maximize what daylight fell of different prismatic glass tiles in the transom above a display into the narrow KIirntner Graben and to direct it through the window was too costly to install and maintain, and also too onyx plates into the room, Loos filled the locale with a peculiar limited in its architectural applications.107 Furthermore, the colored light that was reflected endlessly by the mirrored walls. demand for such a device was lower in European cities than This was a brilliant application of the canopy's known ability to in the United States. Keppler therefore enlarged the compa- gather and refract light. But Loos went further in the architec- ny's product range. Prismatic tiles, basement lights, and art tural application of the canopy than his colleagues in Chicago glass were still produced, but were joined by a new system and New York: by transforming the suspended canopy into a of structural glass, which presented a breakthrough for the stable triangular feature, displaying the American flag and the application of glass in architecture, generated enormous inter-

42 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions est among the architectsof the modern movement,and paved were on display in Bruno Taut's famous exhibition pavilion at the way for the introductionof the hollow glass block in the the WerkbundAusstellung in Cologne of 1914 [Figures27, 28]. 1930s. The German Luxfer Prism Syndikat was, in fact, the main Luxfer's new product, called Glaseisenbeton,or Keppler- sponsor for the building, donating the building materials and System,introduced in 1909, was based on a system of thin providing many of the exhibits.0ls It can be assumed that reinforced concrete bars holding heavy glass tiles in place. Luxfer also initiated the project. The walls in the lower part of These tiles did not have prismaticridges, but were still not the building were constructed of Keppler's new Glaseisenbeton. entirelytransparent, due to theirthickness. The thin reinforced The dome above consisted of two layers, an outer one of simple concretebars would be containedin slotsalong the edges of the plate glass between concrete ribs, and an inside one of simpli- glass tiles, and reflectionsfrom the inner surfaceof the tiles fied prismatic tiles, in the familiar 4 x 4-inch size, joined rendered them almost invisible. Keppler had profited here together by William Winslow's electroglazing process. The from Luxfer'sexperience with pavementlights set in concrete shape of the dome resembled a large, polished diamond, and from the idea of a structuralsquare grid that the electro- symbolizing the quality of the advertised product while also plated copper bands had provided for the prism tiles. The illustrating the name of the leading periodical of the German systemcould be used for entire non-load-bearingwalls, again glass industry, Diamant. In the center of the building was a providinga translucentscreen that could be integratedinto a fountain, colorfully lit from underneath its glass floor; the building'ssurface more easilythan window openings. Although staircases consisted of a steel frame filled with prismatic tiles. the new glasstiles had quitedifferent qualities from those of the The floor was made of concrete with colored glass lenses older prismaticglasses, they were still frequentlycalled Luxfer embedded in it.109 Prisms.All the productsof the GermanLuxfer Prism Company Taut's pavilion rightly has been celebrated as a prime

,b4 ,Alf Al

00, X 7 ? f V K1 *J IIw , 1?"? "*~' " N*kig tw*;

*4r

ro

AAn

FIG.24: PietKramer, De BijenkorfDepartment Store, The Hague,1924-26, prismaticglass installation above the interiorcourtyard, refracting light sideways into the open stories.

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 43

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions WN 0,4,

it 77"

pawI

Fal

FIG.25 (Right):Adolf Loos, KIrntnerBar, Vi- enna, 1908,canopy, photograph ca. 1930. FIG. 26 (Below): Adolf Loos, Kirntner Bar, Vienna,1908, preliminary sketch.

WEiln-A~i~;:

example of expressionist architecture and a brilliant formal major trade fair." Many of them had features such as glass manifesto, but the building was also an exhibition pavilion in a domes, glass staircases, or a central fountain. Luxfer had trade show, with the explicit purpose of displaying a firm's presented its products in separate exhibition pavilions at the products. As such, it was part of a long-standing tradition of a Brussels World's Fair in 1910 and at several trade shows in the particular building type to which it owed a considerable amount following years. At the Baufachausstellungin Leipzig in 1913 of its details. Since the late nineteenth century the glass industry Luxfer's domed pavilion out of prismatic glass, glass tiles, and had exhibited its skills and products in glass pavilions at every reinforced concrete was designed by the prominent German

44 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions r ~~-"?? :-~-- iI?3E i? i i:l~r~ .; .. :r~; I??~.,,B,:aC?~[i!;~:?::.:" : : i-,l--i : :. a I~~:" ~:::::-::::::;~:: ::-::: ?-isB=O:?-~,~ ,~ -i~-a _i - i : i ,I?'C?"?- -: :

"Li:': -"?~~8! ----i- 5`~ : : :;?i* -il?. r i:- ?C ~?PUr:'"n$ iQli j,~ s-~al~

I?~ ~FI

_ r ~?: -f:

,:i I~~i:1 ~ i:??-?.:,~a~??:a?i?i : i :: ~~~~~~~ ~3~9111 1~ ~~a~?i: :

