There are many highlights from Chicago’s vast history, and one of the truly iconic moments is the World’s Columbian Exposition, also known as the Chicago World’s Fair. Held in Chicago in 1893, the World’s Fair proved Chicago’s creative ingenuity and persistent work ethic. The Exposition was socially and culturally influential — so how did the Chicago’s World Fair come to be such a spectacular success?
In the 1890s, the world was changing, and world’s fairs had been successful in Europe as a way to bring people together with progress (London’s 1851 Crystal Palace Exhibition — one of the first Modernist structures — was a prime example). Leaders across the country on a local and national scale agreed to finance a fair; they just needed the right location. Through a battle of finances, persuasion and voting, Chicago won with a large lead over New York. That left the city with an incredible amount of pressure to pull the whole thing off.
Thankfully, Chicago had an incredible team of talented planners, architects and visionaries to get it done. Designed by famous figures such as John Wellborn Root, Daniel Burnham, Frederick Law Olmsted and Charles B. Atwood, the Exposition was a paradise of neoclassical architecture, and the white color of the buildings inspired its nickname, the White City. Art, music, inventions, technology and culture from around the world were featured. The fairgrounds were joined together by lagoons and canals. In the end, more than 27 million people attended the World’s Columbian Exposition during its six-month lifespan, and it became a marker of American — and Chicagoan — history.
The fair’s legacy is still evident all over the city. Daniel Burnham took lessons learned at the fair for his 1909 Plan of Chicago, which in turn, influenced city planning around the world. The neoclassical architecture informed many designs that still stand today, such as Chicago’s Museum of Science and Industry and the Art Institute of Chicago. The Ferris wheel was even famously invented to debut at the Exposition.
Perhaps most important, the Exposition deeply touched the millions of visitors who left with new ideas and inspiration. The Chicago World’s Fair paved the way for Chicago’s vision of the future, and countless others.
Women have been making strides in the field of architecture and design for centuries. Our Women in Architecture series recognizes the pioneering ladies that came before us, and paved the way for a more inclusive and innovative industry today. One such figure is Anna Keichline, whose impressive resume includes titles such as: American architect, inventor, suffragist and World War I Special Agent.
The Life of Anna Keichline
Anna Keichline was born on May 24, 1889 in Bellefonte, Pennsylvania. The youngest of four children, Keichline showed creative genius at a young age. Gifted a workshop and carpentry tools by her parents, she spent her free time creating furniture and — at just 14 years old — won a prize at a county fair for a table and chest she’d made. The judges praised her work as comparing “favorably with the work of a skilled mechanic” and she told local reporters she intended to devote her life to industrial design.
It was no surprise then, when she pursued a degree in mechanical engineering, first at Pennsylvania State College and then at Cornell University. It wasn’t unusual during this time for schools to award women “certificates” rather than “degrees,” but when a rumor of this potential began to spread, Keichline’s classmates rallied and threatened to disrupt the commencement ceremony unless she received the degree she had earned. Kiechline graduated in 1911 and became the fifth woman ever to receive an architectural degree from Cornell. Though entering the male-dominated field was a daunting prospect at the time, Keichline felt sure of her place and purpose.
Keichline was an agent of change in all areas of her life: In 1913, she led a Suffragist protest march in her hometown of Bellefonte. She also served as a Special Agent in the Military Intelligence Division in Washington D.C during World War I, describing herself as: “twenty-eight and physically somewhat stronger than the average. Might add that I can operate and take care of a car [she owned her own automobile]. The above might suggest a drafting or office job, but if you should deem it advisable to give me something more difficult or as I wish to say more dangerous, I should much prefer it. You have asked for my salary in order to rate me… last year my fees amounted to something over six thousand. [the equivalent of $92,000 today].”
As Keichline tackled these feats and more, she was simultaneously setting the foundation for her successful career and the impact she would leave on the architectural world.
Anna Keichline, The Juanita Colony Country Clubhouse, Mt. Union, Penn., 1927. Archives of Nancy J. Perkins
The Work of Anna Kiechline
Keichline believed that there was a place for women in the field of architecture, thanks in part to their unique and innate understanding of space in a home.
