Talk:List of Art Deco architecture

Buildings to be discussed

I thought I'd start a special place for this.

• Alameda Theater
  

KEEP It is described by Crowe in Deco by the Bay as "outstanding example of Deco theater style." Carptrash (talk) 17:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

• Belmont-Sheffield Trust and Savings Bank Building
  

REMOVE. I looked at the links at that article and although Art Deco is mentioned I find that the Neo-Classical influences (esp. in the photographs) far outweigh the deco. Carptrash (talk) 17:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

REMOVE. Noted this in my own comment. SmartOne

• Paramount Theatre (Oakland, California)
  

KEEP Crowe calls this , the supreme example of Deco theater style in the Bay Area. Carptrash (talk) 17:15, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Beautiful Art Deco' exterior. I say KEEP.

• College Park (Toronto)
  

REMOVE. Although McHugh's Toronto Architecture describes this as an "Art Deco building," that seems to be on the strength of the "Art Deco interior" and "Deco concert hall." I feel (men have feelings too) that we should only list buildings that look decoish from the exterior. Carptrash (talk) 17:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

• Park Plaza Hotel, Los Angeles, 1920

I'm looking into it, but 1920 is pretty early for deco Carptrash (talk)

REMOVE Gebhard describes it as "Goodhueseque" and avoids the "deco" word. So that brings up the case of

• Los Angeles Public Library.

I say REMOVE Carptrash (talk) 22:00, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

KEEP. The pilliars on the outside greatly resemble Art Deco, and many other components of the building signify its Art Deco standing.

• Los Angeles City Hall

REMOVE It's another Goodhuesque event - pre-deco Carptrash (talk) 22:09, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

None of the three Los Angeles buildings mentioned about are called deco by Gebhard et al, ‘’A Guide to Architecture in Los Angeles & Southern California’’, Peregrine Press Inc., Santa Barbara, CA, 1977, McGrew and Julian, ‘’Landmarks of Los Angeles’’, Harry N. Abrams, Inc., NY, 1994, or Moore, Becker and Campbell, The City Observed: Los Angeles, Vintage Books, New York, 1984

KEEP. The resemblance of the City Hall compared to many other famous Art Deco buildings is enough to justify its stature as an Art Deco building.

Pan-Pacific?

How about this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pan-Pacific_Auditorium

I didn't see it on the list.

The Pan-Pacific Auditorium is actually a Streamline Moderne building. Most streamline moderne buildings have curved Art Deco styles, circle windows, and the such. Art deco is usually layers, like ocean waves, and sunburst designs. SmartOne

I unilaterally added this to the list. Does it need to be sourced? Carptrash (talk) 21:45, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hotel Astoria?

Hotel Astoria (Saint Petersburg), St. Petersburg, 1912

Not only it predates the style by over a decade, there are virtually no Art Deco resembling elements on the outside of the building. Grubel (talk) 13:35, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

How are we, here

going to treat red links here? Often, in other wikilist articles, red links are not allowed. That, among things, keeps the lists from getting too clutteres up with local favorites, etc. One view is that if a building is signigicent then it should have its own article, making it blue. I know some of the red buildings here and they are fine examples, but . . ... no ticket, no laundry? Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 21:47, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

At WP:Lists#Development, an allowance is made for red links, though not for articles made up primarily of them. At WP:RED, the existence of red links is okayed for subjects worthy of their own article. Binksternet (talk) 15:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Re-Organization

I've read this list many times, and I think it would be easier to access the US buildings if we re-organize them by state. I've got a whole bunch of uncategorized pages in the "by state" category, and I would like to include many on the list.