.,-"-"-i' _i: - ii

-FI ~ag~~ :i:l ?:i : ;'" __ :?(?1?:1?:?~ ? II_-1 :: ,ni-i ::?? -~i-~-~~--: .ce:~ ~~~~? ,?_e-15ss~~, s~s' i ,?.l:?&iA~R~- r?i i -:I:.----?~ i:: ~s Ir r ; i iii i-'':'' : i : - ? - --'i-

~~~1~ ivi

rr~~~~~~c~ .li~~~~i S-~a~

--i

_u":'- -~-`AP. r---:i-?--? : :-- :-- :. .

?i7;:-:

FIG. 27: Bruno Taut, Luxfer Prism Pavilion, Werkbund Exhibition, Cologne, 1914, interior (note the inscription, Deutsches LuxferPrismen Syndikat, at the diagonal con- crete strut).

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 45

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Innere Kuppel- Verglasung USI plast. Luxfcr- KrislallglIsem Glaswandcu. Futoboden in (ilascisenbeon (SystemKeppler) ausgefOhrtvom Deutschen Luxfer-

Prismen-G. m. Sndikat Berlin S.W. 68 Friedrichstr. 204 * Tel. Centrum 11566 Goldene Medaille ,,Iba" Leipzig 1913.

FIG.28: DeutschesLuxfer Prismen Syndikat, advertisement with the Glaspavillonby BrunoTaut, Werkbund Exhibition, Cologne, 1914. architect Bruno Mohring and won a gold medal. Bruno Taut's were used by the Luckhardt brothers in their housing estate of pavilion is part of this tradition. None of its predecessors 1926 on Berlin's Schorlemer Allee, and they were specified in however, enjoyed such enormous and well-orchestrated public- 1922 by Hans Scharoun for his famous FriedrichstraBe sky- ity.11' The collaboration between manufacturers and artists to scraper and by Bruno Taut for his never-executed hotel in render their products publicly visible and to turn them into an Magdeburg of 1922. Walter Gropius and many others praised integral part of the cultural discourse clearly had been one of the potential of Keppler's application enthusiastically."2 Luxfer the goals of the German Werkbund.But it also recalls the continued its tradition of involving well-known, progressive collaboration between Frank Lloyd Wright and the Luxfer architects in the marketing of its products and commissioned Prism Company seventeen years earlier. Hans Poelzig in 1931 to design their Berlin exhibition stand."1 The Deutsche Luxfer Prismen Gesellschaft and especially Luxfer's Glaseisenbetonpatents were adopted and modified by Keppler's system enjoyed tremendous success during the rise of the French glass manufacturer, Socidte de Saint Gobain, and German modern architecture in the 1920s. Luxfer glass ceil- developed into the famous Nevada glass tile construction, which ings were employed in 1929 by Otto Haesler in the auditorium was used by Pierre Chareau in his Maison de Verre of 1929 and of the Volksschule(primary school) at Celle; Luxfer glass walls in Le Corbusier's Clart6 apartments at the Porte Molitor in

46 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Paris (1932). The Nevada glass tile had a size of 20 x 20 cm and prominent place in the history of daylighting technologies for was 4 cm deep (8 x 1 1/2 inches). On its flat side it had a pattern architecture. The developers and main producers of prismatic reminiscent of dried earth (hence the name Nevada), and on glass, the Luxfer Prism Companies, were active participants in the other side a hollow circular mold to reduce its weight and to two important and intertwined debates of their time--the diffuse the transmitted light. Similar to its German predeces- competition among different lighting technologies and the sor, the tile had grooves on all sides to contain and hide the thin discussion surrounding the production of modern architecture. reinforced concrete beam.114 Keppler's system was used by the At a moment when electric light began to replace gas light as American 3-Way Luxfer Prism Company to build something the dominant means of modern artificial illumination, Luxfer like a successor to Bruno Taut's famous exhibition pavilion, a promoted daylighting as a cheaper, healthier, and thoroughly breathtakingly beautiful, shimmering, colored glass house on scientific alternative. Both in the United States and abroad the the rooftop of the Barbizon Plaza Hotel, built in New York City firm's policy of inviting young progressive architects to improve in 1932 by Murgatroyd and Ogden (the actual glass house was Luxfer's designs, suggest architectural applications, and create by Lawrence Emmons)."5 the firm's exhibition pavilions was instrumental in establishing In 1935 the American glass industry finally introduced the publicity for the product and helped to secure its immense machine-made, hollow glass block, which took over the prism's commercial success. role as a mass-produced structural daylighting device, since it had a number of qualities superior to those of prism glass or Conclusion Keppler's glass and concrete construction. Hollow glass blocks The story of the Luxfer Prism Company sheds light on a were a better insulator than simple glass tiles, their surface was somewhat different, less-known history of early modem archi- easy to clean, and they were stable enough to be load-bearing. tecture. In 1969, Reyner Banham had argued convincingly for Entire translucent walls could be built up to a certain height by an as-yet-to-be-written architectural history that would be based simply using mortar without the additional support of rein- upon technology and materials, on the typical rather than the forced concrete bars. The producers of hollow glass blocks exceptional, and on building processes rather than the creativ- adopted the principle of light refraction through prismatic ity of individual architects.119To this day, the complex general ridges around 1939-40, when several firms started offering conditions of architectural production have received far less products such as Pittsburgh Coming's Prism Light-Directing attention than they deserve. We still do not know enough about Blocks, or Owens-Illinois's Insulux Light Directional Blocks in how modern buildings actually came about, how the partici- their advertisements.116 Here, the prismatic ridges were placed pants in the building process interacted, how building materials on the inside of both halves of the hollow glass block, and were were invented and promoted. What emerges from a study of thus protected from dust. In this form some of Luxfer's original the Luxfer Prism Company is an image of stylistic and struc- ideas lived on. Many school buildings in the United States used tural change in architecture linked to the entrepreneurial talent prismatic glass blocks in the 1940s and 1950s, placed directly and resources of manufacturers and builders, or driven by the above the steel framed windows, in a fashion similar to the way visions of building engineers. Their activities have left traces in Luxfer Prisms had originally been employed. Once again, trade publications, patent records, and court cases, more than outside light was directed horizontally into the room or up in architectural magazines and monographs. The dissemina- towards the ceiling and reflected down from there. Light- tion of commercially successful building products and market- directing glass blocks are still being produced and marketed ing strategies seems to have been faster, wider, and less In addition today. there has been a renewed interest since the hampered by national boundaries than the alleged influence of 1980s in daylighting techniques, and prismatic glass is once a published building or a manifesto. The architect's role often again being scientifically explored and has been applied in a was that of a responding participant in a complex interactive number of cases.l 17 process rather than that of the leading protagonist. Contextual- Although many of the original prismatic glass installations izing all building activity in the larger framework of architec- have been replaced, their characteristic square pattern can still tural production offers a way to move beyond the selective be found easily in storefronts throughout the United States.""8 paradigms of historiographical modernism towards Banham's They are more apt to have survived in smaller cities with slow vision of a more balanced account of the building process. economic development. Often however, suspended ceilings or insufficient cleaning over the years have deprived the prisms of their lighting potential. Their history and purpose have all but Notes vanished into oblivion. This paper is based on research that began in 1989. I have presented parts of it in talks given at the Department of Fine Arts at Harvard in 1991, at The material itself, based on a sound optical principle and University the Architecture Department at Yale University in 1992, and at the Annual designed with the explicit purpose of saving energy, deserves a Meeting of the Society of Architectural Historians in Philadelphia, 1994. Since

