#10: Revolutions

Austin Hall presents itself at the nexus of three very different kinds of Revolutions- industrial, educational, and architectural. Each is mutually reinforcing with the other, and each can be seen as forming a key part of the motivation for many of the artistic decisions H.H. Richardson and his team made in designing and executing the work.

The industrial aspect is well-known. The latter half of the 19th Century saw the victorious northern half of the United States rising out of the ashes of the Civil War and developing extensive mass production, construction, and via the railroad and telegraph, connection capabilities. No era, it could be argued, did more to bring the country closer to being recognizable to us today than did the Industrial Revolution. Attendant to this moment of transition was a decided accumulation of wealth alongside the continually increasing influx of immigrants hoping to take their first steps towards it. As a result, class divisions based in nationality and number of generations in the country comprise a key part of Austin Hall's story. Though the laborers who constructed it likely hailed from the city of Boston's vast Irish, Italian, and African American populations, these less well-off individuals would never in their lifetime get to take part in using, enjoying, and benefiting from the education and studies that were housed within its walls. Those who built Austin could not partake in its opportunities.

Similarly, the educational revolution underway in the United States and also in Western Europe reflected class lines. While trade schools and apprenticeships were often seen as the domain of the laborer classes, the twin concepts of professional education and the liberal arts university as we now know it arose at the same time. Austin was a manifestation of this transformation as well, with the very classes that had once been relegated to professional education left unable to take part in its elite incarnation at places like the Harvard Law School. This expansion, for which Austin Hall was built, again was reserved for the descendants of New England's boldface names.

Finally, the architecture itself of Austin can now be seen to represent something of a transformation, although one that touched and could be enjoyed by all classes. The Richardsonian Romanesque approach involved a synthesis of classical, Old World ideas with New World variations and Richardson's own modifications. The variety of buildings Richardson's style would touch- from public libraries to churches, from train stations to an insane asylum, make for a welcome break from the class-divisive Industrial and educational Revolutions. Even if not all his buildings were inhabited by organizations that were open to all, certainly people of all backgrounds could appreciate, observe, and find some way of incorporating this new aesthetic into their experience.

Abstract

Post #9: Abstract

The aim of the paper that will serve as a capstone to this blog will be to explore Austin Hall’s relationship with its architect’s eponymous style, Richardsonian Romanesque. I will argue that Austin Hall can be seen as an archetype for this style and its influence, perhaps more so than any other of Richardson’s works. To do so, I will do the following: 1) define and synthesize a definition of Richardsonian Romanesque based upon both Richardson’s contemporaries and more modern critics have understood the style to be; 2) use extensive visual analysis and my own photography of the building’s interior and exterior to demonstrate how the building matches that definition; 3) examine additional Richardson works and attempt to illustrate how they depart from the definition through analysis of critical works about them; and 4) trace the influence or recollection of this style in works done by architects after Richardson’s death, particularly those of his protégés. I will again attempt to show how Austin’s features can be seen as antecedents of so many aspects of post-Richardson Richardsonian Romanesque works.

            Ultimately, the conclusions I draw in this paper will not establish definitively one way or another whether Austin Hall can lay sole claim to the title of most Richardsonian Romanesque. Nevertheless, using secondary source material and visual analysis of other Richardson works, I hope to be able to derive a comprehensive working definition of the style and show how it may be applied to a particular building that I and others feel closely matches this style. While it may be difficult to abstract away Austin’s characteristics in constructing a definition (necessary so that the definition is not tautological and Austin’s archetypal status is not trivial), this challenge will lead me to make headway on questions that are broader than just the description of a single artist’s work and style. Through attention to considerations that are relevant to Austin Hall and the work of HH Richardson, I hope to explore: 1) What makes for a style of art? How can its features be derived from an examination of works that are thought to adhere to this style? Is this question inherently circular, i.e. does a set of works belonging to a style define the style’s features or do the features belong to the style? 2) How can one judge whether an additional work from an artist fits the stylistic that a critic has generated? 3) How can one infer the latter-day influences of a style and how does that better inform an understanding of the style and its scope to begin with? Certainly, none of these questions will be answered in full, but argument that Austin Hall is characteristically Richardsonian Romanesque will necessitate their examination.

