Mountain Architecture: An Alternative Design Proposal
for the
Wy'East Day Lodge, Mount Hood Oregon
by Thomas P. Deering, Jr.
CHAPTER II - Part 2
RECREATIONAL AND TOURIST FACILITIES
As the educated city dweller of the middle nineteenth century began to feel the effects of the Industrial Revolution, the pressures of city life made weekend retreats and extended holidays in the mountains a popular destination for escape. Due to its proximity to the populous northern Atlantic seaboard, the Adirondack Mountains became one of the primary attractions of the wealthiest patrons of the out-of-doors (Figure 2.19). The lure was not only excellent hunting and fishing, but the natural beauty and healthy atmosphere of the mountains so lacking in the newly industrialized urban centers.
 Figure 2.19: Adirondack Great Camp, "Pine Knot." William West Durant, 1879. The gable fan, radial stick motif and mitered log siding are typical features of this camp, one of the first on Raquette Lake. It was quoted in Stoddard's guide book as "unquestionably the most picturesque and recherche affair of its kind in the wilderness." (Kaiser, The Great Camps of the Adirondacks, p. 74) |
One of the outcomes of this trek to the wilderness was the development of the Adirondack Great Camps. Built as summer vacation retreats by wealthy individuals or private clubs dedicated to the purchase of large tracts of Adirondack Wilderness, these camps featured collections of individual buildings in a distinctive rustic style (Figure 2.20). The Adirondack Rustic style, as it was called, established itself as a representative of the growing sympathetic relationship to nature by both resurrecting the western pioneer spirit through the ubiquitous use of log construction and embodying the rough and picturesque images of the Romantic wilderness.(4) Local craftsmen were employed throughout the camp's active development, producing an identifiable regional style as well as giving it the qualities of a true vernacular.
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.20: Adirondack Great Camp, "Echo." Built for Governor Phineas C. Lounsbury, 1883. Third of the early Raquette Lake camps. (Kaiser, The Great Camps of the Adirondacks, p. 103) | Figure 2.21: Adirondack Great Camp, for Adolph Lewishon, 1903-4. This Camp is still in the rustic style, but with German overtones. The log siding on the upper stories is only decorative, as is the birch bark used to simulate stucco. This building, the boathouse, is actually floating on the lake. (Kaiser, The Great Camps of the Adirondacks, p. 151) |
The style was distinguished primarily by the conspicuous display of log construction, occasionally even simulated (Figure 2.21). This was in contrast to the conventional methods used in most other country homes of the period--Balloon Frame or Post and Beam. "The Camps had logs laid up as walls, framed as trusses, used as supporting purlins for the roof, and peeled as beams and studs. Extensions of log ends, coping of intersecting logs and cross bracing of poles became decorative elements." (5) The rustic use of individual wood members was also applied to the interior decoration and furniture construction, integrating the rugged simplicity of the outdoor environment throughout. (Figure 2.22)
 Figure 2.22: Adirondack Great Camp Interior, Kamp Kill Kare, c. 1900. An example of the rustic in its lightest form, Kamp Kill Kare is said to have the finest rustic furniture in the Adirondacks. (Kaiser, The Great Camps of the Adirondacks, pp. 179, 181) |
The appearance of simple living conveyed by the rustic construction was somewhat deceptive but essential to the camp's character. Log construction was not easy or inexpensive, especially when compared to conventional techniques. The difficulties arose in part because the eventual "form largely depended upon the length of available logs . . . which had to be either cut on the site or transported across the lakes or through the surrounding forest." (6) In addition, the camps were consciously sited in remote areas, "in some cases surrounded by tens of thousands of private reserve," and access to them was usually quite difficult.(7)
The inherent difficulties of construction and site access may have actually been a motivation for the builders, "who were rewarded less by public acclaim than by personal satisfaction in taming the hostile environment and creating a civilized mode of living exclusively by one's own means." (8)
The deceptively simple atmosphere was also maintained by the staff, who at times outnumbered the guests by as many as three or four to one. The urban social rituals to which the guests were accustomed were not entirely abandoned during their stay at the camps. Formal dinner attire and service with silver and crystal was not uncommon--"life in the Adirondack camps was hardly simple, but great pains were taken to make it seem so." (9)
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.23: Adirondack Great Camp, "Knollwood Club", Saranac Lakes area, 1899. One of six identical two and one-half story Victorian shingle vacation houses built by William Coulter. Individuality was achieved by the application of a unique rustic style porch and facade to an otherwise conventional vacation house. (Kaiser, The Great Camps of the Adirondacks, p. 143) | Figure 2.24: Adirondack Great Camp, Hamlin House, Lake Placid. Occasionally European chalet styles were imitated with remarkable faithfulness. (Kaiser, The Great Camps of the Adirondacks, p. 227) |
The Rustic, as a style, should not be directly linked to any particular archetype, although examples exhibiting characteristic details of the alpine Swiss chalet did appear (Figure 2.24). It is, in one sense, the same as any vernacular architecture: "the logical, inevitable convergence of local craft traditions and readily available materials." (10) But to the extent that this mode of building was consciously adopted after a period of time, and, in preference to other methods of construction, refined as a symbol for a particular life style in a particular type of setting, it constitutes a style; and thus transcends the notion of vernacular. The Adirondack Rustic style, based on the vernacular log buildings indigenous to any heavily forested regions, has become, in itself, an archetype. Its subsequent influence can be seen in the many "how-to" books of log-building plans published at the turn of the century, and the eventual adoption by the National Park Service in 1916 for its own lodges, camps, and out-buildings.(11)
