Seattle, the Pacific Basin, and the Sources of Regional Modernism

Abstract

The emergence of mid-twentieth-century architecture that was both modern and regional in Seattle and nearby areas of Washington State presents a singular case study demonstrating an array of influences from Asia and Latin America as well as the Pacific Coast of the United States. This network of influences is evidence of the “complexity of a dissemination” that gained momentum in the 1930s as the modern movement began to spread globally, as identified by historian William J. R. Curtis. Although awareness of distant sources primarily influenced design vocabularies from the 1930s to the 1950s in the Pacific Northwest, by the early 1960s, as Seattle architects and landscape architects began to travel to Japan, they developed a much deeper understanding from a broader collection of sites, and this, in turn, shaped surprisingly varied local responses from Rich Haag’s ideas of “non-striving” design to Victor Steinbrueck’s increasing interest in Pike Place Market. Untangling the array of Pacific Basin influences that helped shape mid-twentieth-century design in Seattle provides one demonstration of the validity of considering the Pacific as an interdependent region. Thus, Seattle offers a foundational case study towards the future project of writing an encompassing account of the interconnected architectural history of the Pacific Basin.

Notes

1. William J. R. Curtis, Modern Architecture Since 1900, 3rd ed. (New York and London: Phaidon, 1996): 16, 685–692; and William J. R. Curtis, “‘The General and the Local’: Enrique del Moral’s Own House, Calle Francisco Ramírez 5, Mexico City, 1948,” in Modernity and the Architecture of Mexico, ed. Edward R. Burian (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1997), 115–118.

2. One of the challenges in pursuing the history of Seattle architecture is the absence of a strong local architectural press. Seattle never had a local professional journal devoted only to architecture. From 1907 to 1965, the professional journal Pacific Builder & Engineer was published in Seattle, but it covered engineering and construction as well as architecture; its focus was primarily on larger buildings, and regional modernism was usually found in residences and smaller institutional buildings that were not typically included in this publication. Selected regional modern work by Seattle architects was occasionally published in national professional journals and also in popular publications like Sunset. The best sources for Seattle's regional modernism in the mid-twentieth century are the articles published in the two local newspapers, the Seattle Times and the Seattle Post-Intelligencer. The local business newspaper, the Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce, is often a good source of information for larger buildings, but it is less useful for residential projects. For a discussion of sources for research on Seattle architecture, see David A. Rash, “Appendix 5: Researching Seattle's Architectural Past,” in Shaping Seattle Architecture: A Historical Guide to the Architects Second Edition, ed. Jeffrey Karl Ochsner (Seattle, WA and London: University of Washington Press, 2014), 495–510.

3. From the nineteenth century, Seattle developed as a centre of trade. With the arrival of transcontinental railroads after 1890, Seattle’s position, a day closer to Japan and China than deep water ports in California, gave it a competitive advantage in developing networks of Pacific trade. According to historian Richard Berner, “By 1916 Seattle had emerged as the leading port on the Pacific Coast.” Richard C. Berner, Seattle 1921–1940: From Boom to Bust (Seattle, WA: Charles Press, 1992): 151.

4. Although the number of Chinese and Japanese immigrants in Seattle was a small fraction of the population, their residences and businesses tended to cluster near downtown in areas that were called “Chinatown” and “Japantown”.

5. The Panama Hotel was designated as a National Historic Landmark on 20 March 2006. See http://www.nps.gov/nhl/find/statelists/wa/Panama.pdf; for a brief account of the architect, see “Ozasa, Sabro,” in Shaping Seattle Architecture, ed. Ochsner, 480.

6. Gail Lee Dubrow, “‘The Nail that Sticks Up Gets Hit’: The Architecture of Japanese American Identity in the Urban Environment, 1885–1942,” in Nikkei in the Pacific Northwest: Japanese Americans and Japanese Canadians in the Twentieth Century, ed. Louis Fiset and Gail M. Nomura (Seattle, WA and London: University of Washington Press, 2005), 120–145.