During her post-graduate career, Keichline shared an office with her father (an attorney) and amassed an impressive portfolio of both residential and commercial buildings. She is renowned for becoming the first registered woman architect in Pennsylvania in 1920, where much of her work occurred.
Her work included the Plaza Theater in her hometown Bellefonte (1925) and the Juanita Colony County Clubhouse in nearby Pennsylvania town Mount Union (1927), among many others. She explored many architectural styles throughout her impressive career as well, including Colonial Revival, Gothic Revival and picturesque cottage houses.
Anna Keichline, Building Block, #1,653,771 A, filed March 16, 1926, issued December 27, 1927. Anna Keichline Papers, Ms1989-016, Special Collections, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
In addition to designing buildings, Keichline was also an inventor and created many “time- and motion-saving” designs for kitchens and interiors. Overall, she owned seven patents — six for utilities and one for design. While her inventions span from a combination sink and washtub, to a foldaway sleeping bed compartment, to a portable partition replete with doors, windows, and eaves, her most famous invention by far is the “K Brick,” patented in 1927 and honored by the American Ceramic Society in 1931.
A forerunner of concrete block design today, the K Brick was an inexpensive, light, fireproof clay brick that could be filled with insulating or sound-proofing material, used for hollow wall construction. Keichline said of her K Brick that it “requires less to make than brick and because of its design takes less time to fire – the tile would reduce the weight of the wall by one-half.”
While Keichline passed away in 1943, her innovations and impact on the architectural field live on today — making her a remarkable figure and woman in history.
If John Lloyd Wright’s name sounds familiar, it’s because his father, Frank Lloyd Wright, is an icon in the architecture world. But his son left his legacy with something more playful; John was the original inventor behind Lincoln Logs, a childhood toy many cherish fondly. So how did the son of an architect come to invent one of the most well-known toys in America? Today, we dive into John Lloyd Wright and the story of Lincoln Logs, and an interesting piece of architecture trivia.
John grew up in Oak Park, Illinois in a home designed by his father, now known as the Frank Lloyd Wright Home and Studio. He was immersed in the world of architecture from a young age, but his childhood was far from perfect. After Frank Lloyd Wright abandoned his wife and children, the two became estranged and their relationship never fully recovered. However, John decided to pave his own way, determined to get out of his father’s shadow.
In his early years of practice, John worked on the West Coast and the Midwest before agreeing to work with Frank on Tokyo’s Imperial Hotel in Japan. The two were faced with the challenge of building a structure that could withstand the frequent earthquakes of Japan, and their original design used a system of interlocking timber beams to let the hotel to sway but not collapse. Before the hotel was even constructed, father and son once again parted ways, this time over a dispute concerning John’s salary.
Now out of work, John turned his attention to his passions and hobbies, including toy design and invention. Taking inspiration from the plans of the Imperial Hotel, he perfected the idea for Lincoln Logs in 1916. Using notched pieces of wood for the miniature logs allowed the toys to withstand playtime instead of earthquakes. Wright received a patent in 1920, eventually selling it as Lincoln Logs grew in popularity.
After his years dedicated to Lincoln Logs, John returned back to the world of architecture, designing a handful of buildings and homes in the Midwest. John’s legacy in the world of toy design is one that has spanned decades, with Lincoln Logs inducted into the National Toy Hall of Fame in 1999. More than 100 years after their inception, Lincoln Logs are still a toy well-loved by generations — and potential young architects.
As part of our “Subsects of Modernist Architecture” series, we’re continuing to explore the many trickle-down pockets of Modernist design throughout the years. Picking back up where we last left off in Part II, European Modernism continued to spread globally and set the precedent for the next wave of architectural movements that emerged. Here’s what followed:
International Style
The International Style (sometimes also referred to as internationalism) emerged in the 1920s and 30s. Originated in post-World War I Holland, France and Germany, the style quickly caught on worldwide, eventually becoming the dominant architectural style in the 1970s. According to the Getty Research Institute, “the style is characterized by an emphasis on volume over mass, the use of lightweight, mass-produced, industrial materials, rejection of all ornament and colour, repetitive modular forms, and the use of flat surfaces, typically alternating with areas of glass.”