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 47

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1992 I have circulated earlier versions of this paper to several colleagues and 8 "The Advantages of Ribbed Glass and of Wire Glass," Engineering News 36 friends. I would like to thankJuergen Schulz for his support and encouragement (13 August 1896): 101; "Experiments on the diffusion of light through prismatic of my research, as well as for numerous critical comments on my paper. I am and ribbed glass windows," EngineeringNews 45 (10 January 1901): 34-35. grateful for generous editorial advice provided by Nancy Austin, Patricia 9 W. Eckstein, "Interior Lighting," AmericanArchitect and Building News 62, no. Huntington, Dian Kriz, Evelyn Lincoln, and the anonymous reviewers of the 1188 (1898): 3-7. Hayward Brothers & Eckstein, eds., TradeCatalogue (London, JSAH. Brown University's John Rowe Workman Award, which I received in 1899), 4-5. 1993, helped to finance my research trips. Jeff Barr, Anne-Laure CarrY, C. F. '10The first one seems to have been Robert Boughton in England, who Edwards, Richard Gelpke, Paul Israel, Joe Jernejcic, Markus Kristan, David suggested "sheets of glass with one face plane and one face with a series of Lynch, Claire Markovitz, Gavin Mayhew, David McGinnis, Charles Parrott, parallel ridges, which are of such a form as to direct the light by simple reflection Rodney Piles, Patrick Pinnell, Martin Rambusch, Burkhardt Rukschcio, Tim or by refraction in the required direction." R. Boughton, "Daylight Diffusers," Samuelson, Joseph Siry, Lisa A. Smith, Christopher Vernon, and Virginia British Patent no. 139 (13 January 1880). "Daylight Prism Co. v. Marcus Prism Wright provided valuable additional information. Co.," Federal Reporter 110 (1901): 980-85. In 1885 a German physicist, Karl ' "Architectural Possibilities of the Luxfer Prism," The Inland Architectand Mohrmann, who taught at the Royal Polytechnic in Hanover, published a News Record29, no. 2 (March 1897): 18. booklet on methods of daylighting. He had been inspired by the intense 2 "The Century's Triumph in Lighting," The Inland Architectand News Record discussions about the lighting scheme for the Reichstag in Berlin which was 34 (January 1900), supplement: 'The Technical Review of the Building Arts": currently under construction, and suggested prismatic glass, which he described 39-40. in some detail. Karl Mohrmann, Uber die Tageslichtbeleuchtunginnerer Raume 3Apart from the material cited below, prismatic glass is treated in numerous (Berlin, 1885); "Oberlichter von Linsen und Prismenglas," Centralblattder contemporary articles: W. H. Greene, "Prismatic Lighting for the Illumination of Bauverwaltung 5 (1885): 256. Dark Interiors,"AmericanArchitect and Building News 69, no. 1284 (1900): 35-36; " James G. Pennycuick, "Window-Glass," U.S. patent no. 312,290 (17 Henry Crew, "On the History Of Our Ideas Concerning Illumination," American February 1885, filed 12 August 1882); Pennycuick acknowledged that "it is not Architectand Building News 62, no. 1188 (1898): 2-3; "Opinion on Luxfer broadly new to provide window-glass with reflecting ridges," but he suggested Prisms," The Economist17 (20 March 1897): 305; Paul Liese, "Glas als Baustoff," that the angle chosen in his application was more efficient. 12 BraunschweigerGNC Monatsschrift(1923): 162-70; "Luxfer Glasbau," Hundert Pennycuick's patent was owned by the Prismatic Glass Company in New and Metal in New Jahre Architekten-Vereinzu Berlin, 1824-1924 (Berlin, 1924), 2:108-12; J. Le Hampshire (1887-89), the Alpha Glass Company Jersey Braz, "Les verres prismatiques," Glaces & Verres32 (1933): 2-10. The most (1889-90), a number of individual businessmen, and finally by Thomas W. exhaustive sources for executed commissions and the technical details of Horn, who founded the Prismatic Glass Company of Toronto, Ltd. in 1896 and Luxfer's prismatic glass are: American Luxfer Prism Company, Luxfer Prisms: eventually became one of the cofounders of the Luxfer Prism Company in its Descriptionwith Illustrations(Chicago, 1897); Henry Crew and Olin H. Basquin, Chicago. In the numerous court cases in which Luxfer defended products eds., Pocket Hand-Book of Usefid Information and Tables relating to the Use of against competitors, Pennycuick's patent was regularly quoted as central to and other Electro-GlazedLuxfer Prisms (Chicago, 1898); American Luxfer Prism Co., Luxfer Luxfer's claims. The competing firms referred to Thaddeus Hyatt's Prism Patent Situation (Chicago, 1898). Prismatic glass is also covered in several unprotected patents of prismatic pavement lights as predecessors to their own al. v. Trustees of Columbia publications about structural glass between 1900 and 1940, such as Jules products. The Luxfer Prism Patents Company et case no. U.S. S. D. Lkopold Charles Henrivaux, La Verrerieaux XXe sicle (Paris, 1903, 1911); A. College et al.; "Demurrer Book" (1897-1911), N-6808, Cir. Lascombe, "Les Materiaux de construction et leur emploi," Revue Techniquede New York,3-4. came from the I'ExpositionUniverselle 1900 (Paris, 1900), 1:395-400; Raymond McGrath, Glass 13The stockholders of the Luxfer Prism Company highest in Architectureand Decoration(London, 1938); Konrad Werner Schulze, Glas in der ranks of Chicago's urban elite. There were a number of successful bankers such T. Haskell Architekturder Gegenwart(Berlin, 1928); Arthur Korn, Glassin ModernArchitecture as Ernest A. Hamill (1851-1927), Frederick (1867-1935), Chauncey C. Waller (New York, 1968); William Kunerth, A Text-Book of Illumination (New York, Blair (1845-1916), Edward L. Brewster (1842-1911), and Edward such as P. Wilson 1929). More recently Luxfer Prisms were discussed in the following articles: (1845-1931), and prominent lawyers John (1844-1922). national such as Hall Thomas O'Mahoney, "Luxfer Prisms," Lighting Design and Applications16, no. 3 There were presidents of major companies, Cyrus Machine (March 1986): 14-16; Gordon Bock, "Glass Notes," The Old HouseJournal 16, McCormick (1859-1936), president of the McCormick Harvesting Wacker of the Wacker & Birk no. 4 (July/August 1988): 35-43; Dietrich Neumann, "Prismatic Glass," Building Co.; Charles Henry (1856-1921), president Levi Leiter former of RenovationMagazine 1 (March/April 1993): 57-60. Thomas Heinz, Frank Lloyd Brewing & Malting Co.; Zeigler (1834-1904), president & William H. Winslow of the Winslow Wright,Art Glass (London, 1994), which contains a section on Luxfer Prisms, Field, Leiter Co.; (1857-1934), president Harlow Niles of appeared after I had finished my manuscript. Brothers Company; Higinbotham (1838-1919), president A. of one of America's 4 The invention of hollow glass blocks goes back to the German engineer Marshall Field & Co.; and George Fuller, president "American Luxfer Prism The Friedrich Siemens in 1879. They became more easily applicable after the French leading construction companies. Company," Who was Who in 1897-1942 inventor Falconnier had improved their stability in 1886. Their widespread use, Economist 20 (13 August 1898): 199; America Ewen was of however, occurred only in the 1930s, when machine-made, mass-produced (Chicago, 1942), 804, 1282. John Meiggs (1859-1939) president the Luxfer Prism for the first four followed in 1901 Harlow hollow glass bricks became available. "Blown Glass Bricks for Building Pur- Company years, by Niles in 1906 L. White, and in 1916 Robin L. White. poses," ScientificAmerican 76, no. 1 (2 January 1897): 10; Fritz Neumeyer, Higinbotham, by Parry by of the shares of the Luxfer Prism He "Glasarchitektur-Zur Geschichte des glaisernen Steines," Bauwelt 73 (1982): Ewen initially held 60 percent Company. 172-79; Anne-Laure "La Brique et le Pave de Verre de 1886-1937" was general manager for the George A. Fuller Construction Company. Parry L. CarrY, one of (Master's thesis, Sorbonne, 1992). White was the former director of the Luminous Prism Company, Luxfer's W. Leonard, The Book (Chicago, 1905), 194; The SThe history ofprismatically shaped glasses for the illumination of buildings competitors. J. of Chicagoans et al. v. The Elders, and Deacons of and ships can be traced back to the seventeenth century. Edward Wyndus, Luxfer Prism Patents Company Ministers, al. case no. N-6809 "Glasses and Lamps for ships, mines &c.," BritishPatent Office,no. 232 (London, the Reformed Church of the City of New York et (1897-99), L. 4 March 1899. 1684); Richard Cole, "Forming Glass into Conical Figures and Lamps" British U.S. Cir. Ct. S. D. New York,statement ofParry Wight, '4 correct formation of the word would be but this term had Patent Office, no. 372 (London, 1704); Apsley Pellatt, "Lighting the interior of The Lucifer, connotations and was therefore not suitable for advertising. 'The Ships, Buildings &c.," British Patent Office, no. 3058 (London, 1807); McGrath negative The Glass, (see n. 3), 180. Century's Triumph in Lighting" (see n. 2); 'To make dark places light," 224. M. Ewen as M. 6 Thaddeus Hyatt, "Vault Cover," U.S. Patent no. 4,266 (12 November 1845); Economist 17 (17 February 1897): John president, Henry Peter Collins, Concrete (London, 1955), 58-60; Cecil D. Elliott, Technics and Bacon as secretary, Thomas W. Horn, andJames Pennycuick had founded the the name two Architecture(Cambridge, Mass., 1992), 171-72. Radiating Light Companyin Chicago in October 1896, changing months later to Glass and in March 1897, to Luxfer 7 State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, "An Act in Relation to Semi-prism Company finally, the (7 Buildings in the City of Providence and for other Purposes," Chapter 688, Prism Company. Statement of Incorporation of Radiating Light Company October Section 29 (Providence, 1878), 21. October 1896); ReportofCommissioners ofthe Radiating Light Company(19

