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.