PROPHET OF DEMOCRACY
Due tribute has been paid to Mr. Louis
Sullivan as an architect in the first essay of this
volume. That aspect of his genius has been critically
dealt with by many, but as an author he is scarcely
known. Yet there are Sibylline leaves of his,
still let us hope in circulation, which have wielded
a potent influence on the minds of a generation of
men now passing to maturity. It is in the hope
that his message may not be lost to the youth of today
and of tomorrow that the present author now undertakes
to summarize and interpret that message to a public
to which Mr. Sullivan is indeed a name, but not a voice.
That he is not a voice can be attributed
neither to his lack of eloquence for he
is eloquent nor to the indifference of the
younger generation of architects which has grown up
since he has ceased, in any public way, to speak.
It is due rather to a curious fatality whereby his
memorabilia have been confined to sheets which the
winds of time have scattered pamphlets,
ephemeral magazines, trade journals never
the bound volume which alone guards the sacred flame
from the gusts of evil chance.
And Mr. Sullivan’s is a “sacred
flame,” because it was kindled solely with the
idea of service a beacon to keep young men
from shipwreck traversing those straits made dangerous
by the Scylla of Conventionality, and the Charybdis
of License. The labour his writing cost him was
enormous. “I shall never again make so great
a sacrifice for the younger generation,” he
says in a letter, “I am amazed to note how insignificant,
how almost nil is the effect produced, in comparison
to the cost, in vitality to me. Or perhaps it
is I who am in error. Perhaps one must have reached
middle age, or the Indian Summer of life, must have
seen much, heard much, felt and produced much and
been much in solitude to receive in reading what I
gave in writing ‘with hands overfull.’”
This was written with reference to
Kindergarten Chats. A sketch Analysis of Contemporaneous
American Architecture, which constitutes Mr. Sullivan’s
most extended and characteristic preachment to the
young men of his day. It appeared in 1901, in
fifty-two consecutive numbers of The Interstate
Architect and Builder, a magazine now no longer
published. In it the author, as mentor, leads
an imaginary disciple up and down the land, pointing
out to him the “bold, upholsterrific blunders”
to be found in the architecture of the day, and commenting
on them in a caustic, colloquial style large,
loose, discursive a blend of Ruskin, Carlyle
and Whitman, yet all Mr. Sullivan’s own.
He descends, at times, almost to ribaldry, at others
he rises to poetic and prophetic heights. This
is all a part of his method alternately to shame and
inspire his pupil to some sort of creative activity.
The syllabus of Mr. Sullivan’s scheme, as it
existed in his mind during the writing of Kindergarten
Chats, and outlined by him in a letter to the
author is such a torch of illumination that it is
quoted here entire.
A young man who has “finished
his education” at the
architectural schools comes
to me for a post-graduate
course hence a
free form of dialogue.
I proceed with his education rather
by indirection and suggestion than by direct precept.
I subject him to certain experiences and allow
the impressions they make on him to infiltrate,
and, as I note the effect, I gradually use a guiding
hand. I supply the yeast, so to speak, and allow
the ferment to work in him.
This is the gist of the whole scheme.
It remains then to determine, carefully, the kind
of experiences to which I shall subject the lad,
and in what order, or logical (and especially psychological)
sequence. I begin, then, with aspects that are
literal, objective, more or less cynical, and brutal,
and philistine. A little at a time I introduce
the subjective, the refined, the altruistic; and,
by a to-and-fro increasingly intense rhythm of
these two opposing themes, worked so to speak
in counterpoint, I reach a preliminary climax:
of brutality tempered by a longing for nobler,
purer things.
Hence arise a purblind revulsion and
yearning in the lad’s soul; the psychological
moment has arrived, and I take him at once into
the country (Summer: The Storm).
This is the first of the four out-of-door scenes,
and the lad’s first real experience with
nature. It impresses him crudely but violently;
and in the tense excitement of the tempest he is inspired
to temporary eloquence; and at the close is much softened.
He feels in a way but does not know that he has been
a participant in one of Nature’s superb dramas.
