You are on page 1of 13

PSFS BUILDING

20 George Howe and William Lescaze

Grace Ong Yan

The PSFS Buildings east faade orients squarely with Market Street but its iconic rooftop sign
was angled toward the Benjamin Franklin bridge across town, ostensibly linking Philadelphia to
a network of urban centers. Howe & Lescaze, Philadelphia Saving Fund Society, Twelfth &
Market Streets, Philadelphia, 1932.*

The Companions to the History of Architecture, Volume IV, Twentieth-Century Architecture.


Edited by David Leatherbarrow and Alexander Eisenschmidt.
2017 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2017 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
MODERN ARCHITECTURE FOR
THE CORPORATE CLIENT
By the late 1950s, modern architecture had become the expected vocabulary for
American corporate headquarters. Decades earlier, this had not been the case.
Corporations were considered unreliable patrons for modern architecture by
tastemakers like the curators of the Museum of Modern Art in New York. In
the book, The International Style: Architecture Since 1922, published following the
famous Modern Architecture exhibition of 1932, Alfred Barr, Jr. expostulated,
we are asked to take seriously the architectural tastes of real estate speculators,
renting agents, and mortgage brokers!1 It is, then, from the commercially
successful modernistic architects, he continued, that we may expect the strongest
opposition to the Style.2 Yet the PSFS Building stands as one of the most significant
modern American buildings, precisely because of the commercial influences of its
business client. The context from which it emerged was not the imported Interna-
tional Style, but instead a modernism that developed in parallel, out of commercial
interests in the urban environment. In fact, the business-minded clients had a depth
of influence over the buildings design, the most important of which was a concern
with advertising the company through its architecture and its red neon sign.
The building is an asymmetrical composition of two vertically oriented rectilin-
ear volumes that were notched at their bottoms into a horizontal curved volume
that floated above the street level. At the top of building stood four, 27 foot-high
white letters: P S F S. Two sets of the initials, one facing directly west and another
facing north-east, advertised the clients business to the city. From dusk to dawn,
the letters glowed red from neon-tube lighting. Though PSFS would not be used
regularly in the savings funds advertising until almost two decades later, the acro-
nyms association with the institution began with the building sign.
The Philadelphia Saving Fund Society (PSFS) building was conceived as the new
face of the oldest savings fund in America as it reinvented itself in the complex cir-
cumstances of the twentieth century.3 As such, the PSFS Building alloyed architec-
ture and business. The design and construction of the PSFS Building, which
occurred between 1929 and 1932, emerged out of many struggles: the Great
Depression; the conflicts between the architects George Howe and William Les-
caze, and the client, the Philadelphia Saving Fund Society Building Committee,
led by its president, John M. Willcox; and the struggle to define the buildings
own modernism in relation to the constant undercurrent of commercialism. While
the building has attributes commonly associated with the International Style, and
has even been described as the first International Style skyscraper in America,4 its
varied and expressive hybrid forms complicate this straightforward interpretation
and point toward a more nuanced reading.
PSFS Building 3

Function

The world of the 1920s and 1930s, which defined the personalities of George Howe
and William Lescaze, was turbulent, marked by the heights of economic prosperity
and depths of worldwide depression that followed. Yet the times were also enli-
vened by an American idealism that could be witnessed in commercial and tech-
nological vitality. The careers of Howe and Lescaze embodied the grand
transformations occurring during this tumultuous era. Architect William Lescaze
had been influenced by the rational expressionist strain of European modernism,
which he demonstrated in his designs for commercial interiors in New York imme-
diately prior to his work on PSFS. Howe had nurtured a late-blooming passion for
modern architecture. He had become interested in German modernism while
studying a classical approach to architecture at the cole des Beaux-Arts from
1907 to 1912. In addition to bringing his enthusiasm for modern architecture to
the project, Howe also provided the client. During his prior partnership with
Arthur Mellor and Walter Meigs, in the firm Mellor, Meigs, and Howe, he designed
four branch banks in the early 1920s for the Philadelphia Saving Fund Society,
whose president was James M. Willcox. When he terminated his partnership with
Mellor and Meigs, Howe started his own practice and took with him one of the
firms most substantial clients, the Philadelphia Saving Fund Society. His prior part-
nership and professional connections, in addition to his refined American upbring-
ing, made him perfectly suited to successfully deal with a wealthy and conservative
clientele.
When they came together as partners in 1929, both architects were struggling to
define a functional modern architecture, informed by their individual experi-
ences variously studying and practicing classicism, art deco, and expressionism.
As partners, they believed that functionalism, a highly debated term from its incep-
tion, was the basis of their common understanding of modern architecture. They
would describe the PSFS Buildings functional5 forms as growing out of the
requirements of our civilization and the modern technique of building6 Indeed,
throughout the process the client had described the 33-story skyscraper as a collec-
tion of distinct building programs, Office, Bank & Store, a description that even-
tually would become a reality as the tall, rectilinear volume was devoted to rental
offices and mechanical services, while the curved volume held the banking hall and
the store. The contrast between straight and curved forms was highlighted through
different materials that sheathed the buildings forms and, in turn, its functions.
The service core was clad in black brick, the bank and store both commercial
spaces in polished granite, and the office tower in an envelope of brick spandrels
and piers clad in limestone and marble. The play of reflective and matte surfaces on
the exterior massing echoed that inside the banking hall. The material claddings did
not simply express interior function, however, but instead added to the dynamism
of the volumes through surface effects.
4 Revisiting the Modern Project

