VC Book Club: Devil in the White City

[gogo]

I have to admit though that a few times I wish there was a time line with dates alongside it for critical moments such as the various activities of the architecture as well as the length of time it took for them to decide on a location for the fair.

I agree, I think that would be very cool to see. Just from the moment they started talking about the dates, I couldn't get over how compressed that timeline would have to be.

 

And, sorry for those of you haven't got to this point yet, but I only promised no spoilers for the second half of the book (Parts III and IV), and this was in Part II:

 

How cool was it when he dropped the name "Ferris"?!?

 

I loved that. I was truly clueless up until then, I couldn't imagine how they were going to out-Eiffel Eiffel, and that just blew my mind. It also blew my mind because, until that moment, I had absolutely no idea about the history of the ferris wheel. If I'd been asked to take a guess, I would have said that it had its origins as some kind of gypsy rope-swing thing, at traveling carnivals in the middle ages, and then grew to what we now think of as a full-on ferris wheel. That it arrived fully-formed, and gloriously huge, in one big chunk of genius from the mind of one man, is astounding and just plain thrilling to me.

 

I realize that at some point a hundred years from now, people will be talking about the huge technological advances being made right now, but the stuff that was happening then just amazes me. That grillage foundation? So cool.

[jimmyjimmy]

I can't recall were exactly in the book the details of the Ferris wheel gets flushed out, so I hope I'm not jumping ahead too far.

2000 passengers at full capacity. 30+ "Pullman" cars (very heavy). You can almost understand why people were awed to the point of standing below on the platform during the machines first revolutions, loose hardware and other untethered debris raining down.

[Edie]

One thing that seems underplayed is how the city ended up all white. There was only a page or so on that (at least so far; I'm on page 200 or so).

 

Being a Chicagoan, I did know about the Ferris wheel, so that part was relatively ant-climactic for me

 

And agreed on the Devil/Fair pieces being tied together -- too gory and probably more dry than needed if separated.

[bleedorange]

I agree, I think that would be very cool to see. Just from the moment they started talking about the dates, I couldn't get over how compressed that timeline would have to be.

 

And, sorry for those of you haven't got to this point yet, but I only promised no spoilers for the second half of the book (Parts III and IV), and this was in Part II:

 

How cool was it when he dropped the name "Ferris"?!?

 

I loved that. I was truly clueless up until then, I couldn't imagine how they were going to out-Eiffel Eiffel, and that just blew my mind. It also blew my mind because, until that moment, I had absolutely no idea about the history of the ferris wheel. If I'd been asked to take a guess, I would have said that it had its origins as some kind of gypsy rope-swing thing, at traveling carnivals in the middle ages, and then grew to what we now think of as a full-on ferris wheel. That it arrived fully-formed, and gloriously huge, in one big chunk of genius from the mind of one man, is astounding and just plain thrilling to me.

 

 

Same goes for me. Without an active knowledge of the fair or the ferris wheel, I was on pins and needles trying to figure out what they would come up with.

[IATTBYB]

How cool was it when he dropped the name "Ferris"?!?

 

When I first read the book, this was one of those revelations.

 

I'd like to hear what you all think of this theory: With the use of the "staff" to meet the construction deadlines, the White City is perhaps the beginning of the disposable commercialism that characterizes our current culture. Instead of scaling back on what could be built using substantial materials (i.e. brick, stone, etc.) that would last for decades the Fair organizers and builders opted for buildings of a temporary nature that superficially projected granduer and substance, but were in fact transient in nature. No wonder Olmstead was at his wits end as this course of building was the antithesis of his philosphy of it taking many years before his artistic vision would be realized.

[kimcatch22]

I'd like to hear what you all think of this theory: With the use of the "staff" to meet the construction deadlines, the White City is perhaps the beginning of the disposable commercialism that characterizes our current culture.

That's an interesting theory and while the White City no doubt played a part in the development of disposable commercialism culture, it's an oversimplification to say that it was the beginning of such a culture. The industrial revolution made mass production possible, and for some time before the Fair material culture was already moving away from homemade artifacts to mass-produced objects. Instead of owning a small amount of family heirlooms, people were buying factory-produced items.

 

The rise of department stores and mail-order catalogs (like Sears and Montgomery Ward in Chicago) in the years after the Fair made it even easier for people to buy mass-produced goods. If you ever have a chance to take a look at a circa-1900 Sears catalog, do it -- you'll be amazed at what they sell. Anything and everything! And if anyone has ever toured a faithfully-recreated Guilded Age house museum, you may have noticed the gaudy patterns in the upholstery. They look tacky to us, but to people back then they were a marvel of what the industry could produce. The tackier, the better -- and people ate it up!

 

But I definitely think the White City represents a "changing of the guard," so to speak. Larson captures this well in his portrayal of Olmstead's agony and Burnham's vision. And because the White City happened on an international stage, it certainly sped up the consumption culture.

[gogo]

Oh, and how about getting through the end of Part 3 by next Monday?