(Thus do I insidiously prepare the way for the
notion that creative architecture is in essence
a dramatic art, and an art of eloquence; of subtle
rhythmic beauty, power, and tenderness).
Left alone in the country the lad becomes
maudlin a callow lover of nature and
makes feeble attempts at verse. Returning to
the city he melts and unbosoms the tender
shaft of the unknowable Eros has penetrated to
his heart Nature’s subtle spell
is on him, to disappear and reappear. Then follow
discussions, more or less didactic, leading to
the second out-of-door scene (Autumn Glory).
Here the lad does most of the talking and shows
a certain lucidity and calm of mind. The discussion
of Responsibility, Democracy, Education, etc.,
has inevitably detached the lurking spirit of
pessimism. It has to be: Into
the depths and darkness we descend, and the work
reaches the tragic climax in the third out-of-door
scene Winter.
Now that the forces have been gathered
and marshalled the true, sane movement of the
work is entered upon and pushed at high tension,
and with swift, copious modulations to its foreordained
climax and optimistic peroration in the fourth and
last out-of-door scene as portrayed in the Spring Song.
The locale of this closing number is the
beautiful spot in the woods, on the shore of Biloxi
Bay: where I am writing this.
I would suggest in passing that a considerable
part of the K.C. is in rhythmic prose some
of it declamatory. I have endeavoured throughout
this work to represent, or reproduce to the mind
and heart of the reader the spoken word and intonation not
written language. It really should be read aloud,
especially the descriptive and exalted passages.
There was a movement once on the part
of Mr. Sullivan’s admirers to issue Kindergarten
Chats in book form, but he was asked to tone it
down and expurgate it, a thing which he very naturally
refused to do. Mr. Sullivan has always been completely
alive to our cowardice when it comes to hearing the
truth about ourselves, and alive to the danger which
this cowardice entails, for to his imaginary pupil
he says,
If you wish to read the current architecture
of your country, you must go at it courageously,
and not pick out merely the little bits that please
you. I am going to soak you with it until
you are absolutely nauseated, and your faculties turn
in rebellion. I may be a hard taskmaster,
but I strive to be a good one. When I am
through with you, you will know architecture from
the ground up. You will know its virtuous reality
and you will know the fake and the fraud and the humbug.
I will spare nothing for your sake.
I will stir up the cesspool to its utmost depths
of stench, and also the pious, hypocritical virtues
of our so-called architecture the nice,
good, mealy-mouthed, suave, dexterous, diplomatic
architecture, I will show you also the kind of
architecture our “cultured” people
believe in. And why do they believe in it?
Because they do not believe in themselves.
Kindergarten Chats is even
more pertinent and pointed today than it was some
twenty years ago, when it was written. Speech
that is full of truth is timeless, and therefore prophetic.
Mr. Sullivan forecast some of the very evils by which
we have been overtaken. He was able to do this
on account of the fundamental soundness of his point
of view, which finds expression in the following words:
“Once you learn to look upon architecture not
merely as an art more or less well, or more or less
badly done, but as a social manifestation, the
critical eye becomes clairvoyant, and obscure, unnoted
phenomena become illumined.”
Looking, from this point of view,
at the office buildings that the then newly-realized
possibilities of steel construction were sending skyward
along lower Broadway, in New York, Mr. Sullivan reads
in them a denial of democracy. To him they signify
much more than they seem to, or mean to; they are
more than the betrayal of architectural ignorance
and mendacity, they are symptomatic of forces undermining
American life.
These buildings, as they increase in
number, make this city poorer, morally and spiritually;
they drag it down and down into the mire.
This is not American civilization; it is the rottenness
of Gomorrah. This is not Democracy it
is savagery. It shows the glutton hunt for
the Dollar with no thought for aught else under
the sun or over the earth. It is decadence of
the spirit in its most revolting form; it is rottenness
of the heart and corruption of the mind.
So truly does this architecture reflect the causes
which have brought it into being. Such structures
are profoundly anti-social, and as such,
they must be reckoned with. These buildings are
not architecture, but outlawry, and their authors
criminals in the true sense of the word.