48 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 1896); Certificatefor Change of Name from Radiating Light Companyto Semi-Prism is also of interest. All patents are published with an illustration and an Glass Company(1 December 1896); Certificatefor Change ofName from Semi-Prism abbreviated text in the Official Gazetteof the U.S. Patent Office. In the following Glass Companyto LuxferPrism Company(20 March 1897), in the archives of the references to patents only their number and the date of institution is given. State of Illinois at Springfield, Illinois. In order to process the firm's patent Sixty-six mechanical patents and ninety-six design patents were issued by eleven applications and deal with patent infringements, Ewen and Horn founded the different assignors on behalf of the Luxfer Prism Company in 1897 (a few more Luxfer Prism Patent Company in Charleston, West Virginia together with followed during the next years). Trade mark: no. 30,255 (22 June 1897); William H. and Francis A. Winslow and William W. Sturges from Chicago in mechanical patents: nos. 568,789; 574,770; 574,843; 579,350; 583,580; 583,594; February 1897. They represented a board of directors and were all major 586,211-29; 586,247-61; 595,257-77 (6 October 1896-7 December 1897). In shareholders. Luxfer Prism Patents CompanyAgreement, 6 February1897 in the addition Luxfer acquired earlier mechanical patents, which were close to their archive of the State of West Virginia in Charleston, West Virginia, corporation own product line: nos. 247,996; 303,359; 312,290; 317,077; 396,911; 396,912; division. 492,363 (4 October 1881-21 February 1893); Design Patents: nos. 25,573; 15 Harold L. Platt, The ElectricCity, Energy and the Growthof the ChicagoArea, 26,829; 26,864-68; 26,890; 26,988-89; 27,323-48; 27,677-80; 27,840-41; 1880-1930 (Chicago, 1991), 95-109; T. J. Jackson Lears, No Place of Grace: 27,968-28,020 (2June 1896-7 December 1897); patents were issued on behalf Antimodernismand the TransformationofAmerican Culture (New York, 1981), 67. of the Luxfer Prism Company in 1897 to the following assignors (DP=design '6American Luxfer Prism Company, Luxfer Prisms: Descriptionwith Illustra- patents, MP=mechanical patents): Frank Lloyd Wright, 41 DP., no MP; Olin H. tions (Chicago, 1897), 4. Basquin, 9 DP, 17 MP; Henry F. Belcher, 12 DP, 8 MP;John M. Ewen, 15 DP, 2 17 Henry Crew (1859-1953), was for many years chairman of the physics MP; William H. Winslow, 4 DP, 10 MP; Frank C. Soper, 5 DP, 6 MP; James G. department at Northwestern University and one of America's most prominent Pennycuick, 5 DP, 1 MP; William S. MacHarg, 2 DP, 3 MP; Edward C. Waller, 2 physicists, specializing in spectroscopy and its applications to astrophysics. He DP, Kraft Booth, 0 DP 1 MP, L. H.Jordan, 0 DP 1 MP; Crew and Basquin, Pocket was the author of several widely used textbooks, however he only occasionally Hand-Book, 266-67. wrote on the subject of prismatic glass. See Henry Crew, "On The History of Our 28William H. Winslow, "Method of Electrolytically Uniting Glass Tiles into a Ideas" n. (see 3), 3-7. There is also a brief reference to Luxfer Prisms in one of Body," U.S. Patent no. 574,843 (5 January 1897, filed 2 November 1896). his major publications: Henry Crew, GeneralPhysics (New York, 1908, 1919), 551 Winslow's patent was an improvement of an earlier patent of 1887 by Henry F. in (biography the Henry Crew papers, Northwestern University Archives, Belcher, who had become head of the art glass department of the Luxfer Olin H. Evanston, Ill.); Basquin (1865-1943) was Crew's student and assistant. enterprise. Henry F. Belcher, "Process of Making Mosaics of Glass," U.S. Patent Hejoined the Luxfer Company for three years as chief engineer and established no. 396,911 (29January 1889, filed 11 May 1887). branches in London (1898) and Berlin (1899). In 1901 he became an assistant 29 "Some Interesting Results in Recent Fires," The Inland Architectand News professor of physics and in 1909 a professor of applied mechanics at Northwest- Record33, no. 2 (March 1899): 16-17. ern University. Who'sWho In America 1944-1945 (Chicago, 1944), 23:116. Later 30 "Glazing by Electrolysis," Inland Architect and News Record 34, no. 2 sources claimed occasionally that Crew and Basquin had invented prismatic (September 1899): 16; Arthur Louis Duthie, DecorativeGlass Processes(London, glass in response to a federal competition for daylighting devices in 1892 and 1911), 217-19; British Fire Prevention Committee, Fire Testswith Glass: Electro had exhibited it at the World's Fair in Chicago in 1893. However, no further GlazedCasements by the BritishLuxfer Prism Syndicate,Ltd., London (London, 1905); evidence for this has been found. Diamant, Glas-Industrie-Zeitung28 (1906): 1; the British Fire Prevention Committee published a number of similar reports Paul "Glas als Baustoff' n. 508. Liese, (see 3), about Luxfer's electroglazing in 1899 and 1913. Wright used electroglazing 18Olin H. Basquin, "Daylight Illumination," The Illuminating Engineer 1 frequently in his stained glass windows, as for instance in the Isidore Heller 2 (1906-7): 724, 823, 930, 1016; (1907-8): 13, 123, 184, 192, 446, 518; Olin H. house of 1897 in Chicago and the Dana-Thomas house of 1903 in Springfield, Illumination of The Basquin, "Daylight Stores," IlluminatingEngineer 2 (1907-8): Illinois. The thinner dimensions of the electroglazed copper bands, the absence 805-13; Claude L. and Robbins, Daylighting: Design Analysis (New York, of soldered joints, and the semimechanical assemblage procedure made pos- 29. 1986), sible the intricate small-scale grids of his geometric glass designs. Kenneth 19L. W. Marsh, Transactions the "Daylight Illumination," of Illuminating Frampton, "Modernization and Mediation: Frank Lloyd Wright and the Impact 3 224-32. Engineering Society (1908): of Technology," in Frank Lloyd WrightArchitect, ed. Terence Riley (New York, 20Crew and PocketHand-Book n. Basquin, (see 3). 1994), 58-79. See also Wright's brief remark about electroglazing in his, "The 21 "Pressed Prism Plate Glass Co. v. Continuous Glass Press Federal Co.," Art and Craft of the Machine" (1901), in Frank Lloyd Wright: Writings and 150 355-64. Reporter (1907): Buildings, ed. Edgar Kaufmann and Ben Raeburn (New York, 1960), 67. 22 Cut: the best quality each tile would be tested with a to glass, polariscope "' Crew and Basquin, PocketHand-Book (see n. 3), 6. Ewen, who patented the eliminate that have been glasses might strained in the manufacturing process, general idea of ornamenting prisms in 1897, claimed that linear ornaments on sized to inch to fit and at the 1/100 exactly, polished ground edges to prepare it the flat side of the prism helped to avoid irregularities on the surface and even for the Commercial:selected not electroglazing process; prisms, tested, polished, breakages during the cooling process in the mold.John Meiggs Ewen, "Figured or and tiles ornamented; Factory:seconds, with minor flaws. This latter product Prism Light," U.S. Patent no. 595,364 (7 December 1897). The Luxfer Prism was intended to with the obviously compete directly existing "factory ribbed" Company also maintained that the feature of ornamenting the surface of the The of was indicated on the tile a glass. grade refraction by corresponding letter, prisms was of "vast pecuniary value, indeed, that it makes purchasers of those A for and P for protruding canopies,J, K, L, M, N, O, S, ordinary sash or forilux who otherwise would not buy prism lights." U.S. Patent no. 653236, Patent installations. It was recommended to mix two types, one major (providing 80 to Application File, Letter of 23 October 1897 of U.S. Patent Office Examiner to 90 percent within a plate) and one minor prism (10 to 20 per cent) within a J. M. Ewen. to avoid single plate glare. 