Post 8: Description of Display Options

Description:

Constructed in 1883 under the oversight and design of American architect H.H. Richardson, Austin Hall was the first building designated expressly for the use of the Harvard Law. Its vaulted portico, demi-tower, and two-toned sandstone façade mark it as one of Richardson’s signature works– the true epitome of Richardsonian Romanesque. Inside is evident the grandeur– both original and restored– for which it was designed, replete with its most well-known masterpiece, the Ames Courtroom.

Display Options:

            Though Austin Hall is inherently site-specific (it was constructed for a particular location and time), there are a coupe of other options that could have been considered for its “display,” i.e. its location and orientation.

1)   Orientation of the building and internal structure- the main entrance and portico to the building faces away from the law school. Moreover, the main staircase resides not in the tower but in a separate wing. Both of these facts could easily have constructed differently. The tower, with pride of place in its prominent position on the exterior, could have had a matching level of importance on the inside. Likewise, it is not entirely clear today why the grand entrance portico faces a direction that is so divorced from the overall law school environs. That being said, such environs were not the same at the time of Austin’s construction. In fact, the focal point of campus was and to some extent still does reside much to the South. At the same time, however, this revisionary and restorative impulse did in fact get realized in the restoration of the building’s interior and in the rear glass-covered entrance stairway, which destroys the work’s original symmetry on the rear façade. A perhaps more interesting change that Richardson could have accomplished would be to place the main chamber of the building, the Ames courtroom, on the first rather than the second floor.

2)   Location of the building- with the focus of campus so far to the south, why was Austin located outside the Yard? Surely, space existed in the Yard as of 1880 that could have been purposed for Austin. As I wrote in a previous post, it is possible that the University fathers felt placing Austin in its own context would allow for the expansion of a truly separate law school. On the other hand, however, this line of analysis may simply be distorted by our hindsight recognition of the law school’s meteoric rise in the decades that followed Austin’s completion. Regardless of intention, Richardson and his benefactor’s choice of siting for Austin have irrevocably shaped the building’s history and interaction with its surroundings.

           

7. Related Works

#7: Related Works

Three works that are worth examination in relation to Austin Hall are H.H. Richardson’s Sever Hall (Cambridge, MA), Trinity Church (Boston, MA), and New York State Asylum (Buffalo, NY). The first is pertinent due to its status as the other Richardson-designed classroom building on Harvard University’s campus. The second is perhaps Richardson’s most noted work, at least in the Boston area. Finally, the third building represents Richardson’s largest project, completed in collaboration with renowned architect and sometime Richardson collaborator Frederick Law Olmstead.

Sever Hall

Dates of Construction: 1878-1880
Architect: H.H. Richardson (1838-1886)
Location: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
Medium: Brick
Style/period: Romanesque Revival (Richardsonian Romanesque)
Dimensions:176 X 74 X 80

            Sever Hall, as one of Harvard College’s classroom buildings (as opposed to the Law school), casts a far less imposing profile on its surrounding quadrangles and installations. It was intended as way for the college to expand its classroom space and was built with a gift from Anne Sever in memoriam of her husband. Possessing less distinct turrets and a smaller entry portico than Austin Hall, Sever could be seen as less characteristically Richardsonian Romanesque. Indeed, the symmetry and regularity of the windows as well as the uniformity of brick coloring allow Sever Hall to recede into near anonymity amongst its Georgian peers, whereas Austin marks a clear break from the traditions of its neighbors. This divergence– the lack of Sever’s distinctness from its neighbors contrasted with Austin’s uniqueness– perhaps reflects the retrospective contexts of their construction, with Austin being the first of its kind and Sever being molded to fit an already existent set of structures. At the same time, its relative lack of ornament and decided monochromatic facade allow it to stand out amongst its fellow Richardson-designed peers, perhaps explaining why it has been named a National Historic Landmark. 

Trinity Church

Dates of Construction: 1872-1877
Architect: H.H. Richardson (1838-1886)
Location: Boston, MA
Medium: Longmeadow Sandstone, Clay, Glass
Style/period: Romanesque Revival (Richardsonian Romanesque)
Dimensions: 211 feet tall.