And such is the architecture of lower New York hopeless,
degraded, and putrid in its pessimistic denial
of our art, and of our growing civilization its
cynical contempt for all those qualities that real
humans value.
We have always been very glib about
democracy; we have assumed that this country was a
democracy because we named it so. But now that
we are called upon to die for the idea, we find that
we have never realized it anywhere except perhaps
in our secret hearts. In the life of Abraham
Lincoln, in the poetry of Walt Whitman, in the architecture
of Louis Sullivan, the spirit of democracy found utterance,
and to the extent that we ourselves partake of that
spirit, it will find utterance also in us. Mr.
Sullivan is a “prophet of democracy” not
alone in his buildings but in his writings, and the
prophetic note is sounded even more clearly in his
What is Architecture? A Study in the American
People of Today, than in Kindergarten Chats.
This essay was first printed in The
American Contractor of January 6, 1906, and afterwards
issued in brochure form. The author starts by
tracing architecture to its root in the human mind:
this physical thing is the manifestation of a psychological
state. As a man thinks, so he is; he acts according
to his thought, and if that act takes the form of
a building it is an emanation of his inmost life, and
reveals it.
Everything is there for us to read,
to interpret; and this we may do at our leisure.
The building has not means of locomotion, it cannot
hide itself, it cannot get away. There it
is, and there it will stay telling more
truths about him who made it, than he in his fatuity
imagines; revealing his mind and his heart exactly
for what they are worth, not a whit more, not
a whit less; telling plainly the lies he thinks; telling
with almost cruel truthfulness his bad faith, his
feeble, wabbly mind, his impudence, his selfish
egoism, his mental irresponsibility, his apathy,
his disdain for real things until at
last the building says to us: “I am no more
a real building than the thing that made me is
a real man!”
Language like this stings and burns,
but it is just such as is needful to shame us out
of our comfortable apathy, to arouse us to new responsibilities,
new opportunities. Mr. Sullivan, awake among
the sleepers, drenches us with bucketfuls of cold,
tonic, energizing truth. The poppy and mandragora
of the past, of Europe, poisons us, but in this, our
hour of battle, we must not be permitted to dream on.
He saw, from far back, that “we, as a people,
not only have betrayed each other, but have failed
in that trust which the world spirit of democracy
placed in our hands, as we, a new people, emerged to
fill a new and spacious land.” It has taken
a world war to make us see the situation as he saw
it, and it is to us, a militant nation, and not to
the slothful civilians a decade ago, that Mr. Sullivan’s
stirring message seems to be addressed.
The following quotation is his first
crack of the whip at the architectural schools.
The problem of education is to him of all things the
most vital; in this essay he returns to it again and
again, while of Kindergarten Chats it is the
very raison d’etre.
I trust that a long disquisition is
not necessary in order to show that the attempt
at imitation, by us, of this day, of the by-gone
forms of building, is a procedure unworthy of a free
people; and that the dictum of the schools, that
Architecture is finished and done, is a suggestion
humiliating to every active brain, and therefore,
in fact, a puerility and a falsehood when weighed
in the scales of truly democratic thought.
Such dictum gives the lie in arrogant fashion, to
healthful human experience. It says, in a
word: the American people are not fit for
democracy.
He finds the schools saturated with
superstitions which are the survivals of the scholasticism
of past centuries feudal institutions,
in effect, inimical to his idea of the true spirit
of democratic education. This he conceives of
as a searching-out, liberating, and developing the
splendid but obscured powers of the average man, and
particularly those of children. “It is disquieting
to note,” he says, “that the system of
education on which we lavish funds with such generous,
even prodigal, hand, falls short of fulfilling its
true democratic function; and that particularly in
the so-called higher branches its tendency appears
daily more reactionary, more feudal. It is not
an agreeable reflection that so many of our university
graduates lack the trained ability to see clearly,
and to think clearly, concisely, constructively; that
there is perhaps more showing of cynicism than good
faith, seemingly more distrust of men than confidence
in them, and, withal, no consummate ability to interpret
things.”
In contrast to the schoolman he sketches
the psychology of the active-minded but “uneducated”
man, with sympathy and understanding, the man who
is courageously seeking a way with little to guide
and help him.