32Wright occupied office 1123 in the Rookery Building, the Luxfer Prism Co. 23 Apparently brass and lead was also used. Crew and Basquin, Pocket office, 1129. Wright's U.S. design patents, nos.: 27,977-28,015; 28,017; 28,020 Hand-Book, 12-13. (7 December 1897, filed 4 October 1897); Brian Spencer published a photo- Luxfer had had 24 to abandon early on its original practice of sending experts graph of a Wright-designed prism in 1974, Robert L. Sweeney was the first one (so-called lucical to site to engineers) every calculate the appropriate installation. to point at the existence of the patents in 1978. Brian A. Spencer, ed., The Prairie Ibid., 79. SchoolTradition (New York, 1974), 48; Robert L. Sweeney, Frank LloydWrzght, An 25 "Experiments on the diffusion of light" (see n. 8), 34-35. Annotated Bibliography(Los Angeles, 1978), 5. David Hanks illustrated two of 26 The Pressed Prism Glass Company was founded in 1903 and manufac- Wright's patent designs in 1979. David A. Hanks, The DecorativeDesigns of Frank tured both the Luxfer Prism tiles and their own line of prismatic glass products. Lloyd Wright (New York, 1979), 15. Several Wright-designed prisms were James Morton Callahan, Historyofthe Making ofMorgantown (Morgantown, West acquired in an auction in 1987 by the Domino's Pizza Collection in Ann Arbor 1926), 269. "American Luxfer Prism Virginia, Company" (see n. 13), 199. Michigan, and published in the catalogue of their traveling exhibition. David A. 27 Patents are numbered within their consecutively category of being either a Hanks, Frank Lloyd Wright,Preserving an ArchitecturalHeritage (New York, 1989), mechanical or a or design patent a trademark and are filed and identified simply 29. The published photograph, however, shows the prisms with their ribs in a by their number and their date. In some cases the date publication ofapplication vertical position, which would not have provided the intended effect of casting

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 49

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions light horizontally deeper into a room. Kenneth Frampton, '"TheText-Tile Tectonic," in FrankLloyd Wright, A Primeron 33William C. Gannett, The House Beautiful (River Forest, 1896-97); andJohn ArchitecturalPrinciples, ed. Robert McCarter (Princeton, 1991): 124-49. Keats, The Eve ofSt. Agnes (River Forest, 1896-97). 5 Frank Lloyd Wright, A Testament(New York, 1957), 30. 34Frank Lloyd Wright, "Design for a Prism Light," U.S. design patent no. 54For example, see Frampton, "Text-Tile Tectonic" (see n. 52), 143. 55 27,977 (7 December 1897, filed 4 October 1897). Ewen had submitted a Arthur Drexler, The Drawings of Frank Lloyd Wright (New York, 1962), ill. general, mechanical patent for a "Figured Prism-Light" one week before to no. 2; both presentation drawings for the 1898 publication in the InlandArchitect protect the general idea of ornamenting prism tiles. He used a variation of and Wright's redrawn version seem to have been lost. 56 Wright's design as an illustration, which differs slightly in two respects: four small Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer describes Wright's habit of taking old drawings out triangles are placed on the four major axes, and two different widths of lines are again and again over the years and writing on them subsequently: "A drawing used for the curved pattern. John Meiggs Ewen, "Figured Prism Light," (see n. from the nineteenth century will have, for example, a note written in 1920, and 31). It is this variation that was mass-produced by Luxfer. then another written in 1950 and so forth." Bruce B. Pfeiffer, "Tre disegni inediti 35Sullivan had used motifs strikingly similar to Wright's later prism design in di Frank Lloyd Wright," Domus 713 (1990): 72-75. The date of 1895 has been the top cornice of the Schiller Building's central tower of 1892, where Wright frequently adopted for Wright's designs for the Luxfer Prism Company. For had had an office in 1893. example, Anthony Alofsin, Frank Lloyd Wright:An Index to the Taliesin Correpon- 36 Frank Lloyd Wright, "Design for a Prism Plate and Border," U.S. design dence (New York, 1988), 1:lviii;Yukio Futagawa, Frank Lloyd WrightMonograph patent no. 28,017 (7 December 1897). It corresponds with an illustration in 1887-1901 (Tokyo, 1986), 84. In his autobiography Wright referred only briefly Crew and Basquin, PocketHand-Book, 33. to his work for the Luxfer Prism Company: "A contract with the Luxfer Prism 37"Architectural Possibilities of the Luxfer Prism" (see n. 1). Co. of Chicago, I to be consulting engineer for making prism-glass installations 38Crew and Basquin, PocketHand-Book, 5. in office buildings throughout the country, had enabled me to build the 39 Robert Prestiano, The InlandArchitect(Ann Arbor, 1985), 81-89. workroom- then I called it a "studio"-next to our little Oak Park dwelling 40 Dankmar Adler, '"The Influence of Steel Construction and Plate Glass place." Frank Lloyd Wright, An Autobiography,1932 (4th imprint, 1977), 162. If in Park with from Upon Style" (1896), in Roots of ContemporaryAmerican Architecture,ed. Lewis Wright's claim that he financed the studio addition Oak money Mumford (New York, 1952), 243--50. the Luxfer Prism Company is correct it could help to confirm the date of the 41Crew and Basquin, PocketHand-Book, 5-6. studio addition as 1898. Due to the above-quoted note, and Wright's earlier 42 The success of the Crystal Palace in London and the growing number of dating, the studio addition has occasionally also been dated as 1895. Since not all the link between structural glass products had contributed to a renewed interest in the age-old the information in Wright's biography has proven reliable, at all exists for dream of a glass architecture. The abundance of visions of a Utopian glass Luxfer's commission and the studio may be wrong. No evidence role would be better architecture in the last quarter of the nineteenth century has not yet been Wright's claim that he acted as "consulting engineer." His adequately recorded. See Daniel Burnham's descriptions of 1887 of a future described as that of a product designer. for the horizontal window glass architecture in Prestiano, The Inland Architect (see n. 39) 72; Frank 57Wright briefly considered Luxfer Prisms in 1936 Luxfer Rosewater, '96, A Romance of Utopia (Omaha, 1894), 54-61; Jules Henrivaux, bands in the Johnson Wax plant and contacted the American 3-Way "Une Maison de Verre," Revue du deux Mondes (1899): 113-39; Paul Scheerbart Prism Company before eventually deciding in favor of the Pyrex tubes.Jonathan 65. described in 1914 how the dreams of a future glass architecture were "in the air" Lipman, Frank LloydWright and theJohnson Wax Buildings (New York, 1986), for the translucent road surface in in 1893 already. Paul Scheerbart, Glasarchitektur& Glashausbriefe(Berlin, 1914; Wright had also specified Luxfer Prism glass in 1924. He most of reprint Munich, 1986), 37. For a general history of accounts of visionary glass his Sugarloaf Mountain Project likely thought heavy, of set in which were also Luxfer buildings, see Rosemarie Haag-Bletter, '"The Interpretation of the Glass Dream load-bearing slabs glass, concrete, produced by Luxfer Prisms. Mark -Expressionist Architecture and the History of the Crystal Metaphor,"JSAH 40 and also occasionally called Reinberger, '"The Sugarloaf a New 43 (1981): 20-43. Mountain Project and Frank Lloyd Wright's Vision of World,"JSAH have known Walter Griffin's to 43Crew and Basquin, PocketHand-Book, 5-8. (March 1984): 38-52. Wright might Burley plans Prism as a material in the road of a 44Luxfer claimed to have improved the lighting efficiency of the conven- use Luxfer Lights load-bearing surface bridge Willow Creek in his Rock Crest and Rock Glen in Mason tional prismatic basement lights considerably by combining them with a vertical to span Project City, Marion of America" installation of a forilux prism screen inside the basement. Luxfer suggested Iowa as early as 1912-13. Mahony Griffin, '"The Magic at the New York Historical ca. 4:299. am reducing the story heights as a result of the prismatic illumination by about one (illustrated typescript Society, 1940), (I Vernon for this foot each, thereby giving the architect more freedom and allowing more stories indebted to Christopher information.) 