Lewis A. Coffin - American Country Houses of the Thirties: With Photographs and Floor Plans

by LEWIS A. COFFIN, A.I.A.

I N 1934, the date of publication of this new volume of American Homes of Today, twenty-two years have elapsed since the first volume of this series. A study of the progress of the design of the country house in America as illustrated in these publications illustrates the tremendous improvement in such work. In 1912 the country house which was worth anything whatever architecturally was either an antique or the work of a very few outstanding architects. The work of American architects in the country house field in general was stiff, undeveloped, and without the flavor of our best traditions. It has always seemed that the firm of McKim, Mead and White did more to bring about a renaissance in country house design than any other firm of architects. The James L. Breese house in Southampton, Long Island, is one of the first really great country houses, the design of which is based on old American precedent. In Virginia and Maryland and other parts of the central eastern South were old Georgian homes, not modern in plan or equipment, but as good as anything in the world architecturally. In New England and other parts of the Northeast were our Colonial houses, mostly in wood construction, but fresh, clean-cut and excellently designed. In California and in Florida to a small extent, a Spanish Colonial style provided a tradition as yet unappreciated. All these American precedents were practically unknown twenty years ago.

About 1912 the attention of architects, magazines, book publishers and students turned towards an interest in early American architecture. The public began collecting American antique furniture. Architects and students went through the Georgian South and the Colonial North photographing and measuring. A great bibliography of Early American Architecture was produced and the renaissance of the American country house architecture was under full way.

If one will look back over the development of the next twenty years until 1932, a gradual absorption of this great fund of tradition is apparent. The vocabulary of the past was successfully used by the architects of this period in developing designs and details adapted to modern requirements. And in this period of rapid building expansion, a huge number of excellently designed houses have been erected.

In all history, the architecture of any period is the mirror of the civilization which produces it. Now we are come to a new erathe era of the so-called modern architecture. In our cities a new style, as fresh as any style ever developed, has evolved. The most successful of the modern city structures are the interpretation into design of our new building facilitiessteel, concrete, modern elevators and new materials, a modified form of functionalism. It is to be noted here, however, that the better examples of modern city architecture do not deny any of the basic principles of sound architectural design.

Only very lately has the tendency shown itself to carry modern architecture into the country home. To the present time it can fairly be said that the results are only a straw in the wind. A new way is pointed out, but the road is obscure.

There is every reason why so different a period as the present should evolve a new type and style of country house. It is axiomatic that it will. But we should not go berserker. Rather, leaning on our own precedent and architectural development to date, we should adopt the new materials, new structural possibilities, and modern ideas towards houses so that they are better planned, more livable and if that be possible, more beautiful than those built by the architects of the past. It is our great opportunity to adopt and evolve, but not to forget the basic principles of simplicity, of proportion, of balance and of well designed detail.

For example, when a house in the so-called modern style is designed, why should the architect forsake the principle of symmetry or asymmetry? In all styles of building in the past, the masterpieces have strict symmetry, or certainly a well studied balance. All country houses cannot have strict balance of design, but the development to date shows too clearly a lack of attempt to accomplish it. For a lazy or incompetent architect it is easier not to have to struggle towards this basic principle of good design, as it is easy for some of the lesser modernist painters to neglect the art of drawing.

In a more practical vein, why should modern country houses in our average climate have flat roofs? The harsh lines thus too often created do not fit into natures landscape except on flat expanses. The attic is lost, there is the added difficulty of insulation, the snow load is increased, and the glare of light and heat from open decks into second floor windows is objectionable.

When modern architecture and decoration have balance, simplicity, good colors, introducing our new materials properly handled, taking advantage of the benefits of structural steel, of air conditioning with modern heating systems, which in turn permit much greater window areas, then they can go far along a new road. The type of new detail, characteristic of any new style, will be evolved. No man, or no men in one decade can invent a good new style of detail. Such things must grow. To the present time, much of the better modernistic details seem based on a Greek tradition. Our colonial style of today is also descended from the Greek through the Roman, Pompeian, Empire and Georgian. We find a sequence of style, each harking back to what men had developed before, but in turn developing a new style. So is it not logical for us to go forward in modern work, employing our new material and developing a new style for our times, based on the traditions of our own country? In time our new homes, the details of our new style, will have characteristics of their own, as distinctive and as good as the Georgian. Along this road we will stay on the track and our architecture will, while modern, be but a fresh development of the undying classic.

Much is heard today of functionalism in modern architecture. All good styles of the past have functionalism at their roots. Posts developed into columns, eaves into cornices, lintels into flat arches, and so on down the ages. Sometimes styles become hidebound, lean insincerely on the past in the face of new discoveries, inventions and requirements. Then it is time for a change. Perhaps such a time exists today. But this is a plea that in this age of turmoil, we carry forward towards new horizons without forgetting those basic principles of design which will never be changed.