Talk:Louis Sullivan

Critic?
Just wondering, it says that he's a critic of the Chicago style but on the Chicago style page its says he is a major member, and even uses a picture of one of his buildings as an example.

I took out many of the pictures in the article because they wasn't enough text to be able to fit them in properly. Also, if anyone knows how to place pictures on the left side while still using bullets (they always show up over or underneath the picture) please alternate the last picture to the other side. Thanks. --TheGrza 06:59, Oct 14, 2004 (UTC)
 * Fixed it. --TheGrza 00:11, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

Does someone have refrences about Sullivan's last years? I have heard that Wright "stole" all the Sullivan clients and that this, along with personal problems, lead Sullivan to a personal crisis and an alcohol dependency. I have also been told that Sullivan spent the last ten years of his life homeless in Chicago. --J4vier 03:52, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

1) That is not a picture of Louis Sullivan at the head of the page.

2)"I have heard that Wright "stole" all the Sullivan clients and that this, along with personal problems, lead Sullivan to a personal crisis and an alcohol dependency." Not true.  Sullivan split with his partner Adler, and that coupled with the Chicago boom being over led to a loss of work coming in.  In later years, Sullivan designed some splendid small banks through the Mid-West, and later spent time in the Chicago 'Cliff Dwellers' club competing his book 'A System of Architectural Ornament.'  I understand that Sullivan's last years were spent in his holiday home at Ocean Springs, Mississippi.

a "modest headstone"
is how Sullivan's marker is described. I just added a picture of it [in fact, two] and I'm wondering if it seems not so modest to anyone else? Compared to the Palmers and Fields and McCormicks maybe, but still. . . . . . . . . .......... ?? Carptrash 15:14, 26 November 2006 (UTC)


 * That description may be referring to Sullivan's original headstone, which is a simple stone laid flush with the ground. See the image at http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/3570/3864/320/GRACE6.jpg (web page http://urbsinhorto.blogspot.com/).  The large marker with the Sullivan-style ornamentation is a later addition. Kevin Forsyth 17:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Good point. Meanwhile . . . . . .. Carptrash 19:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I just removed this from the article.

 * "in fact, Adolf Loos, the author of the seminal manifesto "Ornament and Crime", had worked in Sullivan's office."

Here is why. First of all, "in fact" pretty much always is some version of "in my opinion." Secondly, the citation for including it is "Hughes" and here is what Hughes has to say.
 * The architect who launched the attack on decorated architecture was Adolf Loos (1870-1933), a Czech who lived in Vienna. Between 1893 and 1896, Loos worked for a time in Louis Sullivan’s office in Chicago.

At various other web site (sorry, didn't get addresses) I discovered:
 * "He (Loos) moved to the United States, and stayed for 3 years. Loos was very impressed by the architecture of Louis Sullivan, and the efficiency of buildings in the U.S."

and


 * ...and (Loos) then went to the United States, where he worked as a mason, a floor-layer, and a dishwasher. Loos was impressed by the efficiency of American architecture, and he admired the work of Louis Sullivan.

No mention of working for Sullivan.

Trombly, author of (in my opinion) the best biography of Sullivan, only says: "Adolph Loos, who had been inspired by Sullivan during his 1890s sojourn in America . . . ... "

Could Hughes have been mistaking Irving Gill, another of thew stripped down modernests, and who worked for Sullivan from 1891 to 1893 with Loos? Hines, in his book, Irving Gill:and the Architecture of Reform while discussing Loos' visit to America mentions that Loos visited Chicago where he "encountered the elemental geometry and organic ornamentation of Gill and Wright's mentor, Louis Sulllivan, at precisely the same time that the young Americans (Gill and Wright) were working in his office. " No mention of Loos actually working for Sullivan. So, anyway, I took it out and am interested if anyone else has opinions. Next comes the claim, "In his last years, Sullivan seemed willing to abandon ornament altogether in favor of honest massing." Carptrash 19:44, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Photo of Louis Sullivan
After wondering for a long time about the photo that has been used on this page, I found it on Britannica.com, and it states that it is "Louis Sullivan, detail of an oil painting by Frank A. Werner, 1919; in the collection of the Chicago Historical Society."

"Sullivan, Louis." Online Photograph. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 26 Oct. 2007 .

So that answers that question. I never knew he looked like that in his last years.