I think some of the hold-up in getting started on this was just that, the "getting started" part. I'm thinking now that giving everyone another week for the next hundred pages (approximately) and then another week for the last hundred or so might drag this out (especially since this is such a zippy read). So unless I hear any pleas for more time, I'm going to go ahead and change this to, let's go ahead and start discussing the whole thing next Monday.

 

So much of what we've discussed already covers aspects of the entire book anyway, I think we'd just be dragging this out if we went any longer than that.

 

Keep chatting! This is good stuff.

[Winston Legthigh]

(especially since this is such a zippy read).

Jeez. I'm on page 50 after two weeks...

 

I ain't got time to read!

[IATTBYB]

That's an interesting theory and while the White City no doubt played a part in the development of disposable commercialism culture, it's an oversimplification to say that it was the beginning of such a culture. The industrial revolution made mass production possible, and for some time before the Fair material culture was already moving away from homemade artifacts to mass-produced objects. Instead of owning a small amount of family heirlooms, people were buying factory-produced items.

 

The rise of department stores and mail-order catalogs (like Sears and Montgomery Ward in Chicago) in the years after the Fair made it even easier for people to buy mass-produced goods. If you ever have a chance to take a look at a circa-1900 Sears catalog, do it -- you'll be amazed at what they sell. Anything and everything! And if anyone has ever toured a faithfully-recreated Guilded Age house museum, you may have noticed the gaudy patterns in the upholstery. They look tacky to us, but to people back then they were a marvel of what the industry could produce. The tackier, the better -- and people ate it up!

 

But I definitely think the White City represents a "changing of the guard," so to speak. Larson captures this well in his portrayal of Olmstead's agony and Burnham's vision. And because the White City happened on an international stage, it certainly sped up the consumption culture.

 

Good point. The Gilded Age certainly reflected a changing of the guard from many standpoints. The increased urbanization and industrialization of the United States was occurring at this time.

[yermom]

That Ferris bit was awesome. There have been so many of those fun little revelations in the book, Disney is another good example. When I come to those, I back up and read them out loud to my partner like, "Ooooh, oooh, listen to this one...! See?! original spray paint! That's just crazy!"

[turtlegirl37]

That pic of the original Ferris wheel is awesome, tho I must admit those things scare the bejeezus out of me.

[miss jayne]

Especially since reading this book, I'm a huge fan of Olmstead. The sections about him and Burnham are just so much more fascinating to me than the Holmes stuff. I guess after watching so many seasons of Law & Order, I'm not surprised at one man's capacity for cruelty. But to see what these people accomplished on the positive side, seems like the really amazing thing to me! I can't think of anything that could come together in this way today.

 

 

So true about Olmstead. I love the part where he is describing his vision for the lake and the boats and the grasses.

 

And his obsession with "poetic mystery" brilliant.

 

As far as Holmes goes he just seems to stop at nothing. So creepy and just when I feel like I have to put the book down up pops Burnham. Larson ties the two stories together so well.

[Central Scrutinizer]

Especially since reading this book, I'm a huge fan of Olmstead. The sections about him and Burnham are just so much more fascinating to me than the Holmes stuff. I guess after watching so many seasons of Law & Order, I'm not surprised at one man's capacity for cruelty. But to see what these people accomplished on the positive side, seems like the really amazing thing to me! I can't think of anything that could come together in this way today.

 

So true about Olmstead. I love the part where he is describing his vision for the lake and the boats and the grasses.

 

And his obsession with "poetic mystery" brilliant.

 

As far as Holmes goes he just seems to stop at nothing. So creepy and just when I feel like I have to put the book down up pops Burnham. Larson ties the two stories together so well.

What interested me about Olmstead was, once he gets this vision of his pallet, upon visiting the rural landscapes in Europe, the types of plans he details, I don't know if they were indigenous to the Midwest as he envisioned them, but I worked three summers at Starved Rock State Park about 80 miles from Chicago and the woods are filled with many of the same plants. I wonder if it was a Midwestern version of kudzu.

[miss jayne]

Is there anything like kudzu ?

 

"Kudzu was introduced from Japan into the United States in 1876 at the Philadelphia Centennial Exposition, where it was promoted as a forage crop and an ornamental plant. From 1935 to the early 1950s the Soil Conservation Service encouraged farmers in the southeastern United States to plant kudzu to reduce soil erosion as above, and the Civilian Conservation Corps planted it widely for many years." from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kudzu.

 

 

I'll do a little research at work today and let you folks know.

 

I was thinking about going to visit this part of Chicago next time I go to the midwest....nothing like a walk in the park.

[gogo]

This is just a bump to remind anyone who's planning on catching up on some reading over the weekend (or anyone who's read this before and just wants to jump in), it's no holds barred as of Monday, no "spoiler" restrictions, etc.

 

I'd like to talk about people's favorite "characters" in the book. Obviously there's a lot of love for Olmsted here, but I also really got a kick out of Sol Bloom. Anybody else?

