User:JohnLobell/sandbox

= The Philadelphia School = The Philadelphia School was a movement in architecture, city planning, and landscape architecture from 1951 to 1965 centered around the Graduate School of Fine Arts (GSFA) at the University of Pennsylvania (UPenn) in Philadelphia Pennsylvania. The Philadelphia School was a unique convergence of city, practice, and education, all in renewal, under the leadership of Dean G. Holmes Perkins.

A note on names. The University of Pennsylvania is a private Ivy League research university in Philadelphia, PA. It is not to be confused with Pennsylvania State University, a public, state-related, land-grant research university with campuses and facilities throughout the state of Pennsylvania, which also has an architecture school. Both are often called “Penn.” Thus the use of “UPenn” here. During the period under discussion the architecture school at UPenn was known as the Graduate School of Fine Arts (“GSFA”). It later became the School of Design of the University of Pennsylvania (shortened to PennDesign), and in 2019 it was renamed the University of Pennsylvania Stuart Weitzman School of Design. It essentially comprised architecture, city and regional planning, and landscape architecture, with only some painting and sculpture. During the period under discussion and subsequently it added numerous urban related research initiatives.

During that time at the GSFA and in the architectural profession Louis Kahn was transforming modern architecture, Robert Venturi was pioneering post modernism, Romaldo Giurgola was applying continental philosophy to architectural theory, Robert Geddes was exploring social and psychological issues, Robert Le Ricolais was building experimental structures, August Komendant was pioneering pre-stressed, pre-cast and post tensioned concrete, Ian McHarg was questioning Western civilization and advancing urban and regional ecology, Herbert Gans was moving into Levittown, and Denise Scott Brown was bringing together European and American planning theory and discovering popular culture. And in the city of Philadelphia, Edmund Bacon was directing the most active city planning commission in the country.[i]

By the 1950s American architecture was dominated by the International Style (identified for the United States in 1932 by Henry-Russell Hitchcock and Philip Johnson in their Modern Architecture: International Exhibition at New York’s Museum of Modern Art and the accompanying book, The International Style) that was characterized by the glass and steel architecture of Mies van der Rohe and the white boxes of Le Corbusier. By the mid 1950s there was a feeling that this approach was inadequate. (The feeling was later expressed in a series of books on “the failure of modern architecture.”)[i] While the Philadelphia School was fully modern (even Venturi insisted that he was a modern, not a postmodern architect), the Philadelphia School was in large part a corrective to the limitations of the International Style and a furthering of thinking about modern architecture.

Philadelphia School architectural theory included a renewed interest in history, a strong commitment to urbanism and the urban context, engagement with cultural and social issues, looking at popular culture, and understanding and serving the building’s institution.[ii]

Philadelphia School buildings were varied, but were generally characterized by a clarity of construction, structure as a giver of order, expression of mechanical equipment (HVAC), a preference for masonry and concrete over steel, an emphasis on plan rather than section, and an interest in geometries.[iii]

Some key Philadelphia School buildings and projects include the Trenton Bath House, Trenton NJ, 1959 by Louis Kahn; the Richards Medical Research Laboratories, Philadelphia, PA, 1957–60, by Kahn; the Salk Institute, La Jolla, CA, 1962, by Kahn; the Pender Laboratories, Philadelphia, PA, 1958, by Geddes Brecher Qualls Cunningham; the Boston City Hall Competition Entry, 1962, by Romaldo Giurgola with Ehrman B. Mitchell and Thomas R. Vreeland, Jr.; and the Vanna Venturi House, Chestnut Hill, PA, by Venturi and Rauch, 1962.[iv]

The first outside recognition came in an article by Jan Rowan in the April 1961 issue of the magazine Progressive Architecture titled “Wanting to Be The Philadelphia School.”[v] It was followed by numerous publications. Philadelphia School architecture had a wide influence. We see Kahn’s strong forms in Philip Johnson’s 1972 addition to the Boston Public Library, and his articulation in the towers of I. M. Pei’s 1967 National Center for Atmospheric Research, among many other examples. Kahn’s exposed concrete and expression of construction both influenced and paralleled Brutalist architecture. Venturi’s use of historical (particularly classical) ornament can be seen in much postmodern architecture, including in the work of Robert A. M. Stern, Philip Johnson, Charles Moore, and Michael Graves among others. Influence also came from the fact that many GSFA graduates went on to teach as well as to practice.[vi]