The PSFS Building further demonstrated functional principles by creating


important links to the surrounding urban site. While the buildings modern expres-
sion was strikingly unlike Philadelphias classically derived architecture, there were
aspects of the building design that accommodated the neighborhood. The ground
and underground levels of the PSFS Building allowed the citys infrastructure to
integrate with the architecture, as shopping and public transportation became part
of the building. The neighborhood was a lively area, full of moderately priced retail
outlets, with the Reading Railroad terminal across the street. As the building
owner, Philadelphia Saving Fund Society leased store space located at the corner
street level to its very first tenant, a womens clothier called Lerner Shops, and this
blended easily into the retail street environment. An A & P grocery market was
another retail tenant in the building. Two underground levels accommodated a
connection to the Market Street subway stop and a stair to the subway concourse
was located on the street level between the banking hall and store entrance.
Expressive of its functions, the PSFS Building was conspicuously modern, an
example of which that was rarely seen in America at the time. Certainly, modern
architecture of a different evolution was prominent in Philadelphias buildings. In
the first decades of the twentieth century, Philadelphias modern architecture was
exemplified by the pared-down classicism of the Philadelphia Art Museum and the
City Beautiful movement, out of which the Benjamin Franklin Parkway had been
created. The modern architecture of the PSFS Building, however, was based on
entirely different sources.
In the pre-World War I period, both Howe and Lescaze were earnest students
of new developments in architecture. Repercussions of these early influences can
be witnessed in Lescazes sketches for the base of the PSFS Building, which dis-
played the dynamism and exuberance that had only been seen in works by J. J. P.
Oud, such as Hoek van Holland (192427) and Erich Mendelsohns buildings of
the Tageblatt Headquarters, known as Mossehaus, in Berlin (192123) and the
Schocken department store in Stuttgart (192628). Ouds poetic and Mendel-
sohns dynamic functionalism can both be read in the PSFS Building.7 Lescaze
had studied J. J. P. Ouds building, as one of the projects included in his proposed
book comparing European and American modern architecture suggests. He
believed that Ouds Hoek van Holland housing for workers was a model for
European modern architecture. Like the PSFS Building, Ouds scheme was
designed for multiple uses. It contained 41 dwellings, four shops, four ware-
houses, and a public library. Both buildings were designed as self-contained com-
positions in which the individual functions were transformed into a single
building by the use of repetition. Oud situated four curved storefronts at the ends
of linear rows of houses and his curved plate glass faades undoubtedly influ-
enced Lescazes curved ground floor storefront, which prominently displayed
retail merchandise through a large, continuous glass window at the PSFS Build-
ing. For Oud as well as for Lescaze, the curved element was seen as a symbol of
the modern machine, emulating its circular movements.
PSFS Building 5

