Volume 1 ׀ Renderling: Undergraduate Journal of Art and Culture Nesting Paradigms in the Narrative of Newly-Modern America: Reconciling Henry Hobson Richardson’s So-Called Juvenilia By Benjamin Peterson History and Theory of Architecture Student, Carleton University It is difficult to grasp the scope of change that tran- This emerging cultural paradigm is manifested cal French style and method with the likes of Richard spired in the nineteenth century. In mere decades, em- and nurtured by now-celebrated paragons of American Morris Hunt.3 He returns to America in 1865 and begins pires rose and fell. Individual fortunes acted in much the architectural culture. The influence of Louis Sullivan, of work.4 Astoundingly, by the end of his twenty-year career, same way; being both the products and victims of unim- Frank Lloyd Wright and of Henry Hobson Richardson Richardson had developed a succinct, recognizable style. aginable risk. Emerging industries injected vast wealth spread rapidly across the United States and Canada. Furthermore, his style is so well loved that it is propagat- into varied social classes, social mobility is hopeful and Argued by many to be the first articulation of a style that ed as popular aesthetic from the 1880s into the next cen- all consuming— that which was once reserved only for an is uniquely American, the work of Henry Hobson Rich- tury. The likes of Bruce Price, designer of many late- oligarch or a plutocrat suddenly became the domain of ardson enabled that of Sullivan and Wright. An investi- century icons in Canada, emulates the ‘Richardsonian the newly minted ‘industrialist.’ As such, a triumphantly gation into the career of Richardson and the emergence Romanesque.’ Price’s Windsor Station in Montreal, com- ‘gilded’ age emerges over the latter decades of the cen- of his Romanesque style will hence be undertaken. pleted in 1889, is a worthwhile example. Elsewhere, Rich- tury. Such an era’s dynamism and energy necessitated a Such will be conducted in order to illustrate the transi- ard Waite builds the Ontario Legislature in Richardson’s distinct and lavish architecture to properly document its tion in Richardson’s own work that solidified his style style circa 1893.5 Countless other public buildings are contours. and enabled those of his successors. This investigation built in his style, notably the Old Toronto City Hall by Ed- will argue that, by the end of his career, Richardson ward J Lennox circa1899 and the Cambridge City Hall, Simultaneously, the late century sees an architec- successfully integrated the principals and the motifs of completed in 1889. Design proposals for Richardsonian tural language emerge for each of the major European the radically modern American romantics into an archi- Romanesque churches, especially, are lobbied during the empires. In North America none are more dominantly ar- tecture that from the outset was uniquely his own. reconstruction of Saint John, New Brunswick following its ticulated than those of the perpetually dichotomous Eng- These ends will be achieved through an examination of devastating fire in June of 1877. Richardson’s style re- lish and French. It is here where the last great empire, two works: the Church of the Unity in Springfield, Mas- freshes a deeply historicist architectural scene in the late that of the Americans, emerges. Although ultimately de- sachusetts of 1867 and the Ames Gate Lodge of 1881. stages of the era of great revivals. rivative of imported European traditions, American set- tlers hold a high degree of cultural flexibility when com- The career of H.H. Richardson is decidedly short. As argued in most current discourses, Richardson’s pared to their European contemporaries, thanks in large Born 1838, Richardson only practices between 1866 style is most clearly articulated following his completion part to their geographic isolation. To carve out their own and his death in 1886.2 He is educated through the of Boston’s Trinity Church in 1877. Asserted by James national identity, settlers turn culture inward: towards the 1850s at Harvard University and subsequently the O’Gorman in his book, Three American Architects such an so-called ‘American’ landscape.1 École des Beaux Arts in Paris, where he studies classi- eclectic structure is, ironically, the product of his rigidly- 2 ׀ Nesting Paradigms in the Narrative of Newly-Modern America ׀ Volume 1 Peterson ׀ Renderling classicist Beaux-Arts training. Writing, “[one] can judge gardeners and bachelor guests.9 Instead, the building context. Over the nineteenth century, ideas in landscape from his mature works, in which he eschewed classical uses negative space— the void in its side— to order the architecture trend towards the picturesque. Painterly details, that knowledge of