1.1. Philadelphia
The Philadelphia School saw strong relationships between city of Philadelphia, the GSFA, and the architectural profession. Edmund Bacon, Director of the City Planning Commission, was part of the GSFA faculty; the dean of the GSFA, G. Holmes Perkins, was chairman of the City Planning Commission; several architects with practices in the city were teaching at the school and doing research and design projects for the Planning Commission; and most of the projects students did at the school were sited in the city. And the city, the school, and the profession were all undergoing renewal.

Before Europeans arrived, the Philadelphia area was home to the Lenape (Delaware) Indians. The first European settlers were Dutch, but in 1681 the Quaker leader William Penn received a charter from the English king to establish the colony of Pennsylvania, although he also bought land from the local Lenape to ensure peace. He established Philadelphia as its capital, laying it out with five squares, and although settlement was initially along the banks of the Delaware River, the plan was respected as the city expanded, and Penn’s five squares are still part of the city’s identity. [LOCATE ILLUS 2.1. NEAR HERE]

Philadelphia was the meeting place for the nation’s founders and became an industrial center and railroad hub in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. After World War II, populations and affluence in Philadelphia and other old northeastern and mid-western cities peaked and then declined. A series of federal programs provided funding and legal powers for various forms of urban renewal.

The end of the war found Philadelphia in decay, both physically and politically with elevated railroad tracks penetrating the center of the city. A group of young Philadelphia civic leaders began to meet, including politicians Joseph Clark and Richardson Dilworth; lawyers Wendell Phillips and Henry Sawyer; and architects Edmund Bacon, Oscar Stonorov, and Louis Kahn, to envision a better future for the city, including the ouster of Philadelphia’s corrupt machine politicians. In 1952, the reformers won, Joseph Clark became the reform mayor and the City Planning Commission was given a new role.

Today the attractiveness of Philadelphia’s Center City, Edmund Bacon’s creation, makes it one of our more livable cities, a tourist destination, and a desirable location for service industries. Its many universities, colleges, research institutions, and museums make it an educational center.

1.2. The University of Pennsylvania and the Graduate School of Fine Arts
The predecessor of UPenn was founded by Benjamin Franklin in the mid 1700s and in 1791 it became the University of Pennsylvania. In 1765 it founded America’s first medical school, the first of its many professional and graduate programs. In the 1870s it moved to its current location in West Philadelphia. Its Department of Architecture was established in 1890 and came to wide attention under dean Warren Laird (serving from 1891 to 1930) and Professor of Design, the Beaux-Arts master, Paul Philippe Cret (serving from 1903 to 1929). Today UPenn is ranked by US News among the top fifteen universities in the world.[i]

1.4. The architectural profession
During the period under discussion, Philadelphia also saw a renewal in the architectural profession. The city had had figures of architectural importance in the past: Frank Furness, Paul Philippe Cret, George Howe, Oscar Stonorov, and Vincent Kling, among many others.

But in the 1960s, the city blossomed with new offices, some of which were to become major forces in American architecture and some headed by architects teaching at the GSFA: Louis Kahn; Geddes Brecher Qualls Cunningham; Mitchell/Giurgola; Venturi and various partners; Wallace, McHarg, Roberts, and Todd; etc. These offices put into practice the theories being developed at the school.