Lescaze had also visited Berlin, at least twice in the 1920s, once in 192223 and
again in 1926. Though not documented in Lescazes archive, it is highly likely that
he saw first-hand the strikingly modern renovation of the Mossehaus, the most
prominent feature in Berlin during those particular years. The emphasis on
curved horizontality in Mossehaus corner faade is unmistakably similar to
Lescazes sketch and the subsequent design of PSFSs corner banking hall
faade. Mendelsohn believed that horizontality best expressed the modern con-
struction of reinforced concrete, as well as the velocity of modern urban street
life. Furthermore, for Mendelsohn horizontality would provide a much-needed
stabilizing force that would alleviate the stress of modern life. And on an expe-
riential level, the blurring of verticals and the extension of horizontals reflected
the way automobile passengers traveling at high speeds perceived buildings as
they drove past.8
Echoing Mendelsohns Mossehaus, the bold 1929 rendering by Lescaze showed
a similar horizontally curving faade and windows. The sketch dramatizes the play
of receding surfaces, one recessed at the street level and another implied by a dark
shadow at the second story banking hall level. In addition, Mossehaus appearance,
prominent location, and publicity-minded patron also made it similar to the PSFS
Building. Like the individualistic modernism of Oud and Mendelsohn, the
PSFS Building design would take shape from the dynamic sketches of one of its
designers.

Business

It was just this kind of architectural individualism that translated well into the
business culture of PSFSs clients. Throughout the design process, James Willcox
and the PSFS Building Committee judged its architecture by how it would dis-
tinguish itself through its functional characteristics and its aesthetic appearance
and, specifically, how these attributes would affect their business. While the
Building Committee did not have a particular aesthetic in mind, its criterion
for the architecture was that it be a sound business investment. Upon seeing
Howe and Lescazes proposed modern design, one consulting rental agent stated,
the architecture, while novel, is striking and modern,9 while another one noted:
Opinions will undoubtedly vary regarding its architecture, but the building is
sure to be talked about.10 J. M. Willcox was ultimately concerned with how
his new building would bolster the saving funds larger business strategy to create
a competitive advantage. Originality, or the quality of being remarkable, served
as an advertising strategy and was ultimately one of the aspects that convinced
Willcox to accept the modern design.
But even in 1930, during the design process, the Building Committee was still
not convinced of the modern design. It also had been presented with a more tra-
ditional, Beaux-Arts scheme, in 1926, designed by Howes former practice, Mellor,
6 Revisiting the Modern Project

Meigs, and Howe. This caused Howe to write a letter on July 30, 1930 to his client,
Willcox, in which he argued for his modern design in bankers language. In pecu-
niary terms, Howe compared the modern and traditional schemes by their cost
effectiveness. He presented a graph that showed the gross area and cost saving that
the society would gain by building the modern scheme instead of the traditional
one. While the modern scheme would cost more, the society would get more
for its money. In other words, for $930,000 or about 20% more than the cost
of the 1926 building, your institution obtains more than 200,000 square feet or over
60% additional floor area. Furthermore, the 1930 building is more completely
equipped mechanically than the 1926 building.11 Here, Howe used business
criteria (price per square foot) to cast modern architecture as a good business
investment.
The discussion over the designs modernism also continued as the client
worried that it might not appeal to potential tenants. Because modern architecture
was predominately linked to industrial rather than commercial buildings, Willcox
informed Howe that, We must recognize the fact that there is something in your
design which requires explanation. The first impulse of everyone I have shown it to
is [to turn] away from it.12 Yet Willcox was open-minded about modern design, as
long as it would help his profits. I dont think that there is anything in your design
which would decide a prospective tenant against taking space in the building if the
matter were properly presented. It is impossible to take the architect along every
time a prospect is to be interviewed.13 Willcox thought through the myriad of
possibilities and conclusions that would color his decision-making and finally con-
cluded, On the other hand, its uniqueness at least in Philadelphia gives it an
advertising value that is worth something.14 Here, architecture served as adver-
tisement, giving the city a brand identity and an architectural image of the Phila-
delphia Saving Fund Society. Willcoxs assessment would come true: there was no
other comparable architecture in height, size, or expression. Strikingly unlike its
urban context of commercial buildings in the early 1930s, the PSFS Building would
define modern architecture in Philadelphia.15