58 Architect and News Record No. 4 to be accomodated within a certain height limit. Crew and Basquin, Pocket "Time Extended," The Inland 31, (May The American Architect Hand-Book, 9, 76-77. 1898): 38-39; "Result of the Luxfer Competition," no. 1187 103. There were entries, 45 "An Interesting Competition," The Inland Architectand News Record, no. 6 and Building News 61, (1898): thirty-nine fourteen were awarded. First Prize: $2,000, Robert (January 1898): 63-64. prizes Spencer, Jr., Third Prize: 46 "Our Illustrations," The Inland Architectand Building News, no. 6 (January Chicago; Second Prize: $1,000, Adamo Boari, Chicago; $500, Prize: Curtiss Hoffman, Fifth 1898): 64. S. S. Beman, Chicago; Fourth $300, Chicago; 47 Ibid. Prize: $200, Frederick S. Sewall, Chicago; nine prizes at $100 were given to F. Frederick S. 48 "Frank Lloyd Wright," ArchitecturalForum 68 (January 1938): 54; Wright James E. Fisher, Bloomington; Hugo Liedberg, Chicago; Field & L. Wees, St. Louis, (two wrote: "Early Design for a Prism Glass Office Building, Chicago 1896.... Sewell, Chicago; Medary, Philadelphia; J. Miss.; Notwithstanding the Chicago World's Fair of 1893 .. .A front only." prizes); Alfred Fellheimer, Chicago; David S. Williams, Fort Snelling, Howard St. Louis. 49Henry-Russell Hitchcock, In the Nature of Materials (New York, 1942), 62; Bowen, C. (1864-1953)was a friend and colleague ofWright's Nikolaus Pevsner, PioneersofModern Design (New York and London, 1949), 119. 5 Robert Spencer, Jr. in an architectural about Letter by Manson to Jean Duffy of the Reinhold Publishing Company, of and the first to write a long article periodical Wright's 50 Architectural Club he was instrumental 11 September 1957, Grant C. Manson Papers, Public Library, Oak Park, Illinois. work. As president of the Chicago in Exhibition in 1900. Robert C. I am indebted to William Jerousek, librarian at the Oak Park Public Library, for exhibiting Wright's work in the Thirteenth Annual this information. Spencer, Jr., "The Work of Frank Lloyd Wright," ArchitecturalReview 7 (June ' Grant Carpenter Manson, FrankLloyd Wright to 1910 (New York, 1958), 88; 1900): 61-72. of the Prairie 19 Manson's remark might have been intended as a consoling tribute to the master, 60oH. Allen Brooks, Jr., "The Early Work Architects,"JSAH 2-10. who had been disappointed that he had not been given the chance to build the (1960): Beman was the architect of the Pullman suburb and UN building himself. Manson had probably forgotten that Wright had called the 61S. S. (1853-1914) been one clients. UN building a "deadpan box" and "a fascist symbol." Robert C. Twombly, Frank many office buildings in Chicago, and also had ofWright's early T. "S. S. Beman's Pullman," in Architecture,ed. John Lloyd Wright(New York, 1979), 370-71; Harvey Breit, '"Talkwith Frank Lloyd J. Schlereth, Chicago 174-89. Wright," New YorkTimes Book Review (24July 1949): 11. Zukowsky (Munich, 1988), studied civil engineering in Ferrara and 52For example: Peter Blake, Frank Lloyd Wright (Baltimore, 1964), 45; 62Adamo Boari (1863-1928)

50 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Bologna. He moved to Brazil in 1889 and then to Chicago. He won the 81 Robert Bruegmann, Holabird & Roche, Holabird & Root, An Illustrated competition for the Mexico City Opera House with a neoclassical design in 1904, Catalog of Works,1880-1940 (New York, 1991), 1:181-85. and moved to Mexico to execute the building. While working on this competi- 82 Edward A. Renwick, Recollections(1932), quoted in Bruegmann, Holabird& he tion, shared office space with Frank Lloyd Wright and his collaborators in Roche, 184. For a discussion of the Gage Building's fapade and the prismatic glass Steinway Hall in Chicago (Wright, Testament,35). The Mexico City Opera House installations, see Hugh Morrison, Louis Sullivan (New York, 1935), 195-96; provided Boari with an opportunity to apply his experiences with the Luxfer WilliamJordy, "The Tall Buildings," in Louis Sullivan, The Function of Ornament, Boari competition. provided daylight throughout the theater and created a ed. Wim de Wit (New York, 1986), 65-157; Robert Twombly, Louis Sullivan, His literal curtain wall, the largest iron curtain ever built. A movable screen of 216 sq. Lifeand Work(Chicago, 1986), 352-53. m, made of metal and wood and covered in opalescent Tiffany glass could 83Crew and Basquin, PocketHand-Book, 272. separate stage and auditorium. In 1916 Boari returned to Rome, where he 84Louis Sullivan, "Ornament in Architecture" (1892), in Louis H. Sullivan, became a professor of architecture and the president of the Italian Architects' KindergardenChats and OtherWritings (New York, 1947), 187-90. Association. See Attilio Muggia, Storia dellArchitetturadai primordiai nostrigiorni 85William G. Purcell in a letter to Richard Nickel, dictated 15 April 1958; (Milano, 1933), 594-95, 641-43; S. Raffo Pani, "Adamo Boari," Dizionario Purcell Papers in the Northwest Architectural Archives, University of Minnesota Biografico Degli Italiani (Rome, 1968), 10:802; "Boari, Adamo," Diccionario Libraries, St. Paul Minnesota. (I am indebted to Tim Samuelson for this Porrua (Mexico City, 1965), 125; Xavier Moyss6n, "Mexico City's Palace of Fine information.) Arts," FrancoMaria Ricci 63 (August 1993): 86-114; Adamo Boari, La Costruzione 86Advertisement, The InlandArchitectand News Record31 (1898), 2:xiii. di un teatro(Rome, 1918). 87Crew and Basquin, Pocket Hand-Book, 112; 84 Wabash Avenue is not 63"Awards in Luxfer Prism Competition," The InlandArchitectand News Record mentioned in Bruegmann, Holabird&Roche (see n. 81). 32, no. 2 (September 1898): 15-16. 88 "Modernizing Commercial Buildings," The InlandArchitectand News Record 64 Chicago Architecture Club, TwelfthAnnual Exhibition Catalogue (Chicago, 32, no. 2 (September 1898): 18-19. 113. would much like to thank Patrick Pinnell for 1899), I very drawing my 89Joseph Siry, CarsonPirie Scott,Louis Sullivan and the ChicagoDepartment Store attention to this illustration. The important drawing may have been executed by (Chicago, 1988), 62-63, 85, 125, 184; "Daylight as an Investment," The Inland Walter Burley Griffin, who worked for Boari in 1899. Christopher Vernon Architectand News Record32, no. 6 (January 1899): 58. of (Department Landscape Architecture, University of Illinois at Urbana- 90Paul E. Sprague, The Drawings ofLouis Henry Sullivan (Princeton, 1979), ill. this with Griffin's Champaign) compared drawing drawings of the same period no. 114. The prisms at the Carson Pirie Scott & Co. store were taken out during a the Peter Harrison among Papers at the National Library of Australia in renovation project in 1936, and the carefully orchestrated balance between and confirmed a Canberra, A.C.T., Australia, highly convincing likeness in style Sullivan's wild flowering cast iron and terra cotta ornaments and the geometric and execution. pattern of glittering prismatic glass has been destroyed. 65 91 American Luxfer Prism Company (see n. 3), 9. Bruegmann, Holabird&Roche (see n. 81), 177-79, 289, 315. 66 Luxfer "American Prism Company" (see n. 13), 199. 92 H. W. Desmond, "A Rational Skyscraper," ArchitecturalRecord 15 (March 67 In their monthly advertisements in the Inland Architectand News Record 1904): 275-84. 1897 to March (from April 1900) Luxfer mentioned branch offices in New York 93Joseph Siry, "Louis Sullivan's Building for John D. Van Allen and Son," City, Boston, Philadelphia, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, San Francisco, New JSAH 49 (March 1990): 67-89. Orleans, and Detroit, Minneapolis. 