[LouieB]

Only on the first chapter..I guess I better get off here and go back to reading....

 

LouieB

[IATTBYB]

I'd like to talk about people's favorite "characters" in the book. Obviously there's a lot of love for Olmsted here, but I also really got a kick out of Sol Bloom. Anybody else?

 

Pendagrast, hands down. Holmes may be a psycho, but ol' Pendagrast was bananas.

[kimcatch22]

bump

[jimmyjimmy]

bump

 

Yeah, sorry. Been to busy lately to reply.

Real quickly, Pendagrast is the only element within the entire book I could've lived without. At least I didn't feel he brought enough to the story to continue to reference to him continually throughout. While interesting, Larson could have just gone into a summation of the man, his psychosis, his infatuation with sending postcards to prominent citizens and the lead up to the murder of Carter Harrison and how that tied into the fair.

 

Again with the trivia stuff: I love the tie-ins with Pabst Blue Ribbon, Cracker Jack, etc.

[kimcatch22]

Again with the trivia stuff: I love the tie-ins with Pabst Blue Ribbon, Cracker Jack, etc.

After I first read this book, any friends I saw drinking PBR would be informed that "PBR won its BR at the World's Columbian Exposition." I'm a lame drinking buddy.

[IATTBYB]

Yeah, sorry. Been to busy lately to reply.

Real quickly, Pendagrast is the only element within the entire book I could've lived without. At least I didn't feel he brought enough to the story to continue to reference to him continually throughout. While interesting, Larson could have just gone into a summation of the man, his psychosis, his infatuation with sending postcards to prominent citizens and the lead up to the murder of Carter Harrison and how that tied into the fair.

 

Again with the trivia stuff: I love the tie-ins with Pabst Blue Ribbon, Cracker Jack, etc.

Not that murder and mental illness are laughing matters, but the Pendagrast element brings an almost humorous element into the narrative. When he shows up at the corporation counsel's office announcing to the staff that he is their soon-to-be new boss, and the current counsel shows him around the office is one of the funniest things I can imagine.

 

In addition, the inclusion of Pendagrast is a necessary element because it allows a comparision between the cold calculating criminal mind of Holmes and the criminal actions that are the unfortunate consequence of Pendagrast's obvious mental illness. Holmes' crimes are the end result of his evil nature, he knew what he was going to do and did it. Pendagrast's crime was the result of his mental illness not allowing him to have a grasp on the reality of his situation.

[Central Scrutinizer]

Not that murder and mental illness are laughing matters, but the Pendagrast element brings an almost humorous element into the narrative. When he shows up at the corporation counsel's office announcing to the staff that he is their soon-to-be new boss, and the current counsel shows him around the office is one of the funniest things I can imagine.

The George Costanza of the 19th century.

[turtlegirl37]

Finished the book this morning. All in all, an entertaining and informative read.

[LouieB]

Halfway through....

 

LouieB

[gogo]

I'd like to hear what you all think of this theory: With the use of the "staff" to meet the construction deadlines, the White City is perhaps the beginning of the disposable commercialism that characterizes our current culture. Instead of scaling back on what could be built using substantial materials (i.e. brick, stone, etc.) that would last for decades the Fair organizers and builders opted for buildings of a temporary nature that superficially projected granduer and substance, but were in fact transient in nature. No wonder Olmstead was at his wits end as this course of building was the antithesis of his philosphy of it taking many years before his artistic vision would be realized.

I'm late replying to this, but I did want to say a few things.

 

First, yes, the whole concept of the fair was something that had to be pure hell for Olmsted. The idea of trying to create this landscape, virtually instantaneously, must have been a huge leap for him. Just thinking about the way he worked is so fascinating to me, the thought that you'd plan something with no expectations of it truly looking the way it's supposed to look for decades is insane, but beautiful.

 

The concept of the fair as something ephemeral is something else. I don't know that this was a new standard for this fair. I think he mentions later in the book, when Olmsted is touring the grounds of the Paris fair, that the Eiffel Tower and gardens were meant to be permanent, but the buildings were not? Or did I imagine that? Anyway, my understanding was that all worlds fairs were designed in that way, with mostly temporary structures. I'd say the difference here may have been that Chicago's fair was on such a grand scale, it's hard to imagine that anyone would go to all of that trouble for something that was designed to be temporary.

 

Which brings me back to the thing that I keep dwelling on here: could we do something like this today? The private financing, with oversight from the government, the incredibly tight design and construction schedule? Would anyone even attempt it? I think the only parallel I can see to this kind of achievement today would be in cities that are preparing for the Olympic games. The rate of construction, with a firm deadline, the huge amounts of money spent, the mandatory infrastructure upgrades, etc. And the scene where he describes the opening of the fair, with the electric lights flashing on across the grounds, the bands playing, the huge crowds, definitely reminded me of the pomp and spectacle of an Olympic opening ceremony.