2.1. Bacon’s approach
The physical renewal of Philadelphia began with the 1947 Better Philadelphia Exhibition in Gimbels department store created by Edmund Bacon, Oscar Stonorov, Robert Mitchell, and Louis Kahn. The exhibit was huge, filled with maps, models, films, and light shows and was publicized throughout the country.[ii] [iii]

Bacon, in his role as Executive Director of the City Planning Commission (from 1949 to 1970), had no power and only a tiny budget, so throughout his tenure, he used the power of ideas, including what he called “structuring the dialogue.” He retained architects to produce images of what could be and used those images to stimulate discussion. Thus projects would take on lives of their own, and some were competed years after they were initially proposed. [LOCATE ILLUS 2.2. NEAR HERE]

2.2. Penn Center

Main article: Penn Center, Philadelphia

Bacon’s first Center City project was Penn Center, a large area cleared when the Pennsylvania Railroad removed a section of tracks elevated on a massive stone structure designed by Frank Furness and known as the Chinese wall. Bacon initially hired Louis Kahn to develop images for the project, but they had a falling out and Bacon then retained Vincent Kling. The project aspired to be something like New York’s Rockefeller Center. Eventually, some uninspired office slabs were built. The Pennsylvania Railroad, not the City, owned the property, and the project provided Bacon with good training on how to persuade others.[i] [ii] [LOCATE ILLUS 2.4. NEAR HERE]

2.3. Market East

The area to the east of City Hall was dominated by Philadelphia’s department stores, which were closing as the affluent moved to the suburbs. Bacon believed that Philadelphia could compete with its suburbs as a desirable place to shop and hired Romaldo Giurgola to produce an image of a new kind of urban shopping mall that eventually became Market East, a multilevel shopping mall stretching along Market Street east of City Hall.[iii] [iv] In 1977 the Rouse Company opened Gallery at Market Street, which was initially highly successful, but shopping eventually declined.[v] [LOCATE ILLUS 2.5. NEAR HERE]

2.4. Society Hill

Main article: Society Hill

Philadelphia was initially settled in its southeast quadrant, an area known as Society Hill that by the 1940s was a decaying slum. Under federal, state, and city programs old houses were restored and William Zeckendorf’s firm Webb and Knapp created modern high-rise towers designed by I. M. Pei that harmonized with the old architecture. Society Hill is a huge success; it is one of the nation’s more desirable (and therefore expensive) urban residential neighborhoods. The narrow streets lined with brick Federal and Georgian style houses are charming, green walkways cut through blocks, and small squares frame Greek revival churches and public buildings.[vi] [vii] [LOCATE ILLUS 2.6. NEAR HERE]

2.5. Delaware Riverfront

The Delaware Riverfront was also in need of renewal. Bacon chose Robert Geddes to produce an image of what it could become. Geddes’s design included a tree-lined promenade and parking along the river bank, a boardwalk embarcadero and a tower at the end of Market Street marking the edge of the city.[viii] [ix] [LOCATE ILLUS 2.7. NEAR HERE]

3. The Graduate School of Fine Arts

3.1. Paul Philippe Cret

Main Article: Paul Philippe Cret

Paul Philippe Cret (October 23, 1876 – September 8, 1945) was a French-born Philadelphia architect and industrial designer educated at the École des Beaux-Arts. From 1903 to 1929 he taught a studio in the Department of Architecture at the University of Pennsylvania.

Cret was a charismatic teacher. His success at UPenn can be measured objectively, as New York’s Beaux-Arts Institute of Design sponsored competitions to which students in schools across the country submitted entries. During Cret’s tenure, UPenn students won numerous prizes. [LOCATE ILLUS 3.1. NEAR HERE]

The Philadelphia School approach was a rejection of the Beaux-Arts, but there was one holdover. The Beaux-Arts went beyond the use of Greek and Roman orders to also include a comprehensive approach to urbanism known as the City Beautiful Movement, focused on bringing modern sanitation, light, and air; vast parks; tree-lined boulevards; monumental buildings for cultural institutions; and grand railroad stations to American cities. The Philadelphia School’s comprehensive approach to urbanism owes much to the City Beautiful Movement and to its prime document, Daniel Burnham and Edward H. Bennett’s 1909 Plan of Chicago.