Advertising

The modernity of an electric sign for the PSFS Building was foundational for the
design. The idea for such a sign was raised by the client himself, and in a letter to
Willcox on May 26, 1930, Howe noted, You are aware that ever since you first
asked me to design a branch bank around an electric sign I have been looking
for a means of architectural expression which would not be in conflict with any
form of modern activity outside the field of architecture.16 If the idea for the elec-
tric sign originated with Willcox, Howe viewed the suggestion as an opportunity to
design a modern building. The awkwardness of the electric sign designs on the
1926 branch banks showed that a modern direction for placing advertising on
PSFS Building 7

the PSFS bank was needed. Here, lettering was permissible as modern ornament
because it possessed functional purpose in advertising and in indicating the use of
different parts of a building.17 In fact, in The International Style: Architecture Since
1922, Hitchcock and Johnson stated, Lettering is the nearest approach to arbitrary
ornament used by the architects of the international style.18 The development of
the red neon P S F S sign has been largely overlooked, with the exception of David
Leatherbarrows insightful discussion of the urban implications of the sign.19
The sign had many variations between July 1930 and the summer of 1932, when
it was finally constructed. The architects and clients grappled with three aspects of
the sign design. First, whether the Societys whole name or its abbreviation should
be used. Second, whether the sign would be mounted on the side of the building
or on top. Third, whether the signs orientation would be north, south or east.
These details occupied the architects and clients throughout the design process
and were not mere minutiae; for these decisions signaled modernity on many
levels.
Legibility became an important deciding factor as the architects and clients chose
between displaying the whole name versus the initials. The discussion highlighted
the signs function as a medium for mass advertising. Publicity was at the forefront
in the minds of the clients and the use of initials was not only a matter of legibility; it
also signaled the modernization of the Philadelphia Saving Fund Society as a com-
pany, recasting its image and establishing a visual standard. The wish to modernize
was contested by the Societys hesitation to fully to embrace a modern image, as
the oldest savings fund in America was just starting to grow into a modern business
through the diversification of real-estate ventures and expansion through branch
banks. These difficulties to wholeheartedly accepting modernity was not surprising
at a time when modern life in America was itself still in transition.
Advertising value figured largely in the decision to use initials for the sign and to
orient it toward the north-east transportation corridor. Earle Bolton, staff architect
for Howe and Lescaze, who attended most of the design meetings, reported the
clients desire for advertising value as the reason they eventually approved the initi-
als for the sign.20 One of the vice-presidents of the construction company, Fuller
and Company, asked Willcox if he had ever seen a large electric sign reading
PON visible from the Pennsylvania Railroad as one came into Newark. Willcox
had noticed the sign, which led him to inquire for what the initials stood for. The
Fuller and Company vice-president voiced his enthusiasm for using initials: Lets
make everyone curious about PSFS.21
At a special roof sign meeting in late April 1932, full-scaled letter samples were
viewed: one at the size of the PSFS initial design and another at the size for the full-
name version. A hotel room at a high floor was rented several miles away to judge
visibility of the letters atop the actual, nearly finished PSFS Building. A single letter
S was first hoisted into place. Its simple sans serif typeface with an 18-inch stroke,
proved extremely legible. However, the full name size was constructed at a dimen-
sioned stroke that was considered illegible. The legible initials version was clearly
8 Revisiting the Modern Project

preferable: great size takes less concentration to assimilate.22 By late spring of


1932, the final sign design would show the PSFS initials.
While the architects first sign design depicted it on top of the building, it was
followed by a number of studies that took advantage of the blank south faade that
covered the elevators and service equipment. PSFSs sign design on the faade
reflected commercial signage practices of the time. By the 1910s and 1920s in Amer-
ica, billposting on building faades had become a prevalent way of advertising. At
the same time, there was also influence from a more rarified source. Both George
Howe and William Lescaze visited the 1925 Exposition des arts dcoratifs in Paris,
and had seen Le Corbusiers Pavilion de lEsprit Nouveau.23 The abbreviated letters
E N composed an emblazoned sign on the entrance faade. Le Corbusiers sign
not only reinforced the custom of billposting but also the use of abbreviation.
Despite these illuminating studies, the sign was finally positioned, not on the side
of the building, but on top of it an example of skyline lettering. One precedent for
the PSFS sign position was the Van Nelle Factory in Rotterdam by J. A. Brinkman
and L. C. van der Vlugt, built between 1925 and 1931, which also used sans serif
lettering. The two buildings shared many similarities as modern architecture for
business clients, including angling of the sign toward key sight lines, and function-
alist design principles of clear legibility and use of electric lighting.
The sign atop the building also coincided with a decision to provide air condi-
tioning to the whole building. The Building Committee had originally decided to
air-condition only the banking floors but a particularly stifling summer convinced
the business savvy client that office space would be infinitely more desirable if
manufactured air (air conditioning) were installed throughout the entire office
tower. Now, the PSFS Building was the second in the nation to have this luxury
and the sign would hide the gigantic cooling towers of the air conditioning. This
necessitated a wall-like barrier to hide the service equipment, upon which the let-
ters would be mounted essentially a billboard. As such, the sign would be under-
stood not simply as a display for a name, but as more conventional outdoor
advertising with automobile travel figuring largely in the final decisions.
In the early design schemes, the sign was oriented to the north and south, which
seemed to align with what was considered the front door on Market Street. How-
ever, in a variation of seven schemes presented on November 1930, the architects
included one version that showed an east-facing sign. This particular sign foresha-
dowed the final orientation and hinted at its urban impact, where the eastern face
addressed the Delaware River Bridge (named the Benjamin Franklin Bridge since
1956), which linked Philadelphia to a network of urban centers connected by high-
ways.24 After abandoning the idea of a sign on the south faade, the architects
designed a dual-faced sign directed toward the east and west. Finally, in 1932, after
the long debate, the PSFS sign was constructed on top of the 32nd floor of the sky-
scraper. Each letter was 27 feet tall, 18 feet wide, and 9 inches deep, constructed of
steel and painted white. Supported by steel brackets in front of a solid steel bill-
board of deep cobalt blue, the sign measured 28 feet tall and 120 feet long. The
PSFS Building 9