Marykeiran 21:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Louis Sullivan, Adler & Sullivan, Dankmar Adler
Shouldn't there be an article about Adler & Sullivan that addresses the work of the firm; and then separate biographical articles about Louis Sullivan and Dankmar Adler, each of which provides a complete biography along with information about their individual work when they were not partners? The Sullivan article as currently written tends to emphasize Sullivan alone, but isolation of Sullivan is artificial when Adler, Wright, Elmslie and others played significant roles and at times were certainly equal or more than equal contributors. Sullivan may have portrayed himself as a "lone genius," but his greatest success clearly occurred when he was part of a large firm. SeattleArch 17:08, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

In a book
'Louis spent most of his childhood learning about nature while on his grandparent’s farm. In the later years of his primary education, his experiences varied quite a bit.'

In 'Louis Sullivan' by Morrison, it says that Sullivan spent his summers at his grandparents but has to move back to Boston each September. Shall I change it? 94.168.41.206 (talk) 22:09, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Spelling of Sullivan's Middle Name
I remember attending a lecture on Sullivan a couple of years ago, in which the lecturer stated that, as a final indignity, his gravestone mis-spelled his middle name (i.e., Henri in place of Henry). I see that our article currently adopts the spelling from the gravestone -- Henri -- although the source that is footnoted adopts the apparently correct spelling of Henry. Does any user wish to object to a proposal to change the text's spelling to Henry? Nandt1 (talk) 13:19, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Independent sources (i.e., those not likely to be have been influenced by Wikipedia itself) clearly agree that Henry is the correct spelling, and I suggest we should fall in line with this. Nandt1 (talk) 16:50, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


 * It was, I believe, Oscar Wilde who said that the truth is seldom pure and never simple. In his autobiography Sullivan writes, "That settled it and they named him Louis Henri Sullivan.''  I suggest that we not rush off and make any rash changes, which you obviously are not inclined to do or you would not have posted here first.  Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 19:34, 9 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you: an informative contribution. This said, many published authorities and reference works have clearly come to the opposite conclusion.  It would be good to hear from additional voices on the arguments pro and con. Nandt1 (talk) 21:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

It does raise that old question, can we actually believe someone writing about themselves? Wikipedia often says "No." Of course, this is also a published source, so.... Carptrash (talk) 22:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

"Can we believe someone writing about themselves?" A case-by-case question, obviously, and I really have "no dog in this fight" -- merely the hope that we can get it right. I don't know when the Autobiography was written -- as opposed to published -- but we all know that LHS was a mess towards the end of his life. If the birth certificate said "Henry" I might be inclined to give it more weight than a late memoir, but mistakes are possible in either, and -- as I said -- I have no emotional stake in one answer or the other, and am merely a seeker after the facts! Nandt1 (talk) 02:08, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The autobiography was written just before he died, 1922 or so. Twombly, in the definitive biography of Sullivan (another way of saying "the one I have") states that his birth certificate got it wrong, that it says "Henry Louis Sullivan" but that he was always called "Louis Henry Sullivan." No "i"s in any case.  His maternal grandfather was named Henri, I suspect that late in his life he was drawn to that for some reason.  I am comfortable undoing my undo of your edit, I was just surprised to find what he, Sullivan, had written about it.  Carptrash (talk) 06:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this response, which manages to be both gracious and informative. I have, in turn, tried to incorporate a little of the nuance that you have supplied here into the article.  Nandt1 (talk) 19:28, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I learned early in life to be a gracious looser. Sort of a survival thing. Thanks for your good work. Carptrash (talk) 19:36, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * In response to a subsequent User's reversion of the name to Henri again, I have now added a footnote which draws on the above exchange for its treatment of the naming controversy. Nandt1 (talk) 11:50, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Wrong fotos
This foto is of Victor Horta - Belgian architect. The first one.



And on his site is foto of Louis Sullivan. Some body did completely salad of fotos of these two architects. Louis Sullivan built Wainwright Building too. Source - Book: 50 architects you should know. Very trustworthy.

And on this foto, on second one, is none of them.



--188.28.229.225 (talk) 16:19, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Later Career and Decline's Last Paragraph is biased and appears totally unsourced
"To experience Sullivan's built work is to experience the irresistible appeal of his incredible designs, the vertical bands on the Wainwright Building, the burst of welcoming Art Nouveau ironwork on the corner entrance of the Carson Pirie Scott store, the (lost) terra cotta griffins and porthole windows on the Union Trust building, the white angels of the Bayard Building. Except for some designs by his long time draftsman George Grant Elmslie, and the occasional tribute to Sullivan such as Schmidt, Garden & Martin's First National Bank in Pueblo, Colorado (built across the street from Adler and Sullivan's Pueblo Opera House), his style is unique. A visit to the preserved Chicago Stock Exchange trading floor, now at The Art Institute of Chicago, is proof of the immediate and visceral power of the ornament that he used so selectively. Original drawings and other archival materials from Sullivan are held by the Ryerson & Burnham Libraries in the Art Institute of Chicago and by the Drawings and Archives Department in the Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library at Columbia University. Fragments of Sullivan buildings are also held in many fine art and design museums around the world."