After Cret retired in 1929 the GSFA’s new dean, George Koyl (dean from 1932 to 1950), chose continue in the Beaux-Arts tradition despite the rise of modern architecture. (Frank Lloyd Wright’s Robie House was in 1909 and his Fallingwater was in 1936. Mies van Der Rohe’s Barcelona Pavilion was in 1929. Le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye was in 1931.) In 1950 a group of former GSFA students met with UPenn’s president to ask for a change, leading to G. Holmes Perkins’s appointment as the new dean.[x]

3.2. Hudnut at Harvard

Main article: Joseph Hudnut

Perkins’s approach in introducing a modern architectural education was influenced by what Joseph Hudnut (1886–1968, dean of the Harvard’s Graduate School of Architecture (GSA) from 1936 to 1953), had done at Harvard. Hudnut attended Harvard and the University of Michigan, and after bringing modern architecture to Columbia University, he was invited to do the same at Harvard. At Harvard he had departments of architecture, city planning, and landscape architecture, an approach Perkins brought to the GSFA. Perkins had served as Hudnut’s chair of the city planning department at Harvard, while Walter Gropius, founder of the Bauhaus, served as his chair of architecture.[xi]

Hudnut disliked Gropius’s approach of beginning architectural education with basic design and Gropius’s approach to housing which produced slabs that negated the street, a point Jane Jacobs later made in her book, Death and Life of Great American Cities.[xii] Reacting to the sterility of modern architecture, Hudnut advocated for a richer postmodern architecture, although he never specified what that might be. The Philadelphia School might be seen as the architecture Hudnut was looking for.[xiii]

3.3. G. Holmes Perkins’s vision

Perkins came to the GSFA with several intensions. First was to convert the school from a Beaux-Arts curriculum to a modern curriculum (as Hudnut had done at Harvard). Next was to establish landscape architecture and city planning departments and create a strong relationship between them and architecture. And finally to treat the city of Philadelphia as a laboratory for the testing and implementation of new ideas. Geddes remarked, “He actually saw the possibility of the city being the laboratory for architectural and planning education. In this case, it was Philadelphia. If he had been asked to be a dean in Chicago, he would have done it there. He saw the city as the laboratory. In fact, he saw it as the equivalent of a scientific laboratory for his fields.”[xiv] [LOCATE ILLUS 3.3. NEAR HERE]

3.4. Programs

3.4.1. The unity of design

Perkins envisioned architecture, city planning, and landscape architecture as ideally becoming one discipline, although he realized that was unlikely. Martin Meyerson (on the faculty at the GSFA and later president of UPenn) remarked, “I’d say that Holmes’s aim was to do better than Hudnut to make the ties between architecture, planning, and landscape real, to do it without the acrimony between Hudnut and Gropius. I think he pretty much succeeded.”[i]

3.4.2. Professional architecture program

When Perkins arrived in 1951, the architecture program at the GSFA was entered from high school, was five years, and offered a Bachelor of Architecture degree. By 1959 it had been converted to a three-year program requiring a college degree for entry and eventually offering a Master of Architecture degree.

The curriculum was conventional: Studio courses designing buildings culminating in an independently executed thesis project, supported by technical, history, and architecture and city planning theory courses. What was exceptional was the content of these courses and the faculty teaching them. The approach was comprehensive, looking at all aspects of architecture from pragmatic rather than ideological points of view, emphasizing the urban contexts within which buildings typically exist.

In the 1960s the four choices for studio were often Robert Geddes, Romaldo Giurgola, George Qualls, and Robert Venturi, each of whom taught with a junior, visiting, or rotating critic. Geddes was the most orthodox modern architect on the faculty, Giurgola explored artistic and philosophical ideas, Qualls explored large urban complexes, and Venturi explored many of the issues of developed in his book, Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture.[ii]

The history theory courses included a history of art survey and a course in modern architecture taught by the art history department; an architecture and city planning course taught by Denise Scott Brown which looked at American and European planning theory; an architecture theory course taught by Robert Venturi which looked non-chronologically at various issues in architecture and contained some of the material which would appear in his book; and an architecture theory course taught by Romaldo Giurgola, that looked at theories of modernism in architecture and culture. The courses available as electives included art and architecture history courses taught by the art history department, Man Environment Systems by Ian McHarg, Experimental Structures by Robert le Ricolais, Advanced Structure by August Komendant, and History of Landscape Architecture by George Patton.[iii]

