Sticks and Stones: A Study of American Architecture and Civilization — John Shaqi
Sticks and Stones: A Study of American Architecture and CivilizationMumford, Lewis
History
Sticks and Stones: A Study of American Architecture and Civilization
Mumford, Lewis
Architecture -- United States
If the level of architecture was low in the country, it touched the
bottom of the abyss in the city. As early as 1835 the multiple-family
tenement had been introduced in New York as a means of producing
congestion, raising the ground-rents, and satisfying in the worst
possible way the need of the new immigrants for housing. The conditions
of life in these tenements were infinitely lower than they had been
in the most primitive farmhouse of the colonial period; their lack of
light, lack of water, lack of sanitary facilities, and lack of privacy,
created an admirable milieu for the propagation of vice and disease,
and their existence in a period which was boasting loudly of the
advance of science and industrialism shows, to say the least, how the
myths which inspired the age stood between the eye and reality, and
obscured the actual state of the modern industrial community.
To the disgrace of the architectural profession in America, the
worst features of tenement-house construction were standardized in
the so-called dumb-bell tenement which won the first prize in the
model tenement-house competition of 1879; and the tenements which
were designed after this pattern in the succeeding years combined a
maximum lack of privacy with a minimum of light and air. The gridiron
street-design, the narrow frontage, the deep lot, all conspired to make
good housing difficult in the larger cities: within this framework
good house-design, indeed, still is difficult. The dumb-bell tenement
of the Gilded Age, however, raised bad housing into an art; and the
acquisition of this art in its later developments is now one of the
stigmata of “progress” in a modern American city. I say this without
irony; the matter is too grave for jest.
During these same ’seventies, the benefits of poor housing were
extended in New York to those with money enough to afford something
better: the Paris flat was introduced. The legitimate excuse for the
small apartment was the difficulty of obtaining household service,
and the futility of keeping up large houses for small families: this,
however, had nothing to do with the actual form that the apartment
took, for, apart from the desire for congestion-rents, it is as easy to
build apartments for two families as for twenty. The flat is a genuine
convenience for the well-to-do visitor to a city; it gives him the
atmosphere of a home without many of its major complications, and those
who got the taste for this life in Paris were not altogether absurd in
desiring to enjoy the same benefits in New York. Unfortunately, what
suits a visitor does not necessarily meet the demands of a permanent
resident: one may tolerate a blank wall for a week or a month without
being depressed, particularly since a good part of a visitor’s time
is spent outside his home; but to live year after year facing a blank
wall or an equally-frowning façade opposite is to be condemned to the
environment of a penitentiary.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account