The portions in bold are what first caught my eye, but the paragraph as a whole isn't up to snuff. Even if the other statements were sourced the phrases in bold still need to go. Stating that something has irresistible appeal is incredibly biased. As is stating that the Art Nouveau ironwork is inherently welcoming.

The ideas about his legacy may fit more appropriately in their own section, if fleshed out and cited, or at least need to be made to fit better with its current section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.182.198.115 (talk) 18:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Sullivan and the steel highrise
Sullivan never wrote a "poem" in Lippincott's magazine. I have downloaded a pdf of the original Lippincott's article that Sullivan wrote for the March 1896 issue, and the text shown in this Wiki article as a "poem" exists in prose form, which is why I corrected it. I also checked the source [8] which is cited and that claims that Sullivan wrote a poem in Lippincott's; this citation is actually correct in that Higgins, Hannah B. (The Grid Book) does actually make this claim. Higgins's claim, however, is false, as can be easily verified by examining the original Lippincott's article, as I have done. I accessed it through the Cornell University library, but the pdf has restricted access for some reason. The transcription of the article from MIT which I added to the "external links" section also shows the section as prose, exactly as in the original Lippincott's article. Can you put my corrected text back after verifying that it is, in fact, correct and appropriate? Thanks!Nathan Horne (talk) 01:39, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * What you downloaded was a transcription of the article, not a facsimile, so it proves nothing about whether what Sullivan wrote was in poem-form or not. Because of that, what the reliable source says remains in the article. If you can find an actual facsimile or photocopy of the Lippincott's article, that would be proof that Higgins is incorrect, or was writing figuratively. BMK (talk) 01:46, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * OK, having found a facsimile of the original, it is not written in the form of a poem, even though the phraseology is extremely poem-like, so I have removed the reference to is as a poem, and the cite to Higgins, replacing it with a cite to the facsimile version on Google Books. BMK (talk) 01:59, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Louis Sullivan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091028152838/http://geocities.com/SoHo/1469/sullivan.html to http://richardnickelcommittee.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:07, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

"Form [ever] follows function"
The page presently (30 May 2017) states:

"Sullivan, however, attributed the concept to Marcus Vitruvius Pollio, the Roman architect, engineer, and author, who first asserted in his book, De architectura, that a structure must exhibit the three qualities of firmitas, utilitas, venustas – that is, it must be solid, useful, beautiful.

and refers to Autobiography of an Idea. Not only can I find no reference to Vitruvius in Autobiography, I have not yet found any place in any of Sullivan's works that makes the connection. Does someone have a reference? Autobiography instead actually speaks of the formula having been evolved by Sullivan "though long contemplation of living things." (Autobiography, p. 258 in Dover edition)

Vitruvius undoubtedly enunciated something similar, but where is the evidence that Sullivan ever attributed the idea to him?

Stephendcole (talk) 04:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Louis Sullivan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720182039/http://exhibits.slpl.org/steedman/data/Steedman240102106.asp?thread=240093347 to http://exhibits.slpl.org/steedman/data/Steedman240102106.asp?thread=240093347
 * Added tag to http://memory.loc.gov/pnp/habshaer/mo/mo0600/mo0668/data/mo0668.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.explorestlouis.travel/media/pressKit/historicCemeteries.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091213173019/http://www.tusculum.edu/tour/campus/tvirginia.html to http://www.tusculum.edu/tour/campus/tvirginia.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:55, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Louis Sullivan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131027121823/http://www.siue.edu/universitymuseum/virtualmuseum/Sullivan_Collection_in_Lovejoy_Library.shtml to http://www.siue.edu/universitymuseum/virtualmuseum/Sullivan_Collection_in_Lovejoy_Library.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:51, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Ayn Rand connection
While the connection to Ayn Rand may be important to students of The Fountainhead, the long section devoted to this on the Sullivan page seems out of place. The information would be more appropriately provided in the entry for the book. Any connection to Rand's writing is peripheral to Sullivan's cultural significance, meriting at most a mention, not a full section. Indeed Sullivan advocated for democracy in a fashion that would have been anathema to Rand. Giving her anti-democratic philosophy significant space on this page could confuse readers' understanding of his legacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.164.87.100 (talk) 00:15, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

"father of skyscrapers"
Some readers may interpret this to mean that Sullivan 'invented' the skyscraper, which as far as I'm aware he did not. How did he earn recognition as a 'father of skyscrapers'? Jonathan f1 (talk) 19:59, 26 May 2024 (UTC)