7. Gail Dubrow and Alexa Berlow, “Vernacular and Popular Architecture in Seattle,” in Shaping Seattle Architecture, ed. Ochsner, 355–558; Gail Lee Dubrow, “Asian American Imprints on the Western Landscape,” in Preserving Cultural Landscapes in America, ed. Arnold R. Alanen and Robert Z. Melnick (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2000), 143–168.

8. The architects Thompson & Thompson have not been the subject of significant study. See: “Thompson & Thompson,” Shaping Seattle Architecture,ed. Ochsner, 480.

9. Information regarding the Maneki Café was provided by David A. Rash. The Maneki Café is mentioned in multiple histories of Seattle’s Japanese American community. It is also occasionally mentioned in mainstream newspapers such as the Seattle Times, during the 1930s. Historical photographs of the Maneki Café may be found on the website of the Wing Luke Museum of the Asian Pacific American Experience.

10. Similarly, Japan had been one of just two foreign countries to exhibit at the Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition in 1909 (Canada was the other), but the influence of the Japanese pavilion on local architectural developments was minimal. One reason why the Japanese pavilion at the AYP may have had limited impact was that the design was apparently sent from Japan and erected by a local builder. The lack of understanding of Japanese culture was reflected in the decision made locally to paint the traditionally detailed wood structure red. See Ken Tadashi Oshima, “Asia Outside Asia: The Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exhibition,” in Architecturalized Asia: Mapping a Continent through History, eds. Vimalin Rujivacharakul, H. Hazel Hahn, Ken Tadashi Oshima and Peter Christensen (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press; Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2013), 155–166. The most notable Japanese-inspired structure after the AYP was the Pagoda (1913–1914) at Point Defiance Park in Tacoma, designed by Luther Twitchell. See David A. Rash, “Asian Imagery at the Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition and in Seattle,” paper presented at the “Asian-Pacific Perspectives at the AYPE” symposium, September 12, 2009 (unpublished).

11. For details of the life and career of Lionel H. Pries, see Jeffrey Karl Ochsner, Lionel H. Pries, Architect, Artist, Educator: From Arts & Crafts to Modern Architecture (Seattle, WA and London: University of Washington Press, 2007).

12. On the visual arts in Mexico in the period, see South of the Border: Mexico in the American Imagination 1914–1947, ed. James Oles (Washington, DC and London: Smithsonian Institution Press and Yale University Art Gallery, 1993). For regionalism in Mexican architecture in the period, see Modernity and the Architecture of Mexico,ed. Edward R. Burian (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1997).

13. For the University of Washington architecture programme in the years from 1928 to the 1940s, see Ochsner, Lionel H. Pries, 134–177. A shorter account is contained in Jeffrey Karl Ochsner, “Modern or Traditional? Lionel H. Pries and Architectural Education at the University of Washington, 1928–1942,” Pacific Northwest Quarterly 96 (Summer 2005): 132–150. For a different viewpoint, see Norman J. Johnston, The College of Architecture and Urban Planning, Seventy-five Years at the University of Washington: A Personal View (Seattle, WA: College of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Washington, 1991).

14. Colour illustrations of exotic projects by University of Washington students in the years from 1928 to 1942 may be found in Ochsner, Lionel H. Pries, 134–177. For black-and-white illustrations, see Ochsner, “Modern or Traditional?” 132–150. Drawings of many student projects from those years are held by University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections.

15. Describing his Middleton M. Chism residence (1934, destroyed), architect Tom Haire said it was an example of “modern straight line architecture” that he said was “favored at the present time in Germany.” See Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce, 8 May 1934. The house apparently received significant criticism. The Chism family defended it as a logical, rational design. See “Most Logical House owned by Seattleites,” Seattle Times, 5 May 1935. Haire has remained an obscure figure; the Chism house may have been his only modern design.