Is it not the part of wisdom to cheer,
to encourage such a mind, rather than dishearten
it with ridicule? To say to it: Learn
that the mind works best when allowed to work naturally;
learn to do what your problem suggests when you
have reduced it to its simplest terms; you will
thus find that all problems, however complex,
take on a simplicity you had not dreamed of; accept
this simplicity boldly, and with confidence, do
not lose your nerve and run away from it, or you
are lost, for you are here at the point men so heedlessly
call genius as though it were necessarily
rare; for you are here at the point no living
brain can surpass in essence, the point all truly
great minds seek the point of vital simplicity the
point of view which so illuminates the mind that
the art of expression becomes spontaneous, powerful,
and unerring, and achievement a certainty.
So, if you seek and express the best that is in
yourself, you must search out the best that is
in your people; for they are your problem, and you
are indissolubly a part of them. It is for you
to affirm that which they really wish to affirm,
namely, the best that is in them, and they as
truly wish you to express the best that is in
yourself. If the people seem to have but little
faith it is because they have been tricked so long;
they are weary of dishonesty, more weary than
they know, much more weary than you know, and
in their hearts they seek honest and fearless
men, men simple and clear in mind, loyal to their own
manhood and to the people. The American people
are now in a stupor; be on hand at the awakening.
Next he pays his respects to current
architectural criticism a straining at
gnats and a swallowing of camels, by minds “benumbed
by culture,” and hearts made faint by the tyranny
of precedent. He complains that they make no
distinction between was and is, too
readily assuming that all that is left us moderns is
the humble privilege to select, copy and adapt.
The current mannerisms of Architectural
criticism must often seem trivial. For of
what avail is it to say that this is too small,
that too large, this too thick, and that too thin,
or to quote this, that, or the other precedent,
when the real question may be: Is not the
entire design a mean evasion? Why magnify
this, that, or the other little thing, if the entire
scheme of thinking that the building stands for
is false, and puts a mask upon the people, who
want true buildings, but do not know how to get
them so long as Architects betray them with Architectural
phrases?
And so he goes on with his Jeremiad:
a prophet of despair, do you say? No, he seeks
to destroy only that falsity which would confine the
living spirit. Earlier and more clearly than we,
he discerned the menace to our civilization of the
unrestricted play of the masculine forces powerful,
ruthless, disintegrating the head dominating
the heart. It has taken the surgery of war to
open our eyes, and behold the spectacle of the entire
German nation which by an intellectual process appears
to have killed out compassion, enthroning Schrecklichkeit.
In the heart alone dwells hope of salvation. “For
he who knows even a genuinely little of Mankind knows
this truth: the heart is greater than the head.
For in the heart is Desire; and from it come forth
Courage and Magnanimity.”
You have not thought deeply enough to
know that the heart in you is the woman in man.
You have derided your femininity, where you have
suspected it; whereas, you should have known its
power, cherished and utilized it, for it is the hidden
well-spring of Intuition and Imagination.
What can the brain accomplish without these two?
They are the man’s two inner eyes; without
them he is stone blind. For the mind sets forth
their powers both together. One carries the
light, the other searches; and between them they
find treasures. These they bring to the brain,
which first elaborates them, then says to the
will, “Do” and Action follows.
Poetically considered, as far as the huge, disordered
resultant mass of your Architecture is concerned,
Intuition and Imagination have not gone forth
to illuminate and search the hearts of the people.
Thus are its works stone blind.
It is the absence of poetry and beauty
which makes our architecture so depressing to the
spirits. “Poetry as a living thing,”
says Mr. Sullivan, “stands for the most telling
quality that a man can impart to his thoughts.
Judged by this test your buildings are dreary, empty
places.” Artists in words, like Lafcadio
Hearn and Henry James, are able to make articulate
the sadness which our cities inspire, but it is a
blight which lies heavy on us all. Theodore Dreiser
says, in Sister Carrie a book with
so much bitter truth in it that it was suppressed
by the original publishers:
Once the bright days of summer pass
by, a city takes on the sombre garb of grey, wrapped
in which it goes about its labors during the long
winter. Its endless buildings look grey, its
sky and its streets assume a sombre hue; the scattered,
leafless trees and wind-blown dust and paper but
add to the general solemnity of color. There
seems to be something in the chill breezes which
scurry through the long, narrow thoroughfares
productive of rueful thoughts. Not poets alone,
nor artists, nor that superior order of mind which
arrogates to itself all refinement, feel this,
but dogs and all men.