framework was riveted and cross-braced to the buildings steel structure and could
withstand a 200-mile wind.25 Between the two billboard sign surfaces was a resid-
ual space to house the air conditioning compressors.
The sign would now greet automobile commuters, who utilized a mode of
transportation that was quickly becoming dominant in the late 1920s. Eventually,
to the clients, the rooftop signs legibility from the Delaware River Bridge, where
tens of thousands of New Jersey commuters entered into Philadelphia, was one of
the most important factors of the building design. The large number of travelers
became public in a 1931 study by the Delaware River Joint Commission of Penn-
sylvania and New Jersey, which counted 62,126 people crossing the Delaware
River Bridge daily.26 These were 70% of the total commuters by various means
of travel, including ferries, from Camden to Philadelphia commuters who could
not miss the four large letters on the buildings rooftop as they approached the city.
The PSFS sign had much in common with outdoor billboards. Instead of compli-
cated designs that would take too long to read, billboard designs were deliberately
abstract and simplified. Their design spoke concisely yet read loudly to meet the
modern tempo of life created by highway travel. As part of this new aesthetic, twen-
tieth-century advertisers refined their use of trademarks, logos, and slogans to create
massed images that gave a quick impression. An aesthetics of speed was required,
which could deliver messages in a state of unblinking recognition. A logo was the
ideal form of communication for mobile audiences. The rooftop letters, PSFS,
while not officially registered until the 1970s, were ostensibly such a trademark.

Economics
In the decades after its opening, the PSFS Building enjoyed steady occupancy, per-
severing through the Great Depression. While modern architecture was not the
explicit choice of the client, it turned out to serve the institution well. The Architec-
tural Forum promoted business patronage of modern architecture in an article from
September 1943, entitled, Does Modern Architecture Pay?27 The inquiry of
whether modern architecture was profitable for business clients tapped into a con-
temporary concern. The editors asserted, It should at the very least bring into ques-
tion the notion that investment return and resale value are answered only when a
building turns its face to the past. The journal had sent a questionnaire to business
clients of modern architecture (including PSFS), and then printed a selection of the
responses together with 25 important modern buildings and their clients com-
ments. The article observed that while modern architecture in America predomi-
nated in the commercial and industrial fields, in others including banks,
insurance companies, and government agencies modern architecture was hardly
represented. The editors believed this was due to the unwillingness of investors to
put funds into something that may not pay off and, in turn, argued that [i]n com-
mercial buildings, design is as much a competitive element as merchandising itself.
10 Revisiting the Modern Project

