Archives Scrapbooks

The image displays a two-page spread from a newspaper. The headline at the top of both pages reads "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan." The article, authored by Harland R. Reddell, discusses a response from Professor George H. Edgell, dean of the faculty of architecture at Harvard, to criticisms made by Ralph Adams Cram. The article is continued from page one on the left page, and the right page features the remainder of the article along with several subheadings, including "Defends Robinson Hall Suggestion - Accepts 'Mary Ann Back' Phrase," "Not Architecture," "An Honest Little Person," and "Literally a Sketch."

The content of the article includes Edgell's defense of his suggestions for Robinson Hall and his acceptance of the nickname "Mary Ann back" for the proposed architectural feature. Edgell also clarifies his stance on the broader Harvard plan, engaging with Cram's criticisms and offering his perspective on architectural principles and the specific needs of the university. The article delves into the practical and aesthetic considerations that inform Edgell's approach to the design and expansion of university buildings.

The text is dense and the language is formal, reflecting the academic and professional context of the discussion. The layout of the newspaper is straightforward, with a focus on the written content, and minimal use of images or other visual elements. The paper appears to be from a time when such discussions on architecture and urban planning were of significant public interest.

The image is a page from a newspaper or magazine, featuring two articles written by Dean George H. Edgell of Harvard regarding the plans for Robinson Hall and the criticism by another architect, likely Charles H. Graham, concerning a Harvard plan.

Left Article (Headline: "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan")

• This article is titled "Edgell Answers Cram’s Criticism of Harvard Plan" and is authored by Harold R. Raithel.
• Dean Edgell defends the proposed design for Robinson Hall, rejecting the criticism that it doesn't match the "Mary Ann Back" phrase. He explains that Dean Edgell's design is an attempt to add space to the existing building, which is already substantial, while maintaining the front and back views of the school.
• Dean Edgell states that his proposal is a practical addition to the existing structure, aiming to be both functional and aesthetically pleasing.

Right Article (Headline: "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan" - Continued)

• This continuation highlights Dean Edgell's perspective on not altering the existing architecture and his detailed reasoning for why a new building is not feasible.
• Edgell emphasizes the importance of maintaining the existing building's character and functionality, particularly noting the concerns over the addition being too large and disrupting the architectural harmony.
• He argues that the current design, while not perfect, is a practical solution that respects the existing structure and the needs of the faculty.

Additional Points:

• Dean Edgell mentions the importance of the "suggestion" and the need for dialogue with critics to understand their views better.
• He also touches on the idea of a "new building impracticable" and the necessity of considering the current and future needs of the School of Architecture.
• Dean Edgell concludes by mentioning the intent to discuss further and to clarify the reasons behind his proposal.

The overall tone of the articles is defensive and explanatory, providing detailed arguments and justifications for Dean Edgell’s proposed design changes and their alignment with the architectural vision for Robinson Hall.

The image shows a newspaper clipping containing a dialogue between Dean George H. Edgell of Harvard University's School of Architecture and an architect named Cram regarding a design plan for Robinson Hall at Harvard.

The main article is titled "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan," and it defends the Robinson Hall suggestion. The text is divided into two parts:

1. First Part:

   • The article begins with Dean Edgell responding to criticism from Cram, who had suggested that the phrase "Mary Ann back" was inappropriate.
   • Edgell explains that the phrase was a suggestion and not a definitive decision. He clarifies that the proposal involves an addition to the existing building, Robinson Hall, which is located in Harvard Yard, and not a completely new building.
   • He emphasizes that the new addition is meant to connect with the existing structure and that the design maintains the integrity of the original hall.

2. Second Part:

   • Edgell addresses specific criticisms from Cram, who argued against the addition due to its potential to disrupt the harmony of the existing architecture.
   • Edgell defends his plan, stating that it is an addition to the existing building, not a new structure. He explains that the plan involves a small, logical extension that won't harm the aesthetic quality of the existing hall.
   • He also discusses the practicality of the design, suggesting that it would serve the needs of the School of Architecture effectively and efficiently.

In the lower right corner, there is a continuation of the article that discusses the architectural and structural considerations for the addition, emphasizing that it is a thoughtful and practical solution to the expansion needs of the school.

The overall context seems to be a defense of Dean Edgell's proposal for the expansion and renovation of Robinson Hall at Harvard University.

The image shows a newspaper clipping with an article titled "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan." The article is written by Harlan R. Ridelle and was published in The Harvard Crimson. The main focus of the article is a response from Dean George H. Edgell of the Harvard School of Architecture to criticism by Professor William W. Cram regarding a plan to expand Robinson Hall, which houses the School of Architecture.

Key points from the article include:

1. Dean Edgell's Response to Criticism:

   • Dean Edgell defends the plan to add a new building, "Mary Anne Back," to Robinson Hall, as suggested by Professor Cram.
   • He emphasizes that the plan was initially presented as a suggestion and not a final decision.