Major figures in the International Style movement include Bauhaus Founder Walter Gropius, as well as Bauhaus Director Ludwig Mies van der Rohe and Le Corbusier. Both Gropius and Mies van der Rohe were instrumental in introducing the International Style to Chicago’s architecture — leaving a lasting impact on the city’s skyline that can still be seen and appreciated today.
Metabolism
Like many subsects of Modernist architecture, Metabolism emerged in response to the post-war period in Japan. First introduced during a Congrès Internationaux d’Architecture Moderne (International Congresses of Modern Architecture, or CIAM) meeting in 1959, the movement became fully-fledged just a year later when young architects Kiyonori Kikutake, Kisho Kurokawa and Fumihiko Maki released the Metabolism manifesto during the 1960 Tokyo World Design Conference.
The style was marked by its dynamic fusion of megastructures and organic biology. Metabolism was also heavily influenced by the Marxist philosophies of the time. The architects behind the movement envisioned a more flexible form of urban planning, one where modular towers could be easily installed. They even went so far as to propose vast cities that could float on the ocean, with these modular structures as their foundation. The most successful examples of Metabolism include the site of the 1970 World Exposition, designed by Kenzō Tange, and the Nagakin Capsule Tower, designed by Kisho Kurokawa.
Brutalism
Brutalism, also called Brutalist architecture or New Brutalism, emerged in the 1950s in the UK during post-war construction. The word Brutalism is derived from the Swedish phrase nybrutalism, as well as being associated with the French phrases béton brut (“raw concrete”) and art brut (“raw art”). It’s easy to see the connection: the style is characterized by monolithic forms, rigid geometric styles, and unusual shape, and commonly makes use of bare or raw materials being exposed in monolithic color palettes.
Influenced by socialism, Brutalist architecture was often employed in the UK to create utilitarian, low-cost housing solutions or government buildings. Perhaps for this reason, the style received widespread criticism and was often regarded as “cold” or “soulless.” Nevertheless, many Brutalist structures have left a strong impression on architecture today and remain the cornerstone of universities and public institutions worldwide.
Stay tuned for more features on the subsects of Modernist architecture.
As part of our Women in Architecture series, we recently wrote a feature on pioneering architect, Norma Merrick Sklarek. Sklarek made waves when she co-founded her own architectural practice — the largest women-owned architectural firm in the country, and the first practice to be co-owned by an Black woman. That firm was Siegel Sklarek Diamond.
Siegel Sklarek Diamond
Siegel Sklarek Diamond was founded in Los Angeles in 1985 by three architects from whom the firm got its name: Margot Siegel, AIA, Norma Merrick Sklarek, AIA and Katherine Diamond, FAIA. Siegel had owned her own business for fourteen years prior, while Sklarek and Diamond both came from jobs working for large companies.
The trio combined their unique skill sets to build a successful and impressive practice. Siegel took on the task of quality review and preparing working drawings; Sklarek brought her impressive project management abilities and keen architectural sense; Diamond took charge of the design, giving shape to simple ideas and ensuring clients’ needs were met. Overall, their collective style took inspiration from the Bauhaus style, consisting of largely unadorned Cubist structures, but with the three women’s own inventive twist.
According to a Los Angeles Times article published the year after their founding, Siegel Sklarek Diamond, had “a portfolio of nearly a dozen large projects in Southern California with a value of more than $25 million.” Their work covered a broad breadth and depth of categories, including educational facilities and community buildings, as well as commercial and industrial projects. Projects Siegel Sklarek Diamond took on include the Student Counseling and Resource Center (1988) and The Early Childhood Education Center (1989) at the University of California, Irvine and the Los Angeles Air Traffic Control Tower (completed in 1995), among others.
Control Tower at LAX. Credit: Moto “Club4AG” Miwa on Wikimedia Creative Commons, licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license
In that same article, Diamond is quoted saying that the architecture profession at the time was “definitely an old-boys network,” Diamond said. “It’s definitely a very male-oriented profession, and I think that part (of the reason) is our clients, in order to have the money to hire an architect, tend to be older and more conservative.” As the largest women-owned architectural firm nationally at its time, and the first to be owned by a Black woman, Siegel Sklarek Diamond certainly turned that industry standard on its head and paved the way for many more influential women to follow.