16. For the Thiry house see Meredith L. Clausen, “Paul Thiry: The Emergence of Modernism in Northwest Architecture,” Pacific Northwest Quarterly 75 (July 1984): 128–139; and Meredith L. Clausen, “Paul Thiry,” in Shaping Seattle Architecture, ed. Ochsner, 290–295. Neither the Sproule house nor the Jacobson house has been published. The Sproule house has been inappropriately updated and the Jacobson house has been altered beyond recognition.

17. For the Willcox residence, see Ochsner, Lionel H. Pries, 115–124; for Juan O’Gorman, see Edward R. Burian, “The Architecture of Juan O'Gorman: Dichotomy and Drift,” Modernity and the Architecture of Mexico, 127–149. The Willcox house is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

18. Ochsner, Lionel H. Pries, 161, 166.

19. For the Gayler residence, see Ochsner, Lionel H. Pries, 124–127.

20. The Florence B. Terry residence is discussed and illustrated in Justin Henderson, Roland Terry: Master Northwest Architect (Seattle, WA and London: University of Washington Press, 2000), 22–25. Working drawings are found at University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections.

21. The Kirk house in Seattle’s Ravenna neighbourhood and the Myers house in Seattle’s Magnolia neighbourhood were both included in Victor Steinbrueck, Seattle Architecture, 1850–1953 (New York: Reinhold Publishing, 1953), 34 (Myers house), 40 (Kirk house identified as the “Gordon D. McCarthy house”). Steinbrueck’s small booklet was the first architectural guide for the city; it was published for the national AIA convention held in Seattle in spring 1953. The Myers house is relatively intact but the Kirk house has been significantly altered.

22. “Island Week-end House for All-year Use: Country House for Mr. Richard Lea, Lopez Island, San Juan Group, Washington, Lionel H. Pries, Architect,” Architectural Record 111 (April 1952): 178–180; reprinted in 82 Distinctive Houses from Architectural Record (New York: F. W. Dodge Corporation, 1952), 66–68. Also see “Sod Roof takes all of Puget Sound’s Weather,” Sunset: The Magazine of Western Living 110 (March 1953): 52–53; and “The Sod Roof … cool, green, and alive,” Sunset 123 (August 1964): 68.

23. The Barksdale house has been protected as a Landmark by the City of Seattle. It is also listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

24. The Rohrer house was included in Steinbrueck, Seattle Architecture, 31. Also see Jeffrey Karl Ochsner, “‘Built around a Garden’: The John and Ruth Rohrer Residence, Seattle, 1948–49,” Column 5 [journal of the Department of Architecture, University of Washington] 23 (2009): 58–61. The Rohrer house has been protected as a Landmark by the City of Seattle.

25. Mary Davis Gillies, “Built around a Garden,” McCall's 81, no. 9 (June 1954): 94–95.

26. The Revere Quality Home Institute (of Revere Copper & Brass) ran a national program constructing modern demonstration houses in the late 1940s. Seattle Times architecture writer Margery Phillips offered a lengthy description of Seattle's Revere Quality House with perspective and plan on 17 October 1948 and again with photographs on 14 November 1948 (the day the house opened for visitors). The house was regularly reported in the Seattle Times: March 7, 1948; July 25, 1948; October 3, 1948; November 14, 1948; November 28, 1948. The house is mentioned but not illustrated in David A. Rash, “Architects and Suburban Housing after World War II,” Shaping Seattle Architecture, ed. Ochsner, 313. The house survives, but has been expanded.

27. Paul Hayden Kirk is generally recognised as the most prolific of Seattle’s architects practising in a modern regionalist mode. He was also the most well-published Seattle architect with over sixty articles in national architectural publications. David A. Rash, “Paul Hayden Kirk,” Shaping Seattle Architecture, ed. Ochsner, 296.

28. Zoë Dusanne (née Zola Maie Graves; 1884–1972) first came to Seattle in 1912, but moved in 1928 to New York, where she collected works by modern artists. In 1942 Dusanne returned to Seattle and began promoting modern art. She opened her gallery in the house designed by Tucker, Shields and Terry in 1950, moved the gallery when her house was taken and then destroyed for the construction of Interstate Highway 5 in 1959, and closed it in 1964 when she retired. The Dusanne house and gallery was included in Steinbrueck, Seattle Architecture (1953), 24. The Zoë Dusanne Papers are found at University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections.