2. Architectural Concerns:

   • Dean Edgell agrees with Professor Cram that the addition should be architecturally harmonious with the existing building.
   • He acknowledges the difficulty of adding to a building of historical significance without altering its character.

3. Practical Considerations:

   • Edgell states that the expansion is necessary to accommodate the growing needs of the School of Architecture.
   • He also mentions that the current structure is not suitable for modern teaching methods and that the expansion would provide much-needed space and facilities.

4. Visualization and Practicality:

   • Dean Edgell provides a detailed description of the proposed addition, which includes an architectural drawing.
   • He explains that the addition would be a "suggestion" for further discussion and not a finalized plan.

5. Personal Involvement:

   • Dean Edgell mentions his personal involvement in the planning process and his desire to address the architectural and practical needs of the school.

6. Historical Context:

   • The article includes a brief mention of the historical significance of Robinson Hall, which was designed by Charles Follen McKim and is a notable example of Collegiate Gothic architecture.

7. Dean Edgell's Opinion on Criticism:

   • Dean Edgell expresses that he believes Professor Cram’s criticism is more constructive than destructive and that he is open to suggestions and improvements.

The clipping is dated October 26, 1927, and the article is continued on page 2, which is not visible in the image.

The image is a newspaper clipping from "The Harvard Crimson," featuring an article titled "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan." The article is a response by Professor George H. Edgell, the dean of the School of Architecture at Harvard, to criticisms made by Ralph Adams Cram regarding the Harvard Campus plan, specifically concerning the design of Robinson Hall.

Key Points from the Article:

1. Defense of Robinson Hall Suggestion:

   • Professor Edgell defends the suggestion that Robinson Hall should have an Anne front and a Mary Ann back, a design he believes fits the context and the existing architecture of Harvard Yard.

2. Only a Suggestion:

   • Edgell clarifies that his idea was simply a suggestion for the type of architecture that could suit the building, emphasizing that it was not a rigid proposal.

3. Not Architecture:

   • Edgell agrees with Cram that the current architecture of the Alumni Bulletin building, which Cram designed, does not align with the traditional Harvard aesthetic. He praises Cram's past contributions to architecture and acknowledges the need for understanding and collaboration.

4. Response to Cram's Critique:

   • Edgell discusses how he had previously suggested a plan that incorporated the existing structure of Robinson Hall with an addition to the building, aiming to maintain the architectural harmony of Harvard Yard.

5. New Building Impracticable:

   • Edgell explains why constructing a completely new building might not be feasible, citing practical issues like the need for architects and the functions of the existing building.

6. Likeness to Stetson:

   • He argues that the front of the proposed design for Robinson Hall should be treated similarly to Stetson Hall, maintaining a coherent and consistent architectural style.

7. An Honest Layout:

   • In a sidebar, Edgell praises the "Queen Anne" style suggested by Cram for the Harvard Yard front but expresses that it doesn't align with his vision for the specific context of Robinson Hall.

Overall, the article is a detailed response by Edgell to Cram’s criticisms, outlining his vision for a harmonious and practical architectural plan for Harvard's campus.

The image shows a clipping of a newspaper article titled "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan." The article is a continuation from a previous page, as indicated by the text "Continued from Page One."

The article discusses a response by Professor George H. Edgell, dean of the School of Architecture at Harvard University, to criticism from Ralph Adams Cram regarding the proposed Robinson Hall. The hall is intended to house the Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration.

Key points from the article include:

1. Defense of Robinson Hall: Dean Edgell defends the architectural plans for Robinson Hall, which were criticized by Cram. Edgell insists that the building is a "quiet and dignified" structure that adheres to the same architectural style as the surrounding buildings.

2. Criticism from Cram: Cram had suggested that the design of Robinson Hall was not in keeping with the architectural traditions of Harvard, particularly the style of the adjacent buildings.

3. Architectural Integrity: Edgell argues that the new building is designed to blend seamlessly with the existing architecture, maintaining the integrity of the Harvard Yard. He emphasizes that the building's design is not a "mere imitation" but a thoughtful addition that respects the historical context.

4. Personal Attack: Edgell expresses disappointment that Cram's criticism seemed to be a personal attack on the architects involved, rather than a constructive critique of the design.

5. Literary Sketch: The article also includes a section where Edgell comments on Cram's writing style, suggesting that while Cram is eloquent, his criticism lacks substance and is more focused on personal opinions rather than architectural merit.

6. Modest Little Person: Edgell concludes by expressing his surprise at Cram's criticism, given that Cram had previously praised the architects involved in the project.

The article is a detailed defense of the architectural plans for Robinson Hall, addressing the criticisms point by point and emphasizing the importance of maintaining architectural harmony within the Harvard campus.

This image shows a newspaper clipping from what appears to be an older publication, possibly several decades old given the yellowing of the paper. The clipping is mounted on a light beige background with three punched holes on the left side, indicating it was likely stored in a binder or folder. There are handwritten notes and markings on the beige background to the left of the clipping.