            While not fully complete until after his death, Trinity Church marks what is probably Richardson’s best-known achievement. Though purposed as a church and not a building of secular education like Austin, Trinity still retains some of the key elements of Richardson’s trademark approach: Longmeadow sandstone and granite, an impressive tower, large porticos, and elaborate, asymmetrical windows. Additionally, the building bears aspects that are modeled after foreign churches, particularly in France and Italy, reflecting Richardson’s training and influence obtained from abroad. Specifically, the Romanesque churches of St. Trophime, France and the Cathedral of Salamanca were key sources. Finally, it should be noted how Trinity’s surrounding buildings remind the viewer both of Richardson’s profound influence on future American architecture (seen in the Boston Public Library, a product of his former assistant) and then how much progress has been made since his day (observed in IM Pei’s Copley Plaza).

New York State Asylum

Dates of Construction: 1870
Architect: H.H. Richardson (1838-1886)
Location: Buffalo, NY
Medium: Brick and Sandstone
Style/period: Romanesque Revival (Richardsonian Romanesque)
Dimensions: Unknown

Constructed complete with 59 acres of grounds to house humanely the State's growing mental health patient population, the Asylum entailed numerous administrative and treatment buildings.  In addition to size, the New York State Asylum is likewise noteworthy for Richardson’s not being the only architect as well as the firm influence of French elements. The fact that it was a team effort means that many of its elements are less distinctly Richardsonian. Large entry porticos are still evident, as is impressive, overbearing fenestration, but the overall shape of the building is much more boxy, without the rounded quality of its outline that is observable in both of Richardson’s Harvard building. Curiously, though, despite the Asylum lack of many of Richardson’s hallmark characteristics, it is still attached to Richardson’s name, perhaps revealing just how important the mere mention of the architect’s name is to the building’s status.

             

Post 6: Historical Context

Post 6: Historical Context

Two aspects of nineteenth-century American history shaped H.H. Richardson's development and deeds as an architect and so are relevant to Austin Hall. For one, Richardson’s family circumstances and studies were heavily influenced by cultural changes taking place before, during, and succeeding the American Civil War. Additionally, the progression of the architect’s unique stylistic contributions was shaped in large part by the overall theme of the United States’ changing relationship with the Old World– both culturally and politically.

            Richardson was born into a class of wealthy antebellum Southern planter elite, a status that conferred upon him opportunities unknown to most Americans at the time. From this social status, he developed his talents through advanced education and architectural training abroad, and was a trailblazer in terms of being an American studying Architecture in Europe. The American Civil War changed this opportunity, but also irrevocably influenced the path that both the nation's economic climate and the rest of his life would take. The War reduced his family’s position and standing, forcing Richardson’s withdrawal from architectural training. This same force was responsible for making the North the center of commerce and industry and the South one the nation's poorest regions (even up through the present). At the same time, Richardson felt reluctant to return to his life and family in the South. In part due to Harvard being his alma mater, he chose to settle in the northeast. From an office in New York, Richardson presided over an architectural firm perfectly positioned take advantage of the postwar growth and industrialization of the economy and construction business. Such a climate enabled his later experimentation with a new style, Richardsonian Romanesque.

            For this new style, Richardson would draw upon both foreign and ancient elements to shape works designed to project wealth and power. Such a choice reflected the feeling of the upper echelon of Victorian American society that anything old and European was somewhere better, more refined, and reflected sophistication. Such sentiments in fact paralleled the state of the American scholarly and higher education apparatus. Just like Richardson, many Americans who could afford it would often secured their higher education in Europe, since it was not until World War II that American Universities unequivocally attained pride of place in the academic community. As a result, Austin Hall’s representations of European ideals reflected the central project of the premier American universities of Richardson’s time: Europeanization, or playing catch-up with the respected centers of learning in the UK, Germany, France, and Italy. And that goal was part of what drove Harvard towards expansion in the late 19^th Century, beyond just the same industrializing influences that enabled Richardson’s numerous structures. To be sure, just as this new generation in America would need new and grand buildings, many more Americans would also need to learn in the European model without ever leaving home.