There is no better indication of the soundness of the modern approach than its rapid
acceptance by the people who have to examine it most critically.28 Here, modern
architecture became a form of merchandise, which would promote a businesss
goods. The Philadelphia Saving Fund Societys modern design stood as a bold exam-
ple against the status quo of other banks that did not patronize modernism.
In the reply to the Architectural Forums questionnaire, Willcox offered enthusi-
astic support for the PSFS Building design.29 The type of architecture adopted has
proved most successful, and has resulted in a building better adapted for the pur-
pose than would have been possible had the style been conventional.30 But while
Willcox was satisfied with the design of PSFS, he did not embrace it as modern
architecture per se, but instead called the design ultra-practical. On his first
and only patronage of modern architecture, Willcox wrote: I am tempted to haz-
ard a forecast and say that there will be but few large office buildings erected in the
future designed along conventional lines.31 He supported his statement with his
buildings excellent renting record, which despite the Depression was 92.8% occu-
pied, as well as the quick occupation of the ground floor store and restaurant space.
He attributed these positive results to the orderliness and clean-cut arrangement
of space, typical of this type of architecture, we believe is in large part responsible
for our satisfactory rental experience.32 When the Society examined the balance
sheet of their revenue-generating building, they estimated the total cost to have
been $12,360,942.37, which showed that the construction cost had actually come
in under its initial estimation of $12,500,000.33
According to the PSFS, modern architecture provided business advantage
against their competitors. However, it did so not through conforming to the
orthodoxy of the International Style, but instead through a combination of
poetic and dynamic functionalism in alignment with modern architectures
advertising and branding potential, including not least of all, its iconic rooftop
sign. The design was largely the result of a fruitful collaboration between client
and architect, exemplifying the larger cooperation between business and archi-
tecture in the twentieth century. The PSFS Building stands as a testament to
American modernism with the rise of corporations, the growth of media,
and a burgeoning consumer culture.

Notes

* Credit: Photography: Jack E Boucher, 1985/Library of Congress Prints and Photographs


Division Washington, D.C. 20540 USA http://loc.gov/pictures/item/pa1068/.
1. Henry-Russell Hitchcock and Philip Johnson, The International Style: Architecture Since
1922 (New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1932), 14.
2. Ibid.
3. The companys name from its inception was the Philadelphia Saving Fund Society. After
merging with the Western Savings Fund Society in 1982, the new company underwent a
PSFS Building 11

name change, adding an s to Saving. The new name was subtly different: Phila-
delphia Savings Fund Society. This change was an effort to maintain continuity with
the former business, yet distinguish it slightly.
4. The PSFS Buildings inclusion in Johnson and Hitchcocks Modern Architecture
International Exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art in 1932, and the subsequent
publication of Hitchcock and Johnsons The International Style, cemented its identity as
a particular strain of modern architecture, despite the opinions of historians about its
nuanced modernism.
5. In Howe and Lescazes analysis of the proposed building, written before it was built, on
September 26, 1930, they attempted to define modern. In doing so, they separated
modern into two tendencies, functional, and decorative, and proclaimed them-
selves as proponents of the former. William Lescaze, Architectural Analysis of the
Proposed Building for the Philadelphia Saving Fund Society at 12th & Market
Streets, William Lescaze Papers, Special Collections Research Center, Syracuse Uni-
versity Library.
6. Howe and Lescaze, Architectural Analysis of the proposed building for the Philadel-
phia Saving Fund Society, September 26, 1930, William Lescaze Papers, Special Col-
lections Research Center, Syracuse University Library.
7. Poetic functionalism was coined by Maartje Taverne, in Maartje Taverne, Cor
Wagenaar, and Martien de Vietter, ed., A Poetic Functionalist: J.J.P. Oud, 18901963.
The Complete Works (Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, 2001). Dynamic functionalism
was coined by Kathleen James in Erich Mendelsohn and the Architecture of German Mod-
ernism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997).
8. Ibid., 93.
9. Clarke Dailey, President of The Alliance Reality Company of New York to James M.
Willcox, September 12, 1930, Hagley Museum and Library.
10. Richard Seltzer, Rental Agent, to James M. Willcox, Hagley Museum and Library, Sep-
tember 12, 1930.
11. Ibid, 5.
12. James M. Willcox to George Howe, June 3, 1930, Hagley Museum and Library. Refers
to the comment from Seltzer, rental agent that people think the design is ugly and like a
loft building,
13. James M. Willcox to George Howe, June 3, 1930, Hagley Museum and Library.
14. Ibid.
15. Brand, see Frederic J. Schwartz, The Werkbund: Design Theory and Mass Culture before
the First World War (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996).
16. George Howe to James M. Willcox, May 26, 1930, Hagley Museum and Library.
17. Hitchcock and Johnson, The International Style, 74.
18. Ibid.
19. See David Leatherbarrow, Practically Primitive, in Architecture Oriented Otherwise
(New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2009).
20. See footnote 55 in William H. Jordy, PSFS: Its Development and Its Significance in
Modern Architecture, The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 21, no. 2
(May 1962), 64.
12 Revisiting the Modern Project