The article's headline reads "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan," suggesting an academic or architectural debate regarding plans for Harvard University. The article is continued from another page as indicated by the text "Continued from Page One." There are two columns with dense text in a small serif font, with various parts underlined, indicating that someone highlighted specific parts of the text. A secondary title within the article itself is "Defends Robinson Hall Suggestion Accepts 'Mary Ann Beck' Phrase."

The clipping seems to be part of a discussion or argument, likely regarding architectural plans for a part of Harvard University, and references to various individuals involved in this discussion are made in the text. The overall context, while not entirely clear from the image, suggests historical discourse with regard to university planning or policy.

The image depicts a handwritten note and two newspaper clippings attached to a piece of paper. The note reads: "Tuesday A.M. F.S. --- 7/21" and is positioned in the left margin. The clippings are articles titled "Edgell Answers Cram’s Criticism of Harvard Plan." The first article is continued into the second clipping.

The articles discuss Harvard Dean George H. Edgell's response to criticism from Mr. Ralph Adams Cram regarding the Harvard Plan. Edgell defends the suggestion related to Robinson Hall and accepts the term "Mary Ann Back." Both articles, written by Harland R. Ratcliff, delve into further discussion about plans and suggestions for Robinson Hall and the overall architecture and aesthetic of Harvard University.

The paper onto which these clippings are attached has some holes on the left margin, suggesting it might have been part of a binder or file. The style of the articles, as well as the aged and yellowed appearance of the clippings, indicates they are from an older publication.

The image shows two newspaper clippings pasted on a larger piece of light-colored paper with three hole punches on the left side. Both clippings have the same title: "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan."

The smaller clipping on the left has a headline with a subheading: "Defends Robinson Hall Suggestion - Accepts 'Mary Ann Back' Phrase," and it is authored by Harland R. Ratcliffe. The text discusses Professor George H. Edgell's response to Ralph Adams Cram's criticisms regarding plans for an addition to Robinson Hall. Edgell defends the architectural suggestions and accepts the phrase "Mary Ann Back."

The larger clipping on the right is a continuation of the article and includes multiple sections addressing various points, such as opposition to altering Robinson Hall's design, architectural considerations, and a response to criticisms about the "Queen Anne front and Mary Ann back" phrase. Edgell elaborates on the practical, aesthetic, and functional aspects of the plans and emphasizes the need for expansion to meet the School of Architecture's requirements.

There is a handwritten note on the left side of the page that reads: "Theatre 1922-1931."

The image shows a page from a publication, likely a magazine or journal, featuring an article titled "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan." The page is divided into two main columns of text, with a header at the top that reads "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan." The article appears to be a response to criticisms leveled by Cram regarding a plan for Harvard University, specifically addressing the design of Robinson Hall.

Key Details from the Image:

1. Title and Header:

   • The main title at the top of the page is "Edgell Answers Cram's Criticism of Harvard Plan."
   • The subtitle below the title reads: "Defends Robinson Hall Suggestion — Accepts 'Mary Ann Back' Phrase."
   • The article is attributed to Gertrude R. Edgell, who is identified as a professor of architecture at Harvard.

2. Content Overview:

   • The article discusses a debate surrounding the architectural design of Robinson Hall, a proposed addition to Harvard University.
   • Edgell defends the design, which was suggested by Adams Cram, and addresses criticisms raised by Cram.
   • The article includes a letter from Dean Edgell, who supports the design and clarifies misunderstandings about the plan.
   • There is mention of a "Mary Ann back" phrase, which Edgell accepts as a critique but defends as a reasonable design choice.

3. Layout and Structure:

   • The text is formatted in a traditional newspaper or magazine style, with justified alignment and clear paragraph breaks.
   • The left column contains the main body of the article, while the right column includes additional text, likely related to the same topic or a continuation of the discussion.
   • The right column begins with the phrase "Continued from Page On," indicating that the article spans multiple pages.

4. Visual Elements:

   • The page has a slightly faded, aged appearance, suggesting it is from an older publication.
   • There are handwritten markings or annotations in the top-left corner, including the word "Traces" and some numerical markings (e.g., "22" and "Traces 22"), which may indicate cataloging or reference purposes.
   • The text is printed in a serif font, typical of early to mid-20th-century publications.

5. Additional Text on the Right Column:

   • The right column includes a continuation of the discussion, with phrases like "Only a Suggestion" and "Not Architecture."
   • There is also a section titled "Literally a Sketch" and "An Honest Little Berson," which appear to be separate articles or commentary related to architectural design or critique.

Contextual Clues:

• The article is part of a larger debate about architectural design at Harvard University, specifically focusing on the proposed addition of Robinson Hall.
• The mention of "Mary Ann back" suggests a critique of the design's aesthetic or functional aspects, which Edgell addresses and defends.
• The inclusion of Dean Edgell's letter indicates institutional support for the design and an effort to clarify misunderstandings.

Overall Impression:

The image depicts a historical document from an architectural or academic journal, capturing a professional debate about university architecture. The layout, tone, and content suggest it is from the early to mid-20th century, reflecting the discourse surrounding architectural planning and design at elite institutions like Harvard.