94Thomas' Register mentions fourteen manufacturers of prismatic glass in 68 Holabird & S. S. D. H. Among them, Roche, Beman, Burnham, Dankmar 1905. The Buyer's Guide, Thomas' Register of American Manufacturers 1905-06 Adler, and William Le as well as some of the shareholders BaronJenney, such as (New York, 1905), 476-78. For court cases involving the Luxfer Prism Compa- William H. A. and Winslow, George Fuller, Edward C. Waller. Crew and nies, see The Luxfer Prism Patents Company et al. v. Trustees of Columbia Pocket 105-85. Basquin, Hand-Book, College et al. (1897-1911), case no. N-6808 U.S. Cir. Ct. S. D. New York;The 69 and Pocket Crew Basquin, Hand-Book, 106. Luxfer Prism Patents Company et al. v. The Ministers, Elders, and Deacons of 70 182. Ibid., the Reformed Church of the City of New York, et al. (1897-99), case no. N-6809 71 Ibid., 119, 169. U.S. Cir. Ct. S. D. New York;Luxfer Prism Patents Company et al. v. Smith 72Milo S. Ketchum, The Steel Mill and the Design of Buildings Calculation of Premier Typewriter Company and the Luminous Prism Company (1898-1900), Stressesin FramedStructures (New York, 1913), 305. case no. 0-7024 U.S. Cir. Ct. S.D. New York;Luxfer Prism Patents Company et al. stated that the in 73 One report light the back of a room could be improved v. Pierre Lorillard et al. (1898-1900), case no. 0-7029 U.S. Cir. Ct. S.D. New York ten to fifteen times, the Luxfer Prism itself claimed that to Company figure be up (this material is now in the National Archives- Northeast Region in New York to an twenty-five times, independent report by the New England Mutual City); Luxfer Prism Co., Luxfer Prism Patent Situation (see n. 3), 9, 10. See also Insurance hinted at a Companies possible efficiency rate of up to fifty times. court cases of other competing prism glass producers. "Pressed Prism Glass Co. Marsh, n. "Daylight Illumination," (see 19), 224-32; Crew and Basquin, Pocket v. Continuous Glass Prism Co.," Federal Reporter 150 (1907): 355-64; Federal Hand-Book, 6; on the diffusion of and "Experiments light through prismatic Reporter181 (1910): 151-57. Several of the companies sued by Luxfer for patent ribbed windows," n. 33-34. glass (see 8), infringement, such as the Daylight Prism Company and the Luminous Prism 74 Illumination n. 805. Basquin, Daylight (see 28), Luxfer also gave samples of Company, complained that Luxfer's representatives had harassed their clients color with the of absorbtion, and formulas of how to with an degree light respond and threatened to destroy the already-installed prisms of their competitors. The additional amount of Luxfer Prism prism glass. Company, Table of Color Luxfer Prism Patents Company et al. v. The Ministers, Elders, and Deacons of Corrections for LuxferPrismAreas, (n. p., n. d.). the Reformed Church of the City of New York et al. (1897-99), case no. N-6809 British Luxfer 75The Prism Syndicate, Ltd., Sales Brochure(London, 1905), 4. U.S. Cir. Ct. S. D. New York,statement ofJacobJacobs, 10 March 1899. A window's orientation towards the sun was not taken into consideration, since 95Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company, ed., Glass, History, Manufacture and its only the constant brilliance of the zenith-light could be used for calculation. Crew UniversalApplication(Pittsburgh, 1923), 133-37. and Basquin, Pocket Hand-Book, 187-235. Ketchum, The Design of Steel Mill 96McGrath, Glass (see n. 3), 573-641. Buildings (see n. 72), 300. 97Sweets Architectural Catalogue 1933, A 668-A 669, C 257, C290. The 76 Basquin, "Daylight Illumination of Stores" n. (see 18), 810. American 3-Way Luxfer Prism Company produced mainly prismatic basement prismatic glass was in when the 7 The probably put Trading Room was lights and heavy, load-bearing glass slabs with a light-diffusing surface pattern. remodeled as the Foreman Brother's Banking Company in 1908. John Vinci, The term LuxferPrism was still often applied to these products. See n. 56. The Trading Room: Louis Sullivan and the Stock Chicago Exchange (Chicago, 1989), 98 Knut Ldnberg-Holm, "Glass," The ArchitecturalRecord (October 1930): 49, 51. 327-41 ;John W. T. Walsh, The Scienceof Daylight (London, 1961), 98. 78 Crew and Basquin, PocketHand-Book, 273, 279. 99France: patent no. 267,467 (1 June 1897), nos. 268,690-703 (13 July 79See photograph in A. Viskochil, at the Turn Larry Chicago of the Centuryin 1897); nos. 272,877-78 (7 December 1897), no. 277,180 (20 April 1898); see Photographs(New York, 1984), 81. Bulletin Oficiel de la Proprit6 Industrielle& Commerciale17 (Paris, 1897), 2:152, so Crew and Basquin, PocketHand-Book, 171. 193, 321; Bulletin Oficiel... 18 (Paris, 1898), 2:107. Great Britain: patent nos.

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 51

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 27,954-56 (8 December 1896); nos. 11,071-76 (4 May 1897); nos. 16,529-83 painted glass was erected in the early part of last month, it was an absolute (13 July 1897); nos. 28,696-97 (4 December 1897); and nos. 28,869-77 (7 failure through want of light, but the 'Luxfer Prisms' produced such an December 1897). Switzerland: patent no. 4,481 (13 July 1897), no. 4,765 (10 astonishing transformation as to make it worthy of being unveiled by December 1897), nos. 14,931-41; 15,552; 15,630; 15,886-88 (1898); see H.R.H. the Duke of Connaught on June 22, 1898," wrote the Rector of Trade Cata- FiinJ•hriger Katalog der Patente 1894-1898 (Bern 1899), 61, 182 and 320. London's St. Saviour's Collegiate Church. Hayward Brothers, Germany: Luxfer trademark patent no. 26,346 (Kaiserliches Patentamt, ed., logue (see n. 9), 256. Waarenzeichenblatt4:2 [1897], 785); patent nos: 97,827-29; 97,849-50; 97,942; o05Schulze, Glas (see n. 3), 21-23. In Piet Kramer's department store 98,467; 99,681; 100,140; 101,298; 102,095; 102,240; 102,526; 104,100; 105,010; prismatic glass of one of Luxfer's competitors was used. It was called Solfac and 113,391; 113,517 (1897); design patent nos: 78,944-76; 79,797; 79,915 was marketed by the Deutsche Stern Prismengesellschaft G.m.b.H., Berlin. (Kaiserliches Patentamt, ed., Patentblatt[1898], 866). 106The most extensive information about this bar is to be found in Burkhardt Leben und Werk 100For example, the Luxfer Prism Company Limited (founded 1899) in Rukschcio and Roland Schachel, Adolf Loos, (Salzburg, 1982), London, the Deutsches Luxfer Prismen Syndikat in Berlin-Weissensee (founded 137-39, 456-59; Benedetto Gravagnuolo, AdolfLoos Theoryand Works (New 1899), the Osztr. Magyar Luxfer Prismn Gyar K.F.T. in Budapest (founded York, 1982), 117-19; Arts Council, ed., The ArchitectureofAdolfLoos, exh.cat., 1906); and the Societe Luxfer in Brussels, Paris, and Lyon (founded 1899). The (London, 1985), 36-41. Loos himself used Luxfer basement lights shortly foreign branch usually paid a third of its profits to the American mother afterwards in the courtyard of the Goldmann & Salatsch store. Hermann Czech company and received technical advice and backup for the first fourteen years. and W. Mistelbauer, Das Looshaus(Vienna, 1984), 55. Luxfer also produced the In England, Luxfer Prisms were promoted both independently and in conjunc- molten glass panels above the staircase in the center of the store. Burkhard tion with the firm of Hayward Brothers & Eckstein, which had been selling Rukschcio, coauthor of the above-mentioned monograph on Adolf Loos and the in pavement lights, stallboard lights, and metal products in England since 1783. W. architect responsible for several restorations of Loos buildings Austria, Eckstein was one of the cofounders and held 25 percent of the shares of the confirmed with me in Vienna in July 1994 that Loos had used Luxfer products British Luxfer Prism Syndicate. Luxfer UK Limited, ed., Fifty Yearsat Colwick several times and had also mentioned Luxfer Prisms in his (unpublished) of the Luxfer Prism (Nottingham, 1991), 6-9, 24-25; Hayward Brothers, Trade Catalogue(see n. 9), lectures. Among Loos's assets was a trade catalogue 249-56. Crew and Basquin, PocketHand-Book was translated into French and Company. German. Who's Who (see n. 17), 23:116. The French branch existed between 107Friedrich Keppler (1862-1940), a German-born architect, had emigrated 1899 and 1914, soon followed and in some cases survived by competitors, which to the U.S. in 1888, joined the American Luxfer Prism Syndicate and returned branch after the turn of the promoted prismatic glass as "Luminus," "Lighthouse," "Lumibre," "Verre- to Germany to become the head of the German YorkTimes Soleil," and "Excelsior" prisms. "Eclairage rationel, Luxfer Prism," Didot-Bottin, century. "F. L. Keppler, Leader in Structural Glass," New (8 January Annuaire du Commerce(Paris, 1899), 1515; Didot-Bottin,Annuaire du Commerce 1940), 21. exh. (Paris, 1914), 1695. The most powerful competitor of the French Luxfer 108Deutsche Werkbund Ausstellung CIln 1914, ed., OffiziellerKatalog, In of the Company seems to have been the consortium of glass-producing firms, which cat. (Cologne, 1914, reprint 1981), 225, 252. good photographs can be the St. Gobain glass manufacturing company organized in 1910. This Union interior of the pavilion the name Deutsches Luxfer Prismen Syndikat on concrete beams. from Luxfer's Commercialepour la vente desproduits spiciaux, which boasted assets of seventy-one deciphered the diagonal Apart products, of architecture million francs, offered products similar to those by the Luxfer Company, Taut's early sketches for the glass pavilion and models glass by as well as the creations including prismatic glass and pavement lights. Didot-Bottin,Annuaire du Com- the Taut brothers and others were on display, ofTiffany's merce (Paris, 1911), 1695. An account of the Austrian-Hungarian Luxfer Prism in New York, whose headquarters on Broadway in New York had been equipped as Crew and Pocket 278. Company is to be found in J. von Bue, "Die Glasindustrie in der Deutsch with Luxfer Prisms as early 1897. Basquin, Hand-Book, 109 in on Bohmischen Ausstellung in Reichenberg 1906," Diamant 28, no. 22 (1 August The glass pavilion has been documented publications expressionist 1906): 724. The Canadian and British Luxfer Prism Companies have survived to architecture, such as Wolfgang Pehnt, ExpressionistArchitecture (London, 1973), this day, however specializing in art glass and pavement lights. 