Critique by Brian Michael Lione, 28 March 1999
Summary: Hirshorn and Izenour seem to have spent many hours in archives researching and reconstructing the seriation and evolution of the White Tower lunch counters. Their analysis reflects their AIA backgrounds: the article skillfully addresses the What and Where of the buildings, but does not address the Why or How connected with their popularity and progression.
Steven Izenour has been hanging-ten on
a wave of thought that started to rip in the early '70s. Since
the publication of Learning from Las Vegas: The Forgotten Symbolism
of Architectural Form in 1972, Izenour and co-authors Robert
Venturi and Denise Scott Brown have been both vilified and deified
in certain circles for their critical and controversial views
on Modernism and its place in society. Almost twenty years later,
Izenour seems to be working the mantra for all it is worth, writing
papers
and lectures
built on the "Learning From" premise.
Izenour's co-author, Paul Hirshorn, has had a more humble past, having worked, written, and taught for various firms and universities. Currently he is the Department Head of Drexel University's architecture program.
In Vegas, Venturi and associates use a two-part approach to carefully dissect the architecture of the commercial strip. The first part explains the study and documentation of the evolution of the strip, and the second delves further to look at the symbolic and abstract elements of the strip to explain Why and How it has grown to such importance. The result is an in-depth, although occasionally presumptuous, look at the role of Modernist architecture in modern life.
Hamburgers falls short of a complete explanation. To use the Vegas format, Hamburgers only looks at the What and Where of White Tower lunch counters. The symbolic study is missing here: the popularity of the White Tower is only briefly touched upon, giving the "quick, clean and cheap" aspects of the establishment as reasoning behind their popularity. Perhaps this is enough for the classically trained architects, but it falls short in the interests of a multi-disciplinary and multi-faceted approach to understanding the past.
Admittedly, Hirshorn and Izenour define the overview as a simple "deadpan dissertation" about the evolution of the buildings, citing that it may earn them "an Honorary Doctorate in Pop History--or it may not." This lighthearted approach is reflected in the casual treatment of the subject. Hirshorn and Izenour start at the chain's beginning (Milwaukee, 1926), and chronologically walk the reader through five decades of change in the buildings, outlining the important changes in materials and construction. The feel of the article is decidedly object-oriented. The progression of the White Tower is discussed in terms of shape, size, form, and location, explaining the relevant use of certain materials and designs. This proves for interesting reading, albeit within a narrow focus.
Despite the object-oriented approach, the reader is unable to tell if either of the architects have ever seen more than one White Tower lunch counter in their lives. The images and references used in the article have a corporate-reminiscent quality: Perhaps Hirshorn and Izenour did nothing more than review written histories and archives of the White Tower corporation, putting everything in order and in an understandable context.
Hamburgers eventually proves to be a rough draft of a much longer--and more in-depth--investigation of the White Tower lunch towers. In 1979, Hirshorn and Izenour redeem themselves by revisiting their incomplete Learning from Hamburgers, publishing it as a book by the same name, complete with a symbolic analysis of the chain store's popularity and growth.
Hamburgers is a good example of an article written with a strictly factual viewpoint. No emotions seem to cloud the descriptive goals of Hirshorn and Izenour--they do not demand the immediate National Register listing of all remaining lunch counters, nor do they insist that all urbanites patronizing the chain stores begin paying homage to the historic materials, designs, and forms that make up each building. The stoic approach to the subject provides the reader with a concise history, leaving out the plea for help often present in preservationist manifestos. What have Hirshorn and Izenour learned from the hamburgers? A lot of facts, and few feelings.
Links found for Steven Izenour:
STEVEN IZENOUR, AIA, Principal (Resume)
Venturi, Scott Brown and Associates: Principal Architect
Drexel University Adjunct Faculty
Links found for Paul Hirshorn
Department Head, Architecture Program, Drexel University
Some other refernces to the two authors are here.