3.4.3. Kahn’s studio

In addition to its three-year professional architectural degree program, the GSFA had a non-professional one-year Master of Architecture program that featured a studio course taught by Louis Kahn with two colleagues, Norman Rice and Robert Le Ricolais. The program attracted students from around the world.[iv] [LOCATE ILLUS 3.17. NEAR HERE]

The studio was an important vehicle for Kahn to develop and express his architectural and philosophical ideas. In his 2015 book, Kahn at Penn, James Williamson wrote:

He was worshipped by some of his students as a prophet, or like “Merlin. . . a little old man with a thatch of winnowed hair and wistful blue eyes. . . . His world was the world of the fairies, gnomes and goblins whom he loved, and of magic. . . .” For these students the Master’s Class was enveloped in a “general sense of awe; the belief that we were witnessing something truly amazing, meaningful, in the total scheme of things.[v]

Many of Kahn’s students went on to have flourishing careers, and many also taught. Williamson feels that one of Kahn’s greatest influences was as a teacher of teachers.

3.4.4. Land and City Planning

Both landscape architecture and city planning had been part of the GSFA in the 1920s, but were dropped due to lack of enrollment during the Great Depression. At Harvard, Hudnut had sought (with limited success) to integrate architecture, landscape architecture, and city planning,[vi]and when Perkins came from Harvard to UPenn, he brought that vision with him, hiring Robert Mitchell to build a new city planning department. The department focused on housing, transportation, modeling, land use, and theory; encouraged collaborations between the planners and architects; and built ties between the school and the city.[vii]

Ian McHarg recalled, “with [Lewis] Mumford, [Chester] Rapkin, [Herbert] Gans, [John] Dyckman, [Martin] Meyerson [who later became UPenn’s president], Perkins, Bacon, [Charles] Abrams, and then ultimately [Erwin R.] Gutkind, dear God, there was nobody else. Mitchell and [William] Wheaton had preempted effectively the entire leadership of the planning movement.”[viii] Other faculty included Britton Harris, Denise Scott Brown, Paul Davidoff, and David Wallace.[ix]

3.4.5. Landscape Architecture

Perkins hired Ian McHarg (1920 – 2001), who had studied with him at Harvard, to create the GSFA’s landscape architecture program. McHarg challenged the domination of nature in Western culture, stating in 1957: “One of the most conspicuous failures of 20th century western society has been the environment created. Squalor and anarchy are more accurate descriptions than are efficiency and delight. This should cause no surprise when we consider that prevailing values esteem the ephemeral consumer product over landscape and townscape. Indeed the new yet obsolescent automobile or refrigerator are much more highly prized than the enduring social and physical environment. Despoliation of landscape and the accretion of ugliness are inevitable consequences of such prevailing values.”[x] [LOCATE ILLUS 3.4. NEAR HERE]

The department’s faculty included John Fogg, George Patton, George Tatum, and Anthony Walmsley. Guest critics included Douglass Bayliss, Garrett Eckbo, Lawrence Halprin, and Philip Johnson. One of McHarg’s later appointments was Peter Shepherd, who succeeded Perkins as dean.[xi]

3.4.6. Civic Design

Architects typically focus on individual buildings, while city planners focus on social policy. Between the two are complexes of buildings, addressed by what is today usually called urban design, and what was called civic design at the GSFA. Perkins retained Clarence Stein to do a proposal for the department Civic Design, which Robert Geddes eventually headed.

3.4.7. Fine arts

When Perkins arrived in 1951, UPenn’s Graduate School of Fine Arts had little fine arts. Perkins hired Piero Dorazio from Rome to build a department. Dorazio brought in David Smith, Robert Motherwell, Barnett Newman, and others for crits.[xii] In addition, Perkins launched the Institute of Contemporary Art at UPenn to feature the work of major artists.[xiii]

4. Philadelphia School Philosophy

Philadelphia School architectural philosophy included a renewed interest in history, a strong commitment to urbanism and the urban context, engagement with cultural and social issues, engagement with popular culture, and understanding and serving the building’s institution (found in the question Kahn would ask at the beginning of a new project, “What does this building want to be?”[i]).