29. Seattle Times, April 11, 1948, 15. Architecture writer Margery R. Phillips was a major contributor to the development of Northwest modern architecture, but her life and influence have not yet been the subject of scholarly study. Her obituary appeared in the Seattle Times, May 16–18, 2014.

30. The Lakewood Community Church (1949, altered; now Columbia-Lakewood Community Church) is mentioned but not illustrated in Rash, “Paul Hayden Kirk,” 297. Working drawings and photographs are found at University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections.

31. The Blair Kirk residence is illustrated in Steinbrueck, Seattle Architecture, 33; and in Rash, “Paul Hayden Kirk,” 298. The house is analysed in Erin Anderson, “Decidedly Drawn: A Graphic Analysis of the Work of Paul Hayden Kirk” (unpublished Master of Architecture thesis, University of Washington, 2010). Working drawings are found at University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections.

32. Gaffney’s Swiss connection may suggest a subtle connection to early twentieth-century ideas of regionalism within the Arts & Crafts Movement as well as eclecticism, although the building was clearly modern.

33. Dudley C. Carter (1891–1992) was a Pacific Northwest woodcarver and artist. Carter was born and raised in British Columbia and grew up among Kwakiutl and Tlingit people, and their carvings influenced his artwork throughout his life; he was also influenced by Diego Rivera, whom he met at the Golden Gate International Exposition in San Francisco in 1940. Although he maintained his career as a timber cruiser and forest engineer, he began part-time practice as an artist after moving to Washington State in 1928. See “Dudley C. Carter,” Architectural Craftsmen of the Northwest (Seattle, WA: American Craftsmen's Council, 1961): n.p. For his obituary see Seattle Times, April 9, 1992.

34. Gaffney's Lake Wilderness Lodge was published in Architectural Forum 97 (July 1952): 136–139, 158–159; and Steinbrueck, Guide, 56. A recent article on the history and preservation of the building is Jeffrey Karl Ochsner, “Wish You Were Here: The Continuing Life of Lake Wilderness Lodge,” Arcade 29, no. 4 (Fall 2011): 9.

35. The Ryning residence has not been published; it is analysed in Erin Anderson, “Decidedly Drawn.” Working drawings are found at University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections.

36. “Architecture of the Northwest,” Architectural Record 113 (April 1953): 134–146. In contrast to Paul Thiry's clear statement regarding regional modernism in response to the question “Have We an Indigenous Northwest Architecture?” the other respondents offered more equivocal opinions. John Detlie and Robert Dietz focused on the climate, topography, landscape, and availability of views. Perry Johanson suggested that what made the Northwest distinct was the character of the people, political progressivism and the impact of local educational institutions. Victor Steinbrueck was the most sceptical, suggesting that the situation in the Pacific Northwest was not unique and neither was the architecture. However, by 1975 Steinbrueck had changed his mind. In A Visual Inventory of Buildings and Urban Design Resources for Seattle, Washington, which Steinbrueck co-authored, the modern styles from the middle years of the twentieth century in Seattle included “Northwest Regionalism,” which was said to have begun “ca. 1947”. See Historic Seattle Preservation and Development Authority, Folke Nyberg, and Victor Steinbrueck, A Visual Inventory of Buildings & Urban Design Resources for Seattle, Washington (Seattle, WA: Historic Seattle Preservation and Development Authority, 1975).

37. The Dowell residence has not been published. Working drawings are found at University of Washington Libraries, Special Collections.

38. For the influence of Japanese architecture and photographs of the Japanese house displayed at the Museum of Modern Art, see “The Japanese had Some of our Best Ideas – 300 Years Ago,” House & Home 5/6 (June 1954): 136–141.

39. For the Richard and Ruth Lea residence, see Ochsner, Lionel H. Pries, 255–261.

40. Margery R. Phillips, “Showplace for Family Treasures,” Seattle Times, April 19, 1959, Sunday Pictorial section. A photograph of the Japanese garden in the entry court to the Lea house appeared in the book, Japanese Gardens, but only the Seattle location was identified and no architect was mentioned (Richard and Ruth Lea were included in the acknowledgements at the end of the book). See Wendy B. Murphy, Japanese Gardens (Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, 1979), 46.

41. The Thiry vacation house is illustrated in Meredith L. Clausen, “Paul Thiry,” Shaping Seattle Architecture, ed. Ochsner, 293.

42. Information about the Bloedel Reserve guest house is taken from The Bloedel Reserve: Self-Guided Tour, which may be found on-line at: http://www.bloedelreserve.org/.

43. Fujitaro Kubota (1879–1973) was born in Japan but came to Seattle in 1907. He began a gardening business in Seattle in 1922; during the Second World War, he and his family were interned at Minidoka. The family rebuilt the business after the war ended.

44. George Katsutoshi Nakashima (1905–1990) received his B.Arch. degree from the University of Washington in 1929, and his M.Arch. from MIT in 1931. After working for Antonin Raymond in India, Nakashima returned to Seattle and began making furniture and teaching woodworking. During the Second World War he was interned at Minidoka. Antonin Raymond sponsored Nakashima's release in 1943 and brought him to New Hope, Pennsylvania, where Nakashima built his career as a studio furniture-maker achieving worldwide fame. Paul Kirk specified Nakashima furniture for the Magnolia Branch of Seattle Public Library, completed in 1964; the collection of Nakashima furniture still graces the library. The best overview of Nakashima's life and career is Mira Nakashima, Nature, Form and Spirit: The Life and Legacy of George Nakashima (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 2003).

45. Paul Kirk would travel to Japan after 1976.

46. The most authoritative source for the life and career of Richard (Rich) Haag is Thaïsa Way, The Landscape Architecture of Richard Haag: From Modern Space to Urban Ecological Design (Seattle, WA and London: University of Washington Press, 2015). A short introduction to Rich Haag's career is Duane A. Dietz, “Richard Haag,” Shaping Seattle Architecture, ed. Ochsner, 346–351. Haag's influence in Seattle began at almost the same time as Lionel Pries’ effectively ended. In summer 1958 Pries, who was gay, was picked up in a vice sting in Los Angeles. Although he was so deeply closeted in the university community that few were aware he was homosexual, he was forced to resign from the faculty at the end of October 1958; the reason for his resignation was completely covered up at the time. Pries, who was 61, was forced to find work as a drafter until he turned 65 and qualified for Social Security. He lived quietly in Seattle until his death in April 1968. See Ochsner, Lionel H. Pries, 287–308.

47. The full breadth of what Haag experienced in Japan is far beyond what can be addressed in this essay. Thaïsa Way devotes a full chapter of 26 pages to Haag’s two years in Japan: Way, Landscape Architecture of Richard Haag, 24–49.

48. For descriptions of Haag’s work at Gas Works Park and Bloedel Reserve, see Way, Landscape Architecture of Richard Haag, 147–185.

49. For the early academic career of Phillip Thiel see Jeffrey Karl Ochsner, Furniture Studio: Materials, Craft, & Architecture (Seattle, WA and London: University of Washington Press, 2012), 12–16.

50. Philip Thiel, “Movement in Japanese Environmental Representation,” Urban Planning: University of Washington Department of Urban Planning Development Series 3 (1964), n. p.

51. Philip Thiel, People, Paths and Purposes, Notations for a Participatory Envirotecture (Seattle, WA and London: University of Washington Press, 1997). Also see Philip Thiel, “A Sequence-Experience Notation: For Architectural and Urban Spaces,” Town Planning Review 32, no. 1 (April 1961): 33–52.

52. For an introduction to the career of Victor Steinbrueck, see Thomas Veith, “Victor Steinbrueck,” Shaping Seattle Architecture, ed. Ochsner, 302–307.