21. Ibid.
22. Burton Harrington, Essentials of Poster Design (Poster Advertising Association Inc, 1925),
135, footnoted in Catherine Gudis, Buyways: Billboards, Automobiles, and the American
Landscape (New York: Routledge, 2004), 74.
23. Both architects reportedly visited, separately, the 1925 exposition. Lorraine Welling
Lanmon, William Lescaze, Architect (Philadelphia: Art Alliance Press; Associated Univer-
sity Presses, 1987), 16; Robert A. M. Stern, George Howe: Toward a Modern American
Architecture (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1975).
24. The Delaware River Bridge (now known as the Benjamin Franklin Bridge) was
designed by Paul Philippe Cret, friend and colleague of George Howe, and completed
in 1926. The idea that the angled sign directly faces the bridge was first mentioned to
me in conversation with David Leatherbarrow, who writes about this phenomenon in
his book, Architecture Oriented Otherwise.
25. A Sign Erection Based on Scientific Tests, Signs of the Times, The National Journal of
Display Advertising (November 1932): 18. Hagley Museum and Library.
26. Delaware River Joint Commission of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, Report of the Del-
aware River Joint Commission of Pennsylvania and New Jersey (Camden, New Jersey: The
Commission 1931), 2. The total of 62,126 included 30,486 passengers by 1,810 buses,
31,205 passengers by 13,687 automobiles, and 435 pedestrians.
27. Does Modern Architecture Pay? The Architectural Forum (September 1943): 74.
28. Ibid.
29. A New Shelter for Savings: George Howe and William Lescaze, Architects, The Archi-
tectural Forum 57 (December 1932): 48398.
30. Does Modern Architecture Pay? The Architectural Forum (September 1943): 74.
31. Ibid., 78.
32. Ibid.
33. Report of the Building and Property Committee, May 1, 1933, Hagley Museum and
Library.

Bibliography

Architectural Forum. A New Shelter for Savings: George Howe and William Lescaze, Archi-
tects. The Architectural Forum 57 (December 1932): 48398.
Does Modern Architecture Pay? Architectural Forum (September 1943): 74.
Delaware River Joint Commission of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Report of the Delaware
River Joint Commission of Pennsylvania and New Jersey. Camden, New Jersey: The Com-
mission, 1931.
Gudis, Catherine. Buyways: Billboards, Automobiles, and the American Landscape. New York:
Routledge, 2004.
Harrington, Burton. Essentials of Poster Design. Poster Advertising Association Inc, 1925.
Hitchcock, Henry-Russell, and Philip Johnson. The International Style: Architecture Since 1922.
New York: W.W. Norton & Company, Inc., 1932.
PSFS Building 13

Howe, George and William Lescaze. Architectural Analysis of the proposed building for
the Philadelphia Saving Fund Society. September 26, 1930, Special Collections
Research Center, Syracuse University Library.
Jordy, William H. PSFS: Its Development and Its Significance in Modern Architecture.
The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 21, no. 2 (May 1962).
Lanmon, Lorraine Welling. William Lescaze, Architect. Philadelphia: Art Alliance Press;
Associated University Presses, 1987), 16.
Leatherbarrow, David. Architecture Oriented Otherwise. New York: Princeton Architectural
Press, 2009.
Practically Primitive. In Architecture Oriented Otherwise. New York: Princeton
Architectural Press, 2009.
Lescaze, William. Architectural Analysis of the Proposed Building for the Philadelphia
Saving Fund Society at 12th & Market Streets. William Lescaze Papers, Special Col-
lections Research Center, Syracuse University Library.
James, Kathleen. Erich Mendelsohn and the Architecture of German Modernism. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Schwartz, Frederic J. The Werkbund: Design Theory and Mass Culture before the First World
War. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1996.
Signs of the Times. A Sign Erection Based on Scientific Tests. Signs of the Times, The National
Journal of Display Advertising (November 1932): 18. Hagley Museum and Library.
Stern, Robert A. M. George Howe: Toward a Modern American Architecture. New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press, 1975.
Taverne, Maartje, Cor Wagenaar, and Martien de Vietter, ed. A Poetic Functionalist: J.J.P.
Oud, 18901963. The Complete Works. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, 2001.

You might also like