The earliest public resort hotels in the mountains appeared in the ranges closest to New York City: the Catskills and Shawangunk. Riding the wave of popularity for scenic resorts which had been firmly established by the 1820s, a stock company was formed to build the first of these mountain resorts--the Catskill Mountain House, a small guest house designed to take advantage of the majestic view available from South Mountain (Figure 2.25). The 1823 structure was described in the Gazetteer of New York as "a superb hotel, of 60 by 24 feet, three stories, elegantly furnished and attended, erected . . . with a capital of $10,000." (12) The hotel was later enlarged and remodeled (1840) under the influence of the popular Greek Revival style and the accommodation standards set forth for elegant hotels by Boston's Tremont house. A Corinthian colonnade was added to the front of the building imposing "an over all order upon the patched and lengthened facade".(13) The result was only slightly better than a lowland resort hotel transplanted to the mountains. But despite its fashionable architecture it was unique and did show the effects of being situated in a mountain setting:
The dining hall is large enough for a feudal banqueting hall, its effect being increased by a range of pillars for the whole length down the centre, and these pillars are wreathed with evergreens, while between the numerous windows stand hemlock or cedar trees during the season, quite baronial in taste. As far as I know this style of embellishment is unique; it is certainly very picturesque.(14)
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.25: Catskill Mountain House, c. 1840. Drawing by Thomas Nast. (Limerick, America's Grand Resort Hotels, p. 32) | Figure 2.26: Mohonk Mountain House, Swawangunk Mountains, New York, 1869-1900. (Limerick, America's Grand Resort Hotels, p. 32) |
The food was excellent, not often the case with the other resort establishments, with an emphasis on freshness; fresh fruits, vegetables, and dairy products. Even fresh meats, imported from the local village every morning were part of the daily regimen. Physical and spiritual reinvigoration were clearly part of the resort's image and attraction. The architectural imagery was too strong and complimented well the magnificent scenery, as this excerpt from a letter by Bayard Taylor written to a friend in 1860 suggests:
We have front rooms at the Mountain House; have you ever had one? Through the white Corinthian pillars of the portico-- pillars, which, I must say are very well proportioned--you get much the same effects as through those of the Propylaea of the Athenian Acropolis. You can open your window, breathe the delicious mountain air in sleep (under a blanket), and, without lifting your head from the pillow, see the sun come up a hundred miles away.(15)
Later in the century, and not far from the Catskill Mountain House, evolved another of the Northeast's grand mountain resort hotels--the Mohonk Mountain House (Figure 2.26). Situated to the southeast of the Catskills in the rugged, "more arrestingly spectacular" Shawangunk Mountains, it nudges the edge of Mohonk Lake, which itself "perches precariously in a cleft of rock near the crest of the mountain ridge, facing on one side the peak known as Sky Top, and on the other the broad expanse of Roundout Valley." (16)
During the thirty years after its purchase by a Quaker school master in 1869, the modest tavern-guesthouse grew into a "vast building, nearly one-eight mile in length, a soaring mass of towers and turrets, balconies, verandahs, and gables--built in some parts of wood, in others of brick or stone--surrounded by lawns and broad beds of flowers. If King Ludwig had built the Mountain House on a slope of the Bavarian Alps, the pile would have been taken as evidence of royal dementia." (17)
The hotel still thrives today, serving throngs of summer vacationers and winter skiers alike. Its purpose has, however, been extended beyond the traditional roles of a resort hotel. In keeping with the owner's (the Smiley family) Quaker faith it also functions as a center "to promote international peace and understanding through conferences and informal exchanges of ideas in the inspiring Mohonk setting." (18)
Every history book reminds us that Canada was created by her railways. The century-old union of the British North American provinces might not have been so fully consummated had that transcontinental line not mustered the courage to penetrate the virgin wilderness of British Columbia.(19)
The Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) completed the first line over the Rockies on November 7, 1885. With service now coast to coast, two new problems arose: stimulating enough passenger interest to support the line; and then supplying for those passengers their basic needs throughout the journey. As there was no shortage of spectacular scenery along the route, it became evident that both problems could be solved at once by building modest "pavilions" to exploit the views and give the passengers a comfortable place "to repair and refresh from time to time along the tedious journey." (20)
The year 1886 saw the construction of three small mountain hotels for the railroad. They were all in British Columbia and were designed to attract tourists and relieve the burden of transporting heavy restaurant cars up the steep grades. The three hotels, Mount Stephen House at Field (Figure 2.27), The Fraser Canyon Hotel at North Bend, and Glacier House at Glacier (Figure 2.28), were of similar plan and, in their day, quite popular small resorts in their own right, especially Glacier House which sported a view of the head-wall of Great Illecillewaet glacier 500 feet in the distance (Figure 2.29).
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.27: Mount Stephen House at Field, British Columbia, 1886. The first Canadian Pacific Railway hotel. (Sanford, The Pictorial History of Railroads in B.C., p. 52) | Figure 2.28: Glacier House at Glacier, British Columbia, 1886. (Kalman, The Railway Hotels and the Development of the