the esquisse process and the viewer through its arch and into the property beyond. In composition formed the majority of worked landscape rational analysis of building program far outweighed the the same way, it appears— low-slung and in line with designs over the course of the century. Imported from the trappings of classical style in the aspiring architect’s the horizon— as though it were some eighteenth centu- great estate-homes of Britain and Ireland, the pictur- homeward baggage,” O’Gorman roots Richardson firmly ry fortification, protecting the estate beyond. Deliberate- esque garden takes on a different role in American archi- in an old methodological tradition based in the narrowed ly, then, Richardson is emphasizing the importance of tectural discourse.12 The likes of Frederick Law Olmstead focus on the programmatic needs of a structure.6 As privacy to the family that occupies this insular property. transform what was a decadent feature of a gentleman’s such, O’Gorman sets Richardson to be the methodologi- One might situate such a statement within larger narra- estate into a public good at the forefront of modernity. cal foil of someone like Frank Furness.7 Richardson re- tives of post-industrial environmentalist anxiety which Kowsky highlights the connection between Olmstead and jects eclecticism in favour of a personal mélange of con- one still experiences today. In many ways, then, Rich- Richardson: “Richardson moved to the Boston suburb of temporary aesthetics, argues O’Gorman.8 Although it is ardson’s response maintains relevancy. This becomes Brookline in 1874; seven years later Olmstead became impossible to separate any aesthetic of the century from important when the structure is reconciled with the his neighbour.”13 The two would later work together on its roots in history, O’Gorman raises a key point of Rich- emergence of American nationalism and American ex- commissions near the end of Richardson’s life.14 Discus- ardson’s early career: the distillation of a deeply-personal ceptionalism. sions between the two men lead Richardson to visit Cen- aesthetic from a fusion of contemporary thought and tral Park in New York. A project of Olmstead’s, the park tested method. Situated near Eaton, Massachusetts, the Ames remains a masterwork of principled nineteenth century Gate Lodge marks the entrance to a larger estate prop- park architecture.15 Kowsky asserts that it is on one of The very same contemporary relevance will define erty. Stonework that commands any viewer’s attention these trips that Richardson finds his inspiration for the the mature style developed by Richardson nearer the end has a clear objective at Ames Gate: making allusion to heavy arches of the Ames Gate Lodge. The bridges con- of his life. The example of the Ames Gate Lodge, complet- the storied relation dependency of culture on place. structed by Calvert Vaux, notably the Huddlestone Arch, ed in 1881 provides a clear example of the kind of rheto- Seen hence, another birthing ground for American ideo- the Rustic Arch in the Ramble, and the Springbank Arch, ric that Richardson would Renderling inseparable from logies. Pleasantly situated in one of the oldest states of provide Richardson with his model. 16 his ever-popular aesthetic. Inescapably rugged, the struc- the Republic, Richardson draws on American history ture employs powerful statements of purpose through when materializing his design. Massive fieldstones, Kowsky asserts a primary feature of Vaux’s de- heavily rusticated stonework to communicate both the strewn across the expanse of New England, assemble signs: the subordination of architecture to landscape in- current trends in American picturesque individualism and the structure. Theorized by Francis R. Kowsky in his arti- herent.17 One can easily read such subordination into the to predict future trends in popular American thought. Ty- cle “H.H. Richardson’s Ames Gate Lodge and the Ro- Ames Gate Lodge, where structure appears most obvious- pologically, the building is remarkably simple; the road mantic Landscape Tradition,” Richardson deliberately ly on the roofline that, in a way, merely caps-off what that runs through its side betrays its primary function. chooses these “large cobbles” and arranges them thus could be a cairn of fieldstones. Correspondence between Yet, the building seems resolute in its presentation of its to draw on the popular landscape trends of the day.10 Olmstead and Richardson further develops the im- gate. Note the power with which Richardson denotes the These landscapes ultimately make New England a dis- portance of the cairn as a typology to the two architects.18 transition across the space: his heavy rusticated portals tinct facet of the ever-so-patriotic ‘great American land- Richardson would