Robert Geddes described this concern for cultural and urban context as “civic,” stating: “… it was a school that was learning from where it was. The key was that we agreed on the possibility of civic design. Instead of urban design which had been Josep Sert’s idea at Harvard—he invented the idea of urban design—we worked toward civic design. Civic design has many many layers of meaning. You can have a civic design of a single building. You can have a civic design of objects. It all has to do with the sharing of career. It’s civic, it’s civil. And one of the joys of my life was that, by the time I got to be a full professor in this university, I could be a professor of architecture and civic design.”[ii]

5. Philadelphia School Buildings

Philadelphia School buildings were varied, but were generally characterized by a clarity of construction, structure as a giver of order, expression of mechanical equipment (HVAC), a preference for masonry and concrete over steel, an emphasis on plan rather than section, and an interest in geometries.

Some key Philadelphia School buildings and projects include the Trenton Bath House, Trenton NJ, 1959 by Louis Kahn; the Richards Medical Research Laboratories, Philadelphia, PA, 1957–60, by Kahn; the Salk Institute, La Jolla, CA, 1962, by Kahn, the Pender Laboratories, Philadelphia, PA, 1958, by Geddes Brecher Qualls Cunningham; the Boston City Hall Competition Entry, 1962, by Romaldo Giurgola with Ehrman B. Mitchell and Thomas R. Vreeland, Jr.; and the Vanna Venturi House, Chestnut Hill, PA, by Venturi and Rauch, 1962.

6. Key Philadelphia School Figures

6.1. Edmund Bacon

Main article: Edmund Bacon (architect)

Edmund Bacon (May 2, 1910 – October 14, 2005) was born in Philadelphia and studied architecture in the Beaux-Arts tradition at Cornell University. After working in Shanghai, China, studying with Eliel Saarinen at Cranbrook Academy of Art, and a stint as a city planner in Flint, Michigan, Bacon returned to Philadelphia in 1939 where he held several planning roles, culminating as Executive Director of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission from 1949 to 1970. [LOCATE ILLUS 2.3. NEAR HERE]

In the 1940s Bacon was part of a reform movement in the city and in 1952 they succeeded with the election of Joseph Clark as a reform mayor and the adoption of a new city charter providing a leadership role for the City Planning Commission and rationalizing the city’s operating and capital budgets.

As the City Planning Commission did not have real powers, Bacon used a strategy of creating proposals with strong images for a series of interrelated projects. These included Penn Center, with images by Vincent Kling; Market East, with images by Romaldo Giurgola; and the Delaware Riverfront with images by Robert Geddes. All of these were eventually realized, as was the renewal of Society Hill to become one of the most desirable urban residential areas in the country.

Besides his role as Executive Director of the Philadelphia City Planning Commission, Bacon also taught a course on city planning at the GSFA which formed the basis of his book, Design of Cities(1967, revised 1976). The book is divided into a survey of the physical development of cities throughout history and a description of his approach to planning in Philadelphia.

Some of Bacon’s key ideas include:

Commitment to one place: Bacon served in various planning roles in Philadelphia from 1939 until his retirement in 1970, after which he remained a gadfly regarding urban issues.

Structuring the dialogue: a planner should neither impose a completed plan, nor survey users as to what they want (as they are not planners, they don’t know what is possible); rather a planner should put forward an image to which constituents can react and provide feedback. To explain this approach Bacon referred to Pope Sixtus V who created an image of connecting boulevards in Rome and placed a series of obelisks in key spots, leading to the completing of the connecting boulevards long after his death.[i] Using this approach Bacon was able to initiate projects that were realized even after his retirement.

The urban whole: What is important in architecture is not single buildings but how buildings work together to create an urban whole.

The second man: Bacon presents the example of how Antonio da Sangallo the Elder and Baccio d’Agnolo subsumed their opportunity to be original and imitated Brunelleschi’s arcade for the Foundling Hospital in Florence to create one of the great urban spaces. In Design of Cities, Bacon writes: “This design set the form of Piazza della Santissima Annunziata and established, in the Renaissance train of thought, the concept of a space created by several buildings designed in relation to one another. From this, the principle of the ‘second man’ can be formulated: it is the second who determines whether the creation of the first man will be carried forward or destroyed.”[ii]

[i] Bacon, Edmund N., Design of Cities, p. xx.