Additionally, some of the buildings on the list are Streamline Moderne. The question is if we (or I) should make a list of Streamline Moderne buildings, or perhaps leave them at the bottom? SmartOne

Organizing by state sounds like a good idea. I've always thought of Streamline Moderne as being a sub divisioin of Art Deco, along with "Zig-Zag Moderne" and "PWA (or WPA) Moderne". I say that we should include all that stuff. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 22:17, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Additionally, I'd then say arrange chronologically within each state. Also, it looks like a long night's work to me. Carptrash (talk) 22

20, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

So, you're telling me that the states should be in alphabetical order? That's exactly how I plan to arrange them. The buildings will also be in alphabetical order, but not organized by letter, like now. Time doesn't matter; I've spent days categorizing Art Deco buildings spilled out in Wikipedia. Just need to confirm this before I can do the categorization. SmartOne

I'm suggesting (different from "telling") that the states be alphabetized, but that each state be arranged by date of the building. That would provide a nice historical timeline for each state. Either way, yes, by all means, GO FOR IT What ever you do will be a good revision. Carptrash (talk) 22:40, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I see what you're "suggesting." So the states should be in order by oldest to newest, instead of A to Z? If that's what you're telling me, I do that right now. SmartOne

Re-Re-Organization

Now, I've been thinking that List of Art Deco architecture should be organized in a table like all of the other Architecture Lists. I don't know about time, but it might work out. SmartOne

Re-Re-Re-Organization

Throughout my Art Deco architecture listing, I was thinking the VERY art deco buildings should be first, and the Art Deco "fusion" should be closer to the bottom. What I mean by "Fusion" is like Art Deco and Neoclassical or Victorian mixed together, such as Art Deco-looking Neoclassical pillars. Since Art Deco Neoclassical architecture is very different than the formal Art Deco looks, they should be re-listed at the bottom or indicated in the list as they are enlisted now. Personally, I prefer the second choice, as the list does not have to be too organized, but there should be some sort of indication within each building which is true Art Deco and which "Fusion." SmartOne

I feel that if a building is considered Deco, then it goes in the list. If it is a hybred of some sort, then we thrash it as to whether it is Deco or not and either keep it in it's place or "throw the package out." Carptrash (talk) 17:16, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I'm more in the 'throw it out' camp than otherwise. I would like this page to show buildings that are acknowledged to be prime examples of Art Deco alone, not hybrids or fusions. It's enough for a building to say at its article page that it is partly Art Deco and partly something else—we do not have to put that building in this list. It would be present in one of the various Art Deco building categories regardless of its absence here in this list. Binksternet (talk) 18:35, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Let's not do anything rash, but, for example, I just started looking at the buildings already listed and quickly came to this one. College Park (Toronto). What do folks here think of it, thumbs up or thumbs down? Carptrash (talk) 21:34, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

The 1930 interior photograph certainly demonstrates Art Deco, but the exterior is not so easy to categorize. Binksternet (talk) 22:11, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Alright, well first of all, the College Park is a mix of Art Deco (note the ripples on the "flat pillars") and Neoclassical. I think that removing the Art Deco "fusions" would be a great idea... didn't really think of that. The "List of Art Deco architecture" page we can all agree that it is solely for Art Decoey buildings. I've read through more than half of the Art Deco buildings on the entire Wikipedia, adding more Art Deco to the list, so I can really tell which is truly Art Deco and which a mix. Buildings such as the Social and Public Art Resource Center in Venice, California, is completely Art Deco. The Alameda Theatre in Alameda, California, is more like Mayan Revival, and buildings such as the Belmont-Sheffield Trust and Savings Bank Building in Chicago is a bad example of Art Deco- the building has Art Deco components, which qualifies for categorization, but as of now does not qualify for the List of Art Deco architecture. I can fix this up quickly, classifying each and every building by Art Deco and which should only be in categories. Questions? SmartOne

First of all I’d like to mention how much I am enjoying the adult nature of this discussion as opposed to others I’ve been involved in. That’s the good news. The. …. other news is that our discussion is slowly filling up with phrases such as “Art Deco fusions" and “Art Decoey” and ideas like “we can all agree”, “I can really tell which is truly Art Deco and which a mix” and “but as of now does not qualify for the List of Art Deco architecture” and this tends to make me nervous. I start to itch while reading them. I am not even quite sure that I understand this sentence. “I can fix this up quickly, classifying each and every building by Art Deco and which should only be in categories.” The work done on the list so far is great, it is much improved and going to get, I imagine, much better, but I see no reason to do things too quickly. Someone asked for questions. Here is one. Can we define Art Deco Architecture? Is a basically neo-classic exterior with a great deco lobby an example? For example. Carptrash (talk) 17:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Alameda Theatre