While women’s contributions to architecture are celebrated more than ever in modern times, these contributions have always been part of the architectural world — historically, they were just overlooked. As part of our women in architecture series, today we’re spotlighting another strong female figure in Modernism: Eileen Gray.
Eileen Gray was born into a wealthy aristocratic family in Ireland in 1878. Her father, a landscape painter, encouraged Gray’s artistic pursuits so that in 1900, Gray left for Slade School in London to study fine arts in a bohemian, co-ed program that was quite unusual for the time.
From connections made at Slade, Gray learned to lacquer furniture, eventually opening a studio in 1910 with Japanese craftsman Seizo Sugawara. In fact, Gray was so committed to the trade that she suffered from the so-called lacquer disease — a painful hand rash. Her hard work paid off, however, as she and Sugawara produced commissions for Paris’s wealthy elite.
Bibendum Chair, designed by Eileen Gray. Photo courtesy of EileenGrayDesigns.com
Gray’s time lacquering was cut short by World War I. However, after a brief stint driving ambulances during that period, she dove back into the world of interior design. Her most notable project included the Rue de Lota apartment and showcased some of Gray’s most iconic furniture designs, such as the Bibendum Chair (which parodied the shape of the Michelin Man) and the Pirogue Day Bed. Gray’s success led her to open her own shop in 1922, attracting high-caliber clients like Ezra Pound. During that time, she honed her style to become more streamlined and industrial, taking after Modernist inspirations like Le Corbusier.
E-1027, designed by Eileen Gray in France in 1929. Photo courtesy of e1027.org
With the support of her romantic partner, architect Jean Badovici, Gray pursued architecture. And despite not having a formal education in the trade, through apprenticeship and field learning, Gray flourished. Gray’s most notable architectural project was E-1027, a cuboid structure. When Gray finished E-1027, Badovici announced the home in his magazine and claimed himself joint architect. Of the nine architectural projects she completed in her lifetime, Badovici took credit for four of them.The home attracted Le Corbusier, who stayed often and later disrespected Gray’s wishes that the home remain without decor when Corbusier painted Cubist murals of naked women on its walls. Critic Rowan Moore commented on the move by Corbusier in 2013, calling it an “act of naked phallocracy” by a man asserting “his dominion, like a urinating dog, over the territory.”
In spite of the disrespect she faced from her male counterparts, Gray stands evermore steadfast as an influential figure in Modernist history.
Stay tuned for more features on women in architecture.
Chicago is home to a vast array of architectural diversity, from Modernism to Prairie School and beyond. Although no two city skyscrapers are the same, Marina City is one building that particularly stands out. Built by American architect Bertrand Goldberg, the industrial series of towers represent his unique mark on Chicago architecture. Today, we’re taking a closer look at Goldberg’s life and work.
Bertrand Goldberg presenting a model of Marina City; photo courtesy of BertrandGoldberg.org
Early Life and Architectural Beginnings
Born local to Chicago in 1913, Bertrand Goldberg left the US for Germany at the ripe young age of eighteen in 1932. There, he studied at the Bauhaus and worked at the small architectural office of Bauhaus director Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Like many others studying and working in Germany during that period, Goldberg eventually had to flee the country under mounting political pressure and civil unrest. After a brief stint in Paris, Goldberg returned to his hometown in Chicago to continue his career.
Prentice Women’s Hospital, designed by Bertrand Goldberg, in Chicago, IL
The Work of Bertrand Golberg
At only 23 years old, Goldberg opened his own architectural office in Chicago. He was most known for his innovative structural solutions to complex problems, with commissions that included designing an easily transportable structure for the North Pole chain of ice cream shops as well as many prefabricated projects and mobile vaccine laboratories for the US government.
His work was always experimental, testing out ways to create unconventional forms through extremely conventional and mundane materials. His most popular project is Marina City, often referred to as the “corn cobs,” which stand out in sharp relief against the Chicago riverfront.
Marina City is a mixed-use complex of five concrete towers, built in 1961-1964, that has continued to change and evolve over time. Goldberg’s original plan was complete with an office building, theater, public pedestrian plaza, an active rail line, a marina, an ice skating rink and a bowling alley. Though the rail line and skating rink are no longer standing, the theater remains, converted in the Chicago House of Blues venue.
