The Woolworth Building and the Question of Ornament

Elevation and section of the Woolworth Building’s crown, showing the ornament and detailing throughout. Drawing by Cass Gilbert. Originally published in a 1913 issue of The American Architect.[1]

Pictured here is a combined elevation and section showing the crown of the Woolworth Building in New York City. Completed in 1912, the tower was the tallest building in the world at the time, and featured Neo-Gothic detailing throughout. As the drawing shows, this detailing is largely superficial, however. This is highlighted by the stark contrast between the left and right hand side of the drawing. On the exterior, the building is lavishly detailed, with pinnacles, dormers and spires finished in a copper coating. It resembles a Medieval cathedral from Europe, and projects the idea of wealth, which was no doubt the goal of the architect. Compare this to the right side of the drawing, and you have a standard steel structure with sloping walls and flat interior surfaces. All the money was spent on the exterior of the building, while the interior was largely banal.

This dichotomy between exterior and interior raises a couple questions related to verticality. First, why put such lavish details on the building’s exterior, so far away from the ground and out-of-sight for the building occupants? The answer is rather simple: for early skyscrapers, the building aesthetic was usually a reference to a historical style, such as Woolworth’s Neo-Gothic detailing. Gothic buildings were quite lavishly detailed in Medieval times, so it makes sense that a Neo-Gothic skyscraper would follow suit. Combine this with the fact that a tower’s crown is where the architect has the most freedom to design, and you get the level of exterior detail shown above. Furthermore, buildings such as this were meant to satisfy the ego of the people building them, so a detailed crown such as this draws attention to itself, which accentuates the height of the building. The Woolworth was the tallest building in the world at the time, so why wouldn’t the architect try to bring attention to this?

Second, why is the detailing is restricted to the exterior? If you’re occupying the highest place in the city, wouldn’t it make sense for the Neo-Gothic details to show through to the interior as well? This answer is less clear, but I suspect it has something to do with the differing lifespans between the two. A building’s exterior is built to last much longer than the interior elements. This is because it’s much easier and less expensive to change the interior. Aside from this, perhaps the architect wanted the interior to be more standard, and thus more flexible for future tenants. Perhaps the client asked for it. Either way, the result shown above creates a tension between interior and exterior. Other than the view out the window and the sloped walls, there’s little to suggest you’re actually in the Woolworth Building. It could be any other building in the city, save for the sky-high views.

Regardless of the reasoning, this disconnect between exterior and interior makes sense when considering the need for Woolworth to project its world’s tallest status through its exterior detailing. It was the tallest building in the world, so it’s detailing needed to reflect this. Still, it’d make for a much more meaningful experience if this was reflected on the interior as well.

Check out other posts about New York City here.


[1]: The American Architect, vol. CIII, no. 1944 (26 March 1913).