We ought to restrict ourselves to observations published by experts. A committee of Wikipedians eyeballing photographs to form an original consensus is not what building the encyclopedia is all about. SmartOneK's example of the Alameda Theatre is described as "eclectic" by Therese Poletti, author of Art Deco San Francisco: The Architecture of Timothy Pflueger, a very thorough book. Poletti notes the theatre's Moorish Revival rosettes flanking central vertical Art Nouveau flower patterns separated by vertical Streamline Moderne columns. This last feature makes Poletti say that it, the El Rey Theatre (of San Francisco) and the Oakland Paramount were Pflueger's most Moderne exteriors, and as we know, Moderne is a subset of Art Deco. The interior is much more Art Deco, says Poletti, but Janet Levaux of the San Jose Mercury News adds that there are Cubist touches in the main mural. "Mayan Revival" isn't mentioned by Poletti or any other writer. The San Francisco Chronicle and the Alameda Magazine call it Art Deco in an overall sense. From all that, do we list it or not? I think we do, as the umbrella term "Art Deco" allows for eclecticism. Binksternet (talk) 18:51, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Sounds pretty good to me. (opinion) List it. This is not to be so much our call as some author or expert's. I'm not inclined to recomend anything more about the examples here until I can get home and check out my library on San Francisco and deco architecture. More of a problem, I suspect are going to be buildings that show up in articles and are labeled as being art deco by some other editor and there is no source given. Often a look at a picture will suffice, but as you suggest, not always.

Alright... so I'm pretty disturbed by the conversation now. So what I've been trying to say about "Fusion" is like the mix of two different architectural themes. Now, Streamline Moderne is much like Art Deco, and there should indeed be a seperate page for Moderne. I think, and "as we can all agree," while I apologize on that cliche, that this List of Art Deco architecture should set the greatest examples of Art Deco architecture in the world. Now, buildings like the Alameda does look to me like Mayan Revival, an architecture similar to Art Deco, same as how Streamline Moderne is similar to Art Deco as well. I apologize if the building seemed wrongly pictured by my impression, but from that argument by Binksternet debating the different decour of the exterior, the Alameda doesn't deserve to be hanging on the Art Deco "wall of fame."

Now the second discussion is the argument within interior design. Now, I know absolutely nothing about interior design, so whatever buildings I have added to the list or categories and whichever I have not, I can't recognize looks "beyond the window." So, I wouldn't suggest listing the Art Deco buildings, and I apologize using "Art Decoey," that have Art Deco interior designs, such as furniture, posters, and all other of the sort. A good decision would be to have another category with "Art Deco interiors" in the "Art Deco buildings" category. When buildings are enlisted as Art Deco architecture or buildings, and think about this one, does the interior actually deserve to be considered "architecture" or a "building?" They are a form of style, rather.

Furthermore, I would like to make another apology to the "bloggers" here on this page who have been shocked by what I've written. But if we take the close eye at any building, it is very simple to see the look of Art Deco and any others. There just seems to be some sort of common sense in noticing Art Deco between other forms of architecture, such as the layered, wave-like columns. Now, if any of the Wikipedians have any sort of books to prove a building a mix of different architectural styles, just fix it. Now, I, again, apologize, but I must revisit the Alameda. Art Nouveau is not related to Art Deco, and it is not a complete form of Art Deco. But anyone can be a judge. If anyone of you Wikipedians would kindy list some buildings that seem "unworthy," do so as you please. And to the past "commentators of linguistics," please don't criticize the wording in the argument between different forms of architecture. SmartOne

I can tell you have a good heart, but Wikipedia is not about you deciding what "looks to me like" with "common sense", or about what happens "if we take the close eye at any building". It is instead about what published experts think, and a number of them think the Alameda Theatre to be a good example of Art Deco, despite its Moorish and Nouveau touches.

On the other hand, I think there is far too little of interior architecture in Wikipedia, and I think your idea of starting an interior architecture category, complete with subcategories such as Art Deco interior architecture, is a good one. (The same with landscape architecture. Two great swaths of endeavor that have precious little representation on Wikipedia.) I will help where I can in locating expert opinion, but I won't be eyeballing a photo to put my opinion down as fact.

By the way, all Streamline Moderne falls under the umbrella of Art Deco. Binksternet (talk) 08:04, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

This is mostly a reply to SmartOne, but as with everything on wikipedia, it is for the world to see and reply to if desired. First of all, I am sorry that you are “pretty disturbed” by this conversation because I am delighted with it. I see no name-calling, no rank pulling, no ‘’’you’re wrong, wrong, wrong,’’ or any of those unpleasant things. I see an attempt by serious, informed, well-intended editors trying to work their way through a rather complicated situation. I suspect that I might be one of the “past "commentators of linguistics," mentioned and that is because, from my perspective, words matter. They typically have very specific meanings, and these meanings frequently vary from user to user. I actually like words such as “decoey” and “decoish” because to me they are quite explicit. I am not sure what the use of the word “bloggers” here implies, so please feel free to expand. I see us all as being equal wikipedia editors. When I read, “. Art Nouveau is not related to Art Deco” I am inclined to say that they bear the same relationship as my father does to me. Related to be sure, but definitely not the same thing. I have lots of books on deco and architecture in general and will try to use them to back-up whatever points I make about a particular building. Interiors. Art Deco interiors are not just created by furniture and accessories and other things that can be removed. The shape of the room creates rather good deco interiors by the plaster details built in, by the lighting and the lighting fixtures, by wrought iron (or anything else) grillwork, but murals and probably more. I am not in favor of listing buildings on the list that do not have definite deco exteriors, but there is a good argument that can be made for doing this and I leave it to someone who feels that way to present it. Finally (for now) I do not view this list as being a “best of” event at all. I see it is being as comprehensive a list of art deco buildings in the world as we can generate. whoops Carptrash (talk) 19:54, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, I would like to apologize to you all again for making you worry... didn't mean to get in that direction. Now, with interior design, I can never find any pictures or photos on those pages, so whichever buildings have Art Deco furniture and other decour of the sort, they should have very good photograph examples. Now, Art Nouveau is a French style (Nouveau is French, obviously, meaning New), but is in a whole other nature than Art Deco. There seems to be more curves, more flow, and more European looks, while Art Deco has layers and waves or rays. When I see Art Nouveau, I think of the Yellow Submarine look, don't really know why. But Art Nouveau, point promised, is a completely different look at Architecture. Now, they do look somewhat similar, but they are not the same architecture.:Taking another look at the Alameda once again, I can see the Art Deco pillars and other features on the facade. I still have a slight objection, but I can't blame any of you Wikipedians. If you all agree the building is Art Deco enough, I rest the issue. And to my friends at the bottom who have chosen the decision list, thank you for building one. And again I would like to thank Carptrash for rejecting the Belmont. I completely disagree with any mix of Art Deco and Neo-Classical that can be considered Art Deco entirely. There are two ways to deal with a mystery: uncover it, or... eliminate it. SmartOne

Perhaps you should think a bit about why Crowe, the author of a published book on Art Deco, would consider the Alhambra to be an "outstanding example of Deco theater style " . Going a bit farther with Art Nouveau, if you take a look at our article you'll find that it really is not a French style, rather the name, as it is used in America, and sometimes other places, is a French word. Carptrash (talk) 20:31, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I've read through Art Nouveau, and it was indeed the French "New Art." But it wasn't just popular with the US. However, Art Deco, like said, is another topic on architecture. And when you, Carptrash, mentioned the Alhambra, do you mean the Alameda, like discussed, or some other building? SmartOne

Yes, you are right. the Alameda. I wrote Alhambra by mistake, getting caught up in some Moorish thing. Carptrash (talk) 21:38, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

It appears to me

that the last, fairly massive edit of yours, was just cleaning up and that more more buildings were removed. Sound right? Carptrash (talk) 20:58, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

No, no buildings were removed. Just redundant city and architect links—a lot of them. The one extra deletion I made was that I pulled "now home to Southwestern University School of Law" from the Bullocks Wilshire entry. The building is what we are concerned with, not the occupant. Binksternet (talk) 21:26, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

We need to discuss and decide

whether or not ships are considered to be architecture. An unregistered editor removed a ship from this list and I put it back pending discussion here. Failing to get any, I am inclined to consider them to be architecture - see Naval architecture. But feel free to pitch in your thoughts. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 23:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Also Marine architecture. Carptrash (talk) 23:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

So what

do you folks think about buildings such as Wells Fargo Center (Minneapolis) - a modern, perhaps "Post-Modern Art Deco" pile. I say NO and if I don't hear some discussion about why it should remain I shall eject it soonish. Carptrash (talk) 19:12, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of Art Deco architecture. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120717041508/http://turnerscross.com/church/index.php to http://www.turnerscross.com/church/index.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:35, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

sources, use them

Hey, I keep seeing this list-article appear on my Watchlist because it links to articles I have created, probably all being National Register of Historic Places-listed buildings in the U.S. having Category:Art Deco architecture or similar category. So far the list has few if any sources included. Presumably relevant sources are at the linked articles. But, expecially for places that have no link, such as item "MacDougal Memorial Chapel, Fort Wayne", IMHO it is essential to include the source that leads anyone to believe that the place is an example of Art Deco style. --Doncram (talk) 04:00, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

For example, the entire section for the Congo links to no articles about buildings, and has no sources. I removed it from the article to put it here for discussion.

Democratic Republic of Congo

• Bukavu
  • Mayor's Office
  • Hotel Elila
  • Notre Dame de la Paix
  • La Lycée Lima
  • Hotel Horizons

Palace of Justice, Lubumbashi

• Lubumbashi
  • Palace of Justice
  • Park HotelI

Are there any sources suggesting any of these are Art Deco? --Doncram (talk) 17:20, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

I do see that the Lubumbashi Wikipedia article does assert one building (the Palace of Justice) is Art Deco ("Some of the most prominent examples of colonial architecture, such as the art-déco style Palace of Justice, the Grand Hotel, or the Catholic cathedral St Pierre et Paul, have been restored since the late 20th century"), but the assertion there is unsupported by any source, so IMO the assertion should not be made in this list-article. I see no mention at all of the Park Hotel in the Lubumbashi article, maybe the Grand Hotel is meant? Per Booking.com, a Park Hotel does exist, but I see no assertion of Art Deco style anywhere.

Googling "Palais Justice Lubumbashi" I find this "Leopoldville 1930s – Postcards from the Art Deco (I)" blog-like posting dated January 2, 2018, but I am not sure if it is usable here in Wikipedia. It also mentions "For ease of location, the tour begins at the Pullman Kinshasa Grand Hotel on Ave. Batetela" without actually asserting the Grand Hotel is itself Art Deco. --Doncram (talk) 17:45, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

I am some what comfortable with those of us who edit this page looking at a picture of a building and making an educated assessment as to whether a building is deco or not. With that in mind I have removed "The Bund, Shanghai, China" from the list because it is a lot of buildings, many dating from the 1910s and others described as being Beaux-Arts styled. Carptrash (talk) 20:31, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

I just removed

• The Divinity of Light ("Electra") statue by Edward Field Sanford Jr. on the Alabama Power Company General Office Building, Birmingham, 1926
  because it is a statue not architecture and the building it is on is already listed. Carptrash (talk) 02:54, 4 January 2019 (UTC)