Columbia University Libraries Digital Collections: The Real Estate Record

Real estate record and builders' guide: v. 45, no. 1161: June 14, 1890

Text version:

June 14, 1890 Record and Guide. 879 recent declaration that Americans are the most practical people on earth is jnstifled. The Harlem River Improvement is picayune compared with fche undertaking at Manchester, but ifc has been a longer fcime under construction and is farther from completion than the Manchester canal. Think, fcoo, bow small and simple, com¬ paratively speaking, is the improvement of our harbors and the building of docks that will attract ratber thau repel commerce. Americans would do well to reflect a little more on foreign models and a little less on their own greatness. The New World Building. The new World building bas grown to be one of the most con¬ spicuous objects down town. It shares with its neighbors, fche Tribune building and the Times building, the advantage of a visi¬ bility that is not secured in the same degree for any other edifice below Union square as for fchose that front the City Hall Park. But the size and shape of the World building make it stand out even more strikingly tban the other tall structures that border Printing House square. The site affords an area quite ample for even an eight-story building, being about 100 feet on Park row by about 125 on Frankfort sfcreet. But a thirteen-story building is a \, --^Ifel HP > TKB NEW WORLD BUILDING. different matter. It would be difficult to prevent such a buildiug from looking stilted, even if it sfcopped.with the thirteenth story and were broadened aud kept down by every device at the com- maad of the architect. Here, however, there bave been uo pains at all taken to keep the building down, or afc any rate they have not been successful, and its height is increased by fche super-addi¬ tion of a dome of two apparent stories in addition to the cupola. Frankfort sfcreet is so narrow that it is impossible to get a compre¬ hensive view of the flank of the building, which is so violently pre- shortened from any point on the ground level as to consist appar¬ ently of a yellow wall with so many ranges of openings as to be confused and confusing in effect. Architecturally the building consists of the Park row front and the angle, which is rather peculiarly treated. It is this part alone thafc can be seen from a distance great enough to be taken in as a whole. Architecture has this difference from any art the products of which are not useful, that it has to be judged according to condi¬ tions that may or may not be of fche artist's own making. Evident misfortunes of site, of size or of material, or evident concessions to utility at the expense of the architecture can be recognized and allowed for. But in a commercial building for a private owner wbo can tell whether the obstacles to architectural success come from alterations of the architect or freaks of the client? Mr. Post is entitled to every presumption, seeing not merely tbat he is a very popular architect,'but, what is more to the purpose, that in thoughtfulness and thoroughness his recent work shows a steady advance on what preceded it. It is not betraying anybody's secret to say that tbe dome is the obstacle fco the architectural success of tbe World building. That fact "jumps to the eyes," as the French have it, and it is fair to suppose that the client has im¬ posed it. Now a dome may be precisely the noblest culmination possible to a building, but that depends both upon the building and upou the dome. In order to crown an edifice effectively the dome must be provided for in fche first place by a sufficient square or polygmal substructure of its own, and in the second place the whole building must form a spreading and expansive substructure for it. There must be under a dome a heavy mass of wbich alti¬ tude is not the leading dimension. It is nofc necessary jusfc now to search into the reasons for this. The fact will be admitted by all architects aud amateurs who will recall the successful domes of the world from Agra to Washington, No architect of any sensitiveness ever gave a domical termination to a tower, and a building as tall as the new World building, even wifch its considerable area, is virtually a tower. It might be left four square with a frowning cornice, it might be crowned with a steep roof, but it cannot with¬ out incongi-uity be fitted with a dome. Nevertheless, if we assume the union of the dome with a build¬ ing of these dimensions to be part of the architect's problem, there ought to be some interest in seeing how he has tried to solve it. In the World building there is not much evidence even of attempt at reconciliation or transition between the mass and lines of the build¬ ing and the mass and lines of the dome. ,We have all heard of the carpenter who after a day's work upon a difficult job declared that fchere was nothing to do but " to cuss the thing aud quit it." One seems to detect in the treatment of the World building evidence of this execration and abandonment. Obviously enough the thing to do, under the afflicting conditions imposed upou the designer, was to keep the building as low and as broad as might be, fco dissemble to the utmost its tower-like proportions and to provide a base for the dome tbat should detach it and serve as a middle term between it and the building. Neither of tbese things bave been done, at least neither of them has been effectually done. There are no continuous horizontal lines below the fifth story, and although each diviaion is marked with a strong string cour.se the vertical lines predominate throughout. The trite device of enhancing the scale of the parts by grouping two real stories in one apparent story lessens the number of horizontal lines available, and the vertical lines are strongly emphasized by the projection of the central part of the Park row frout. The purpose of the central pavilion is to sustain a pediment that serves as a base to the dome, but in every point of view the result is unfortunate. It makes the building spindle still more and it continues the Hne of the dome to the ground, which is a thing especially to be avoided. Moreover, the ornament of the front is concentrated on the central paviUon, the sides being plainly treated, and this gives the architecture the effect of being a mere veneer that could be removed without impairing the stability of the building on which it has been stuck. This effect is increased by the appearance of a strip of yellow brickwork outside of aud behind the rugged brown stone that seems to fortify the north corner. An attempt is made to detach the dome and give it a base by the treatment of the south corner wbich is rounded, with a single large opening in each stage and is stopped above the eleventh atory leaving a re-entrant angle above. But this ia too partial to serve its purpose. The dome remains simply dropped ou a towering mass, and is as if fche build¬ ing had no neck. One cannot get any point of view from wbich the building loses this high-shouldered look, which presents to it more of a deformity as it would be in the case of a human being. A building cannot be so ugly aud incongruous in maas and be redeemed by any grace of detail, but in fact tbe detail is not grace¬ ful. Tbe best thing in the building is fche half-story above the main entrance, with doubled square-headed openings and termini between, but the detail even of this is rather crude and reckless. There is a certain swagger in the huge entrance, and a certain sumptuosity in the superimposed and polished columns of the pavilion. But for thoughtful and refiued design, one looks everywhere in vain, and the critic fiuds himself forced to follow the example of the designer—to "cuss the thing and quit it." In another column will be found a letter upon immigi-ation. Underneath it we have placed a few remarks that seem to be called for specially, but there are a few other facts which the reader should not lose sight of. The abnormal representation of foreign born in dur criminal and dependent clasaea furnishts strong evidence of the undesirable character of the immigration of later years. In the State of New York the report of the Secretiiry of State for 1887 shows thafc there were in tbe county poor-houses 9,988 foreign born paupers and 9,173 native paupers, and in the city alms-houses there were 34,167 foreign born and 18,001 native paupers—a total of 43,455 foreign bom paupers against 27,173 native born, or about 160 of tbe former fco 100 of the latter, while the proportion of foreign bom to native inhabitants in the State in 1880 was as 31 2-10 to 100. Inquiry into emigration from foreign ports discloses facts which explain, in a measure afc least, the cause