            Ultimately, Richardson’s contributions can be seen as part of an era that attempted to replicate the opulence of Europe in the United States. Such an effort took the form of education and architectural expansion that would bring many of the successes of Europe to the States, but not without significant modification and variation– experimentation that would attain fame in its own right, such as in the case of H.H. Richardson’s architectural masterpieces.

References:

- Hitchcock, Henry Russell. The Architecture of H.H. Richardson and His Times. Hamden, CT: Archon Books, 1961.

-http://www.massmoments.org/moment.cfm?mid=282
-Background knowledge learned in Niall Ferguson’s Harvard Course Western Ascendancy

            

#5: Questions and Print Sources

Key Questions-

1.     How much of a say did Austin Hall’s commissioners (i.e. Harvard Law School) have a say in the aesthetic form of the building? In other words, to what extent did function and purpose dictate what Richardson’s designs were?

2.     What was Richardson’s own impression of Austin in the context of his other works? Was he proud of the job he did?

3.     What did the landscape surrounding Austin look like at the time of construction?

4.     Can we find any indication as to why the tower-like feature on the façade of Austin faces away from the rest of what is now the Law School campus?

5.     What were the trends in Richardson’s work that are evident in features of Austin (i.e. what sorts of patterns can we see as epitomized in Austin?)?

Key Sources-

1.     H.H. Richardson: the architect, his peers, and their era

2.     H.H. Richardson’s youth: some unpublished documents.

3.     H.H. Richardson, complete architectural works

4.     Austin Hall after a century

5.     Austin Hall: fund for restoration and preservation

6.     Austin Hall feasibility study the second century

7.     Austin Hall graphic: connecting stairs to tunnel

8.     Graphics and initial plans from Richardson and Shepley, Bulfinch, Richardson, and Abbott. At least ten of these exist.

Primary Source-derived Historical Context

Post # 4: Primary Source-derived Historical Context

10/14/12

An examination of two news articles– one a Washington Post obituary eulogizing architect H.H. Richardson upon his death in 1886 and the other a New York Times account of a Law School Association meeting that was part of Harvard’s 250^th anniversary celebration– reveals just how critical a role Austin Hall played in this nation’s architectural and legal history. Moreover, what perhaps comes as a surprise is that journalists at the time were already aware of the lasting legacy of the events that they had witnessed. Such precious insight speaks to the immensity of the importance of the buildings Richardson created. It also reminded me that the effect of restoration of Austin to the point that it resembles what must have been its appearance post construction is that I feel connected to this celebration in experiencing Austin- a connection whose specifics I now understand. To think that the luminaries of the 1880s were on hand before this very building is a reminder of the building's interaction with its environment that is more extensive than meets the eye. I now have difficulty look at Austin without immediately recalling its History in my mind.

            Richardson’s “pupils may be found among the rising men of his profession almost everywhere in America,” opined the Post, “his name will always be inseparably associated with the architectural development of art in America.” This widely circulated statement can only be read as reflecting the near-universal spirit of common amity towards Richardson’s achievements. The fact that his “creations grace and dignify Washington among other principal cities of the Republic” was not the only thing to render Richardson so notable. The Post argues that it was his ability to achieve such widespread acclaim precisely by channeling foreign architecture to create an entirely new style that makes him so remarkable. It is this context– that of a public awareness that this genius in life would retain or even grow in meaning after death–  in which Austin Hall must be considered. As a late life creation for Richardson, the building could not disappoint such high expectations and yet also had to prove to be something that its user, Harvard, could be proud of as a symbol of its nascent law school.

            The meeting described by the Times reflects Austin Hall’s near immediate status as a source of pride for Harvard. It was a setting in which the University and Law School sought fit to host numerous luminaries of the day, including Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. As a centerpiece of the celebration of the University’s past two centuries and a half, the building, much like its architect, recalled a tradition in order to look towards the future. It should be noted, however, that the principal portion of the day’s festivities were relocated to Sander’s Theatre, probably out of space considerations but perhaps also signaling that the building, as an innovation, was too young to be the backdrop for the main event of the day. Something about an event commemorating the founding of the oldest higher education institution in America demanded a building that was not quite so new; establishments of that time would seem to prefer celebrating their heritage by looking backward rather than forward. In spite of this reality, this article shows Austin Hall’s role in the development of the Law School as a separate entity in American education.