The excuse that we are too young a
people to have developed an architecture instinct
with that natural poetry which so charms us in the
art of other countries and other times, Mr. Sullivan
disposes of in characteristic fashion. To the
plea that “We are too young to consider these
accomplishments. We have been so busy with our
material development that we have not found time to
consider them,” he makes answer as follows:
Know, then, to begin with, they are
not accomplishments but necessaries. And,
to end with, you are old enough, and have found
the time to succeed in nearly making a fine art of Betrayal,
and a science of Graft. Know that you
are as old as the race. That each man among
you had in him the accumulated power of the race,
ready at hand for use, in the right way, when
he shall conclude it better to think straight and
hence act straight rather than, as now, to act crooked
and pretend to be straight. Know that the
test, plain, simple honesty (and you all
know, every man of you knows, exactly what that
means) is always at your hand.
Know that as all complex manifestations
have a simple basis of origin, so the vast complexity
of your national unrest, ill health, inability
to think clearly and accurately concerning simple
things, really vital things, is easily traceable to
the single, actual, active cause Dishonesty;
and that this points with unescapable logic and
in just measure to each individual man!
The remedy; individual
honesty.
To the objection that this is too
simple a solution, Mr. Sullivan retorts that all great
solutions are simple, that the basic things of the
universe are those which the heart of a child might
comprehend. “Honesty stands in the universe
of Human Thought and Action, as its very Centre of
Gravity, and is our human mask-word behind which abides
all the power of Nature’s Integrity, the profoundest
fact which modern thinking has persuaded Life
to reveal.”
If, on the other hand, the reader
complains, “All this is above our heads,”
Mr. Sullivan is equally ready with an answer:
No, it is not. It is close
beside your hand! and therein
lies its power.
Again you say, “How
can honesty be enforced?”
It cannot be enforced!
“Then how will the remedy
go into effect?”
It cannot go into effect.
It can only come into effect.
“Then how can it come?”
Ask Nature.
“And what will Nature
say?”
Nature is always saying:
“I centre at each man, woman and
child. I knock at the
door of each heart, and I wait. I wait
in patience ready
to enter with my gifts.”
“And is that all that
Nature says?”
That is all.
“Then how shall we receive
Nature?”
By opening wide your minds!
For your greatest crime against
yourselves is that you have
locked the door and thrown away
the key!
Thus, by a long detour, Mr. Sullivan
returns to his initial proposition, that the falsity
of our architecture can be corrected only by integrity
of thought. “Thought is the fine and powerful
instrument. Therefore, have thought for the
integrity of your own thought.”
Naturally, then, as your thoughts thus
change, your growing architecture will change.
Its falsity will depart; its reality will gradually
appear. For the integrity of your thought as
a People, will then have penetrated the minds of
your architects.
Then, too, as your basic thought
changes, will emerge a philosophy, a poetry, and
an art of expression in all things; for you will
have learned that a characteristic philosophy, poetry
and art of expression are vital to the healthful growth
and development of a democratic people.
Some readers may complain that these
are after all only glittering generalities, of no
practical use in solving the specific problems with
which every architect is confronted. On the contrary
they are fundamental verities of incalculable benefit
to every sincere artist. Shallowness is the great
vice of democracy; it is surface without depth, a
welter of concrete detail in which the mind easily
loses those great, underlying abstractions from which
alone great art can spring. These, in this essay,
Mr. Sullivan helps us to recapture, and inspires us
to employ. He would win us from our insincerities,
our trivialities, and awaken our enormous latent,
unused power. He says:
Awaken it.
Use it.
Use it for the common good.
Begin now!
For it is as true today as
when one of your wise men said
it:
“The way to resume is
to resume!”