75-78; most recently in Angela Thiekotter, ed., Kristallisationen,Splitterungen, 101 The most detailed The Wenke Department Store by Josef Gogar in Jaromer, 1908-9, Bruno Tauts Glashaus (Basel, 1993). (and fairly unknown) "Das Glas als featured Luxfer Prisms above its display windows. Ako' Morawanski, Die account of Luxfer's technical qualities can be found in Felix Linke, Architektur der Donaumonarchie (Berlin, 1988), 126-27. For Copenhagen's Dichtung und Wahrheit," BraunschweigerGNC Monatsschrift(1923): 154-61. have been the Falconnier in front of Magasin du Nord, see Schulze, Glas (see n. 3), 24. The roof of the arcade in I0oThe earliest might glass-brick pavilion at the of 1893 the Budapest's Gresham Palace of 1907 by Zsigmond Quittner consists entirely of the horticultural building Chicago Exposition by Glashfitten- Silesia and the Falconnier Luxfer Prisms. Another arcade in Budapest, Heinrich Schmal's orientalist werke Adlerhiitten Actiengesellschaft, at Penzig, in 1897. "Glass and "Pariser Hof' of 1910-11, is equipped with Luxfer Prism pavement lights and pavilion at a Stuttgart trade show Paving Building Bricks," American 89 no. 1538; 24,642-43; displays Luxfer glass in its colorful ceiling. Johann Friedrich Geist, Passagen Scientific (24 June 1905): supplement American 76 (Munich, 1979), 169. "Falconnier Hollow Glass Brick," Scientific (10 January 1897): 2; Beton und Eisen 105-6. 102P. Grandjean, "Note sur les prismes Luxfer," Revue Universelledes Mines, de "Die Glasbausteine System Falconnier," (1905): In illustrations of Luxfer's earlier exhibition have not la Metallurgie 47, no. 3 (1900): 105-38; Val St. Lambert was initially the sole i1i fact, pavilions yet been found. however, described in detail in the producer of prismatic glass for Europe with an output of 150,000 tiles per They are, contemporary Diamant 31 "Die Glasin- month. The British Luxfer Prism Company ordered prism tiles from Val St. literature: "Berliner Ausstellungen 1910," (1910): 645; 31 834; "Die Lambert as late as 1934, when a dispute over prices seems finally to have ended dustrie auf der Bruisseler Weltausstellung," Diamant (1910) the collaboration. Val St. Lambert, Dalles & Prismes (ca. 1938), handwritten internationale Baufachausstellung in Leipzig," Diamant 35 (1913): 739; Liese, als Baustoff' n. 162-70. notebook from the Val St. Lambert Company in the possession of the Comrning "Das Glas (see 3), Museum of Glass, F-6941. A contract between the French and Belgian Luxfer 112 Bruno Taut, "Glas als architektonischer Baustoff," GlastechnischeBerichte 4 Die 23, no. 20 Prism Syndicate (a subsidiary of the British Luxfer branch) and the St. Gobain (1926-27): 17-28; Walter Gropius, "Glasbau," Bauzeitung (1926): 159-61. Company in the St. Gobain Archives of 5 August 1902 speaks of an exclusive dans Deutsche sales agreement between the two companies (I am indebted to Anne-Laure "3Julius Posener, "En se promenant la Bauausstellung," Carr&at the Sorbonne for this information). I'Architectured'Aujourd'hui 6 (1931): 45-50; I am indebted to Anne-Laure Carr& at the Sorbonne for this information. 103"Concours publics-les prismes Luxfer," L'Architecture,no. 10 (11 March, Glass n. 180. Marc estremi del mattone 1899): 88; "Le concours de prismes Luxfer," L'Architecture50 (15 December "114McGrath, (see 3), Vellay, "Agli 1900): 456; also in "Concours d'Architecture du 'Luxfer Prism'," La Construction Nevada," Rassegna 7, no. 24 (4 December 1985): 6-17. ArchitecturalRecord Moderne 14 (1898-99): 287-88; and "Concours," La ConstructionModerne 16 115 "Luxfer Glass Prism Constructions," (January 1931): New York (1900-1901): 132. 59-62; Robert Stern, Gregory Gilmartin, and Thomas Mellis, eds., for Construction in 104 "The 'Luxfer Prisms' have wrought wonders on the North Transept 1930 (New York, 1987), 222; Eugene Clute, "Designing "A New 14 Window in our Collegiate Church of St. Saviour Southwark. The wall of a Glass," Pencil Points 13 (November 1932): 741-42; Beacon,"Architect 243. huge warehouse towers above the windows and when the memorial in (June 1930):

52 JSAH / 54:1, MARCH 1995

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 116 See, for example, "Special Lighting Needs,"ArchitecturalReview (February 326-330 South State Street, in which all of the stores are equipped with 1940): 35. prismatic glass and the floor contains Luxfer basement lights. 117In Germany the firm of Siemens reintroduced prismatic glass to the 119Reyner Banham, The Architecture ofthe Well-tempered Environment (London, market, and, with its pavilion at the Seville Expo '92, presented a prototype of a 1969), 9-17. building lit by this technique. In the United States, Hendrik Gerritsen, a physics professor at Brown University, and others, work with refractive plastic foils that carry microprismatic ridges cut by a laser beam. The basic principle has Photo Credits remained the same, but the tasks in creating these new materials have become Fig. 4, 5. Avery Library, Columbia University more complex, adding to the quest for more light a concern for its color and Fig. 6, 7, 8. U.S.Patent Office quality. Michael Freund, "Christian Bartenbach: Das rechte Licht ist seine Fig. 9. Rice Photo, Providence Kunst," FrankfurterAllgemeine Magazin, no. 685 (16 April 1993): 10-16; L. Fig. 10. The Inland Architectand News Record 31 (January 1898), unpaginated, Young, "Natural Light at Work," Metropolis(April 1993): 51-68. copyright Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation 118 For example, in Chicago a few of the Luxfer Prisms have survived in Fig. 11. TheInlandArchitect and News Record31 (January 1898), unpaginated the backs of both the above-mentioned Gage and McClurg Buildings. The Fig. 12. Wright, A Testament,30; copyright Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation Rookery Building still retains numerous prismatic glass installations in Fig. 13. copyright Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation most stories of its back fagade. In Philadelphia, the Witherspoon Building Fig. 14, 15. The Inland Architect and News Record 32 (September 1898), of 1896 at 1319-1323 Walnut Street by Joseph Juston retains its original unpaginated. prismatic glass. The Young, Smyth, Field, & Company Building at Fig. 16. Chicago Architectural Club, ed., TwelfthAnnual Exhibition Catalogue 1216-1220 Arch Street in Philadelphia of 1902 still displays vast expanses (Chicago, 1899), 113 of prismatic glass in all eight stories in both its front and back fagades. It was Fig. 17. Chicago Historical Society, ICHi-19291, Barnes Crosby photo, ca. 1905 designed by the Philadelphia architecture firm of Field & Medary, which Fig. 18. Courtesy of the Art Institute of Chicago, C369s2 had won one of the prizes in Luxfer's design competition of 1898. Fig. 19. Chicago Architectural Photographing Co. Numerous examples of prism installations can be found in storefronts on Fig. 21. Copyright 1904 by McGraw-Hill, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduced Buffalo's Main Street, or on Keany and Bush Streets in downtown San with the permission of the publisher. Francisco (for example, 66 Keany Street). Brooklyn's Williamsburg Savings Fig. 23. Illuminating Engineer (Feb./March 1907-8): 812 Bank at 175 Broadway (1875, by George B. Post; additions in 1906 by Fig. 24. Konrad Werner Schulze, Glas in der Architekturder Gegenwart (Berlin, Helme, Huberty & Hudswell) also contains vast expanses of prismatic glass 1928), 128 in its semicircular windows. In Albuquerque, New Mexico, the KiMo Fig. 25. Courtesy of Dr. Rukschcio, Vienna Theater on Fifth Street and Central Avenue (1927, by Robert and Carl Fig. 26. ALA 258/ (c) ARS, New York/VBK, Vienna, 1994 Boller) contains prisms in several of its first-floor windows. One of the most Fig. 27.Jahrbuchdes Deutschen Werkbunds (1915), 82. remarkable of a number of examples large surviving Luxfer Prism installa- Fig. 28. Deutsche Werkbund Ausstellung, C61n, 1914, ed., OffiziellerKatalog, tions is Ann Arbor's Nickel's Arcade (1915-18, by Hermann Pipp) at (Cologne 1914), 225

NEUMANN: LUXFER PRISMS 53

This content downloaded from 128.148.252.35 on Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:45:40 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions