The Battle Against 'Butcher' Architects
Local architects met to argue against open competitions that allowed unqualified builders and butchers to bid on public projects.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
At a meeting of the Washington Chapter of Architects at the Burke building Friday afternoon, a paper on architectural competitions was read by C.H. Bebb and was followed by a vigorous discussion of recent competitions. Mr. Bebb considered the subject purely in the abstract, but his argument was decidedly opposed to competitions as at present carried on. His first objection to the system was that the programme or bill of instructions is usually drawn up by the promoters of the project, there being no reference to the qualifications of the competitors, so that any draftsman, carpenter, builder or butcher may enter with as much chance as the greatest living genius. Mr. Bebb then dwelt on the wisdom of having the plans judged by a practical expert instead of by a committee.
“Any draftsman, carpenter, builder or butcher may enter with as much chance as the greatest living genius.”
The professionalization of architecture in 1890s Seattle mirrors ongoing civic debates about who has the right to shape the city's built environment. The struggle between credentialed experts and 'outsider' builders is a classic Seattle civic tension that still surfaces during major infrastructure planning.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.