            Though we now know that Austin Hall represents some of the best of Richardson’s contributions to architectural traditions in this country as well as the development of the educational system, it is reassuring to know that this reading is not just the bias of hindsight. Richardson’s contemporaries felt so too, making his work, as embodied in Austin Hall, all the more special.

References

"An American Architect." The Washington Post (1877-1922), Apr 30, 1886. http://search.proquest.com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/docview/138056241?accountid=11311; http://sfx.hul.harvard.edu/hvd?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&genre=article&sid=ProQ:ProQ%3Ahnpwashingtonpost&atitle=An+American+Architect.&title=The+Washington+Post+%281877-1922%29&issn=&date=1886-04-30&volume=&issue=&spage=2&au=&isbn=&jtitle=The+Washington+Post+%281877-1922%29&btitle=.

"Harvard's Celebration." New York Times (1857-1922), Nov 06, 1886. http://search.proquest.com.ezp-
       prod1.hul.harvard.edu/docview/94355820?accountid=11311; http://sfx.hul.harvard.edu         /hvd?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&genre=article&sid=ProQ:ProQ%3Ahnpnewyorktimes&atitle=HARVARD%27S+CELEBRATION%3A+INAUGURATED+BY+THE+LAW+SCHOOL+ASSOCIATION.+AN+ELOQUENT+ADDRESS+BY+OLIVER+WENDELL+HOLMES%2C+JR.%2C+A+BUSINESS+MEETING%2C+AND+A+BANQUET.&title=New+York+Times+%281857-1922%29&issn=&date=1886-11-06&volume=&issue=&spage=3&au=&isbn=&jtitle=New+York+Times+%281857-1922%29&btitle

3. Architectural Context

Post #3: Architectural Context

10/7/12

Though built near the end of H.H. Richardson’s life and career, Austin Hall came about at the beginning of a paradigm-shifting American architectural movement. This narrative places Austin Hall in a context of tremendous influence. Emblematic of what would come to be known as Richardsonian Romanesque, and as part of the greater Romanesque Revival that occurred in Victorian era North America, Austin Hall is an example of a style that drew upon the way buildings were constructed in the past to alter how they would be built for generations to come.

            This style was based proximally upon Richardson’s Beaux Arts training and more distantly upon French and Spanish elements of the 11^th century, particularly the Romanesque that style preceded the great Gothic cathedrals and churches of western and northern European cities. Richardson’s channeling of these influences resulted in a pattern of work that gave Austin Hall and its sister structures overbearing stone facades, replete with smooth, circular arches, vaulting ceilings, and exterior towers- all hallmark characteristics of the French and Spanish works that had influenced him. As such, it is these characteristics of Austin Hall that automatically render it reminiscent of Richardsonian Romanesque. Though perhaps less well known than its relative in Boston, Trinity Church, the Buffalo Psychiatric Center, and the American Museum of Natural History in New York City, Austin Hall nonetheless bears all the same hallmarks as its peers.

            Beyond great stone arches and towers, all of Austin Hall’s prominent features can be seen as exemplifying a style that would come to influence American architects such as Frank Lloyd Wright, both in municipal/ecclesiastical structures and private homes. The deepness of window settings and overhangs to protect recessed door openings as well as monochromatic but two-tone stone works and grouped windows help to indicate that Austin is about as typical of Richardsonian Romanesque as a building can get.

            Though travel and subsequent exposure to European traditions certainly influenced Richardson’s channeling of Romanesque adaptation– many of the most popular public buildings of the time had come to epitomize Romanesque Revival– two facets of Austin Hall reveal exactly what made his style decidedly Richardsonian. As art historian John Wilmerding recently wrote, Richardson often took into account Labrouste’s guidance “that the function and nature of a building ‘might be grasped by a glance at its exterior.’” Certainly, Austin Hall matches this wisdom. As discussed in a previous post, the simultaneous ornate and imposing qualities of the building’s façade belie its heady purpose. Likewise, its form that is decidedly different from surrounding buildings to the south in the undergraduate campus help the viewer to make the transition from buildings that are purposed for the college and those that are devoted to the Law School.