The success and critical acclaim of Marina City inspired many of Golberg’s later structures, including River City in Chicago and several hospital structures across the country. Though Goldberg died in Chicago in 1977, he has built a lasting legacy and forever left his mark on the Chicago skyline.
Whether it’s in reference to decor or design, the terms modern and contemporary are often used interchangeably. While this detail may be easily overlooked, the difference between the two styles is notable, especially in the world of architecture. Today, we’ll break down the distinction between modern vs contemporary architecture, and why it matters.
Simply put, contemporary design refers to styles relevant in the present moment, whereas Modernism refers to a style defined in the past. As we’ve covered in previous posts, Modernism has an expansive history, which was most notably defined between 1900 and 1960. Contemporary design can change based on what’s currently trending, and often changes based on widespread taste. Modernism remains defined by traditions and practices from the original Modernist movement.
So why do these two styles often get confused? Firstly, Modernism is a timeless style that often translates as contemporary because even after almost a century, its elements are still beautiful. It’s why our own use of materials, natural light and structure have stood the test of time at Optima. Secondly, current contemporary design does share some similarities to Modernism. Glass and metal materials, floor-to-ceiling windows and minimal color palettes are all popular architectural details right now. Even curated residential green space, a signature Modernist feature in our projects for decades, are trending with the house plant craze. With contemporary architecture and design borrowing elements from Modernism, it makes sense that they often get swapped out for each other.
If you want to learn how to spot the difference, it’s worth studying Modernism first so you know what to look for in true Modernt pieces and buildings (our own blog is a great resource for that). Some things to look for: open floor plans, asymmetry, large panels of windows or glass walls, lack of ornamentation and highly functional spaces. Function over form was the mantra of Modernism, and it still informs Modernist interpretations now. If the building or space includes anything trendy or cutting-edge for the year — like some of Architectural Digest’s 11 Most Anticipated Buildings of 2020 — it’s probably more appropriately categorized as contemporary.
Although the two styles are similar, there’s no replicating the impact and legacy of Modern architecture. Our love for Modernism inspires us to recognize and appreciate it when we see it, and we hope our readers share the sentiment.
When Optima expanded to Arizona in 2000, with the new territory came a vast and storied architectural culture and history. While the Southwest is home to many distinguished styles, perhaps none is as unique as pueblo architecture. Our Modernist design is in stark contrast with the Pueblo style, yet we still honor the history and modern-day impact of pueblo architecture.
Pueblo architecture comes from the traditional dwellings of the Puebloans, or Pueblo peoples, a southwestern Native American tribe. In Spanish, pueblo translates to “village,” referring to the Puebloans’ iconic style of building. Puebloans first began building pueblo structures between 750-900 CE, but were inspired by the Ancestral Puebloan cliff dwellings dating as far back as AD 1150.
Pueblo architecture is most commonly constructed from adobe, though stone was used when available. Building structures are flat-roofed, with the roof supported by wooden beams, vigas, and small perpendicular beams, latillas. Vigas typically protrude beyond the building structure. In larger communities, many pueblo homes are stacked in multistory terraces with setbacks. These communities also often include kivas, partially underground circular ceremonial rooms, as well as courtyards or plazas.
When Spanish colonists arrived to the southwest in the 1500s, they adopted Pueblo architecture for their own buildings, such as haciendas and mission churches. From the colonists, Puebloans began incorporating more manufactured techniques, such as sun-baking adobe bricks, and more manufactured materials.
Optima Camelview Village in Scottsdale, Arizona
Pueblo architecture continues to permeate the voice and character of southwest design. Although our own Modernist style is vastly different, Pueblo influences still informed many design choices. Optima Camelview Village honors the tradition of terraced dwellings in its stepped, landscaped facade and centralized courtyard. The desert dwellings of Optima contain traits of the traditional Publeoan dwellings, too. At Sterling Ridge, the cantilever roof pays homage to vigas, while the site-sensitive, multilevel design of the structure allows the home to blend into the landscape.
But despite the notable influences, it is Optima’s departure from the dominant southwestern architectural style that attracts people to our work — employees and residents alike.
