MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W229817338

Adler & Sullivan: The End of the Partnership and Its Aftermath

2005· article· en· W229817338 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rochelle Berger Elstein

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of the Illinois State Historical Society · 2005
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueArchitecture, Modernity, and Design
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPraiseTragedy (event)BiographyGeneral partnershipArchitectureSociologyClassicsArt historyHistoryLawArtPolitical scienceLiteratureSocial scienceArchaeology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The firm of Adler & Sullivan, combining the talents of Dankmar Adler (1844-1900) and Louis Sullivan (1856-1924), is well known in the history of nineteenth century American architecture. Most scholarly accounts of the firm emphasize Adler's engineering and acoustical skill; and praise-and illustrate-Sullivan's great talents as a designer. Adler is also regarded as the businessman while Sullivan is always depicted as the artist. The partners themselves acknowledged their mutual strengths, as Adler wrote in his autobiography, which is in his archive at the Newberry Library in Chicago: Of late years, owing to the preeminence in the artistic field of my partner Mr. Sullivan, I have devoted my efforts to the study and solution of the engineering problems which are so important an incident in the design of modern building.1 That they joined their abilities and flourished in the early 1880s through the early 1890s and dissolved their association in 1895 is indisputable. So are the facts that both Dankmar Adler and Louis Sullivan continued their careers alone, with much less success than during their years as partners. The historical record supports this accepted wisdom, and it provides evidence that the economic conditions in the 1890s strained firms in both Chicago, where Adler & Sullivan did almost all of their work, and in New York, where they built their last building together. The story of the firm of Adler & Sullivan begins with promise and ends in tragedy. Two men, born a decade apart, from very different backgrounds, and with distinctive abilities, lives, and temperaments, joined forces to produce some of the most memorable buildings in this country's history. One was trained by apprenticeship, the other had some formal education. Adler needed a partner in the boom decade of the 1880s, when the city's leaders were determined to become the equal of New York; and their answer to the Metropolitan Opera House was the Auditorium. With its superb sound and beautiful ornament, it was the first of Adler & Sullivan's many commissions in and outside of Chicago that expanded the firm's size and reputation. Adler & Sullivan joined the ranks of noteworthy Chicago architectural firms, building skyscrapers, concert halls, warehouses, and factories. In 1893, the World's Columbian Exposition focused the eyes of the world on Chicago, with its impressive lakefront site, and a burgeoning downtown. The visitors wrote home about the Fair, particularly the pristine classicism of its Court of Honor. Two innovations also attracted attention-Adler & Sullivan's distinctive polychromatic Transportation Building and George Ferris's enormous wheel.2 Economic depression followed in the wake of the fair, and the only building on their drawing board in 1894 was the Guaranty Building in Buffalo, New York, which came to Adler & Sullivan as a result of the Auditorium's fame. It was their final commission; and Dankmar Adler and Louis Sullivan parted company. Adler briefly left the practice of architecture, but when he returned, there was no reconciliation. Adler's practice in the early 1880s had consisted largely of small factories and office buildings (many for the entrepreneur and real estate developer Martin Ryerson) and houses for successful German Jewish merchants. All the designs were competently done and a few commercial buildings showed Sullivan's early spiky ornament. And the buildings came in within budget, which was very important to Adler who oversaw the business side of the firm. As jobs increased in size, cost, and complexity, the roles of Dankmar Adler and Louis Sullivan diverged, with Adler taking on the engineering tasks and Sullivan producing gorgeous ornament. Adler was responsible for Louis Sullivan's making the transition from decorator to architect; Sullivan made Adler & Sullivan's architecture unique. At its height, Adler & Sullivan was one of the most creative, productive, and influential of Chicago's architectural firms-busy and exceptionally prosperous. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,035
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,102

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,014
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0300,035
Communication savante0,0250,019
Science ouverte0,0020,016
Intégrité de la recherche0,0100,016
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0130,003

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,022
Tête enseignante GPT0,215
Écart entre enseignants0,193 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2005
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of the Illinois State Historical SocietyMême sujetArchitecture, Modernity, and DesignTravaux en français237 207