Such a contrast also matches the difference in the land immediately facing each side. On the dark side is the moist, soft earthwork of pine needles and sod adjacent to the Langdell Library. On the light side, a non-descript parking lot and an alabaster Littauer Center accentuate this barren quality. Even without regard to its history, the Hall is sharply distinct from the law school buildings and quadrangle it both faces and guards. The viewer, if approaching from the South, sees Austin as perhaps the first representative of the shift away from the modern/Georgian mixture that embodies Harvard yard and the faculty of arts and sciences. While faintly resembling its Richardson-designed sibling to the southeast, Sever Hall, Austin Hall denotes a clean break with the architectural traditions expressed to its immediate South. And yet, it is the desert through which one enters this structure, further suggesting that Austin Hall has become a guardian of sorts for itself and its siblings of the law school, as if to welcome the viewer to a distinct locale. The elaborate portico add to this character, especially given their shading effect. Once up the stairs and under their protection, the viewer becomes immediately insulated from the parking lot wasteland. Of course, being the first building expressly purposed for the Law School, Richardson likely did not have this quality in mind in his original design. It is a feature that his work has acquired over time, yet it is no less significant, given the structures (or lack thereof) that have arisen around it.

            The second of Wilmerding’s remarks– made primarily in reference to Richardson’s public library project in North Easton, MA– is also applicable to Austin Hall. Though his Beaux Arts training dictates a certain symmetry and adherence to the regular patterns of classical geometry, Richardson embellished this repetition with some personalized characteristics, namely in coloration, unique statue figures, and in lack of radial, axial, or longitudinal symmetry. Perhaps it is this personalization– this adaptation of a building’s façade in a way that gives it the viewer a feeling for its uniqueness and a sense of insight into its purpose– that rendered Romanesque Revival so influential upon the work of future generations of American architects.

References:

http://www.bc.edu/bc_org/avp/cas/fnart/fa267/hhr.html

http://www.buffaloah.com/a/archsty/rom/index.html#rr

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443884104577647754028760674.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

Post 2: Artistic Processes

Post # 2: The Creation of Austin Hall

            Austin Hall was designed by American architect Henry Hobson (H.H.) Richardson in 1881, though it did not open for Law School Classes until 1883, with construction officially completed in 1884. As the first building specifically commissioned for sole use by the Harvard Law School, its interior warrens are replete with administrative office space as well as the Ames Courtroom, a large space with wooden beams and a fireplace that hearken back to its day when it housed the school’s library rather than the moot court. The frontal inscription from Exodus, "And thou Shalt teach them ordinances and laws and shalt show them the way wherein they must walk and the work they must do" also reflect the building’s status as the first law school building.

            Austin was one of the last works Richardson completed prior to his death in 1886. It followed a traditional “Richardsonian Romanesque” style, even though it is likely that his three closest, young assistants carried out some of the logistical work for him, given his deteriorating health late in life. In fact, these three formed the firm, Shepley, Rutan and Coolidge, which would carry out many of Richardson’s plans after his death, and thus posthumously broaden his legacy.

            Prior to construction and even selecting its alumnus Richardson as the architect, however, the University needed a benefactor and a location. The former arrived in the form of Edward Austin, the structure's namesake. Dean of the Law School Langdell then selected the site, with an emphasis on developing a building that would facilitate large lecture meetings, in support of his "case method." For such an interior and for the design , Langdell and the University fathers selected acclaimed H.H. Richardson, due to his credentials as the most prominent New England architect at the time as well as his connections to the University as a Harvard alumnus and principal designer of the freshly-built Sever Hall.

           Following the design and planning phase, it was not Richardson and his assistants who oversaw the placement and erection of thousands of tons of Ohio and Longmeadow sandstone. Rather, the Norcross brothers, James and O.W., with the latter taking the lead, oversaw the actual execution of Richardson's plans. Richardson had relied upon these two individuals heavily in the past for this work role in the implementation of virtually all of his designs. Though their relationship with Richardson was the primary basis for their wide appeal, they would develop relationships with many of his protege's firms after his death, such that the actual physical construction of nearly all Richardsonian Romanesque structures following his death was left up to the Norcross Brothers.