[ii] Bacon, Edmund N., Design of Cities, p. 109.

[i] Lobell, John, Louis Kahn: Architecture as Philosophy, p. 5.

[ii] Geddes, Robert, “The Philadelphia School,” talk transcribed in The Philadelphia School, by Lobell, p. 179.

[i] Strong, Ann L. and Thomas, George E., eds., The Book of the School, p. 134.

[ii] Lobell, John, The Philadelphia School, p. 59.

[iii] Lobell, John, The Philadelphia School, pp. 42-63.

[iv] Williamson, James F., Kahn at Penn, p. xx.

[v] Williamson, James F., Kahn at Penn, p. 271.

[vi] Pearlman, Jill, Inventing American Modernism, p. 61-64.

[vii] Strong, Ann L. and Thomas, George E., eds., The Book of the School, pp. 138-139

[viii] Strong, Ann L. and Thomas, George E., eds., The Book of the School, pp. 138-139.

[ix] Strong, Ann L. and Thomas, George E., eds., The Book of the School, pp. 138-139.

[x] Strong, Ann L. and Thomas, George E., eds., The Book of the School, pp. 139-140.

[xi] Strong, Ann L. and Thomas, George E., eds., The Book of the School, p. 140.

[xii] Strong, Ann L. and Thomas, George E., eds., The Book of the School, p. 142.

[xiii] Strong, Ann L. and Thomas, George E., eds., The Book of the School, pp. 142-143. [i] Bacon, Edmund N., Design of Cities, pp. 274-282.

[ii] Heller, Gregory L., Ed Bacon, pp. 89-115.

[iii] Bacon, Edmund N., Design of Cities, pp. 284-287.

[iv] Heller, Gregory L., Ed Bacon, pp. 136-151.

[v] Heller, Gregory L., Ed Bacon, pp. 140-148.

[vi] Bacon, Edmund N., Design of Cities, pp. 296-297.

[vii] Heller, Gregory L., Ed Bacon, p. 117-136.

[viii] Bacon, Edmund N., Design of Cities, p. 298-301.

[ix] Heller, Gregory L., Ed Bacon, p. 134-136.

[x] Strong, Ann L. and Thomas, George E., eds., The Book of the School, p. 131.

[xi] Pearlman, Jill, Inventing American Modernism, pp. 64-85.

[xii] Pearlman, Jill, Inventing American Modernism, pp. 144, 162.

[xiii] Lobell, John, The Philadelphia School, p. 85.

[xiv] Geddes, Robert, “The Philadelphia School,” talk transcribed in The Philadelphia School, by Lobell, p. 178. [i] 2022-2023 Best Global Universities Rankings. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rankings

[ii] Heller, Gregory L., Ed Bacon, pp. 46-53.

[iii] “Philadelphia Plans Again,” Architectural Forum, December 1947, pp. 65–88. [i] Books attacking modern architecture include: Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture, by Robert Venturi, 1964. The Failure of Modern Architecture, by Brent C. Brolin, 1976. Form Follows Fiasco: Why Modern Architecture Hasn’t Worked, by Peter Blake, 1977. The Language of Post-Modern Architecture, by Charles Jencks, 1977. From Bauhaus to Our House, by Tom Wolfe, 1981. The Decorated Diagram: Harvard Architecture and the Failure of the Bauhaus Legacy, by Klaus Herdeg, 1983.

[ii] Lobell, John, The Philadelphia School, p. 77.

[iii] Lobell, John, The Philadelphia School, pp. 117-121

[iv] Lobell, John, The Philadelphia School, pp. 121-143.

[v] Rowan, Jan, “Wanting to Be the Philadelphia School,” Progressive Architecture, April 1961, pp. 130–163.

[vi] Williamson, James F., Kahn at Penn, p. xx.

[i] Lobell, John, The Philadelphia School, p. 1.