53. Victor Steinbrueck, Seattle Cityscape (Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press, 1962).

54. Jeffrey Karl Ochsner, “Victor Steinbrueck finds his Voice: From The Argus to Seattle Cityscape,” Pacific Northwest Quarterly 99 (Summer 2008): 122–133.

55. Argus, August 31, 1962, 1. Steinbrueck also mentioned his Asian Arts Fellowship in Victor Steinbrueck, “An Architectural Report on the Nanzen-ji, a Buddhist Temple in Kyoto,” Urban Planning: University of Washington Department of Urban Planning Development Series 3 (1964), n. p.

56. For Steinbreck's presentation of the intricate life of the Pike Place Market in the 1960s. see Victor Steinbrueck, Market Sketchbook (Seattle, WA and London: University of Washington Press, 1968). The fight to save Pike Place Market culminated in a successful referendum creating the Pike Place Market Historic District passed by voters in Seattle 4 November 1971.

57. The name of the College of Architecture & Urban Planning was changed to College of Built Environments in 2009.

58. Thiel’s collaborator on the TIT exchange programme, Kiyoshi Seike (1918–2005), was known primarily for his residential designs, but also worked on large-scale commercial and public projects. He was a professor at the Tokyo National University and at TIT.

59. Following retirement from the University of Washington in 1991, Thiel taught at the Sapporo School of Arts from 1992 to 1998.

60. Grant Hildebrand, Gene Zema: Architect, Craftsman (Seattle, WA and London: University of Washington Press, 2012).

61. Although the influence of Victor Steinbrueck waned after he retired in 1984, and the same happened after Thiel retired in 1991, the design programmes in the College of Built Environments (formerly College of Architecture & Urban Planning), have maintained their connections to Asia with regular travel programmes and studios in Japan and China. Although Rich Haag retired in the mid-1990s, the design culture of the University of Washington landscape architecture programme continues to feel his influence in its emphasis on urban ecological design. Way points to the current focus on urban ecological design at the University of Washington Landscape Architecture Department as a legacy of Rich Haag. Way, Landscape Architecture of Richard Haag, 187–188.

62. This article emphasises the uniqueness of Seattle at the nexus of influences from Mexico, California, Oregon and Japan. For a different point of view that argues for similarities among American West Coast cities, see: Diana Painter, “Regional Modernism on the West Coast: a Tale of Four Cities,” in Proceedings of the Society of Architectural Historians, Australia and New Zealand: 31, Translation, ed. Christoph Schnoor (Auckland, New Zealand: SAHANZ and Unitec ePress; and Gold Coast, Queensland: SAHANZ, 2014), 773–784.

63. Work by Seattle practitioners seems similar to some work by architects in Australia and New Zealand in the 1945–1970 period as represented in books such as Looking for the Local and Group Architects. See Justine Clark and Paul Walker, Looking for the Local: Architecture and the New Zealand Modern (Wellington: Victoria University Press, 2000) and Group Architects: Towards a New Zealand Architecture, ed. Julia Gatley (Auckland: Auckland University Press, 2010), 197–216.

64. No architectural publications from Australia or New Zealand seem to have been received in Seattle in the mid-century period. No records of travel to Australia or New Zealand by Seattle architects in the period have been discovered.

65. This apparently parallel development might be considered evidence for a broader modernist regionalism such as proposed by Stanford Anderson's with the terminology, “second International Style.” See Stanford Anderson, “The ‘New Empiricism – Bay Region Axis’: Kay Fisker and Postwar Debates on Functionalism, Regionalism, and Monumentality,” Journal of Architectural Education 50, no. 3 (February 1997): 197–207.

66. For a discussion of the geography of American architectural achievement see William Jordy, “Thoughts on the Geography of American Architecture,” American Architecture: Innovation and Tradition, eds. David G. DeLong, Helen Searing and Robert A. M. Stern (New York: Rizzoli, 1986).

67. A similar statement can easily be made about the regional modernism of California, Oregon and British Columbia.