         Integral to the implementation process whose completion the chief builder oversaw were the following specialized workers, whose efforts proceeded in roughly the order they are listed:

-Surveyors

-Structural engineers

-Stonemasons

-Roofers

-Plumbers
-Glassmakers

References:

James F. O' Gorman (1973). "O.W. Norcross, Richardson's 'Master Builder': A Preliminary Report"
http://www.law.harvard.edu/about/nwc/legacy_history.htm

http://www.law.harvard.edu/about/administration/facilities/buildings/austin.html

http://eng.archinform.net/arch/1425.htm

http://www.bluffton.edu/~sullivanm/harvrich/harvrich.html

http://www.flickr.com/photos/onasill/7263476022/lightbox/ (Picture)

Austin Hall
Initial Visual Analysis
23 September 2012


Austin Hall, designed by American architect H.H. Richardson and built from 1881 to 1884 as the first structure expressly designed for the Harvard Law School, is full of contrasts. The first of these is the divergence that exists between the four facades: the front is welcoming and impressive, complete with its portico and tower, while the rear is hard to fully grasp and is symmetrical yet lacking in coherent structure; parts fly off in all direction. The two side facades are boring and barren, without windows or any ornament save for the irregularity of stone. While the front is fairly flat, the back  has a three-pronged appearance that more voluminous, does not impress as readly as the sun-splotched front. These two principal facades line up almost exactly with cardinal North and South. Its south face, through which entry is gained, is then of course always awash with light during daytime hours, even on the dreariest February day. The north, more irregularly designed face, remains darkened at all times. The effect is lunar; on the light side, one encounters the forest primeval and on the dark side, a desert from which there is no escaping a bleached-out existence.

Another readily apparent visual contradiction is that between what first meets the eye about the building and the appearance that the viewer eventually realizes the building actually has. Two examples of this dichotomy are in the shape of each level and in the number of segments or wings the building would appear to have from its exterior. With regard to the former, the initial observation is of non-linear, curved geometry– all the aspects that are so central to rendering the building Romanesque revival. In fact, the more one inspects the facades, the more one realizes that many of them are linear in appearance, with regular lines and edges as expected, particularly in the upper floors. With regard to the latter example, the building appears monolithic at first, especially from the perspective of the parking lot. In reality, four distinct segments are present. Like so many of the contradictions about Austin Hall, it is yet another that the viewer can realize only by undertaking careful consideration of the building as art, and not just as a structure that houses a purpose. Chief among these are the ornate carvings of the portico facade, just under the bands of pink Longmeadow sandstone.

The interior (see floorplan below right) eventually recapitulates the elaborate decoration of the facade, but not before another contradiction emerges- that between the impressive qualities of the exterior and the just-another-old-building feeling the visitor first gets upon reaching Austin's dark, carpeted foyer. The first floor is a series of winding hallways with a staircase on either wing and numerous classrooms emanating outward when least expected. Upon reaching the second floor, all of the cramped offices and hallways seem to be in the service of framing the real prize of Austin Hall- the massive Ames Courtroom, built to facilitate Dean Langdell's new style of teaching by case method to large lecture of indivduals.

A final contradiction is Austin's visual relationship between its motivation and actual appearance. As a relic of the late Victorian period when universities continued to broaden their focus away from divinity-related studies, Austin appears decidedly church-like in its Romanesque Revival appearance, with ornate semi-cylindrical towers protruding from its façade. Even without regard to its history, the Hall is meant to be sharply distinct from the law school buildings and quadrangle it both faces and guards. The viewer, if approaching from the South, sees Austin as perhaps the first representative of the shift away from the modern/Georgian mixture that embodies Harvard yard and the faculty of arts and sciences. While faintly resembling its Richardson-designed sibling to the southeast, Sever Hall, Austin Hall denotes a clean break with the architectural traditions expressed to its immediate South.

Initial Information- Austin Hall

Name: Austin Hall
Dates of Construction: 1882-1884
Architect: H.H. Richardson (1838-1886)
Location: Harvard University, Cambridge, MA
Medium: Longmeadow and Ohio sandstone exterior
Style/period: Romanesque Revival
Dimensions: 116 ft. frontage, 48 foot depth, 80 X 55 feet in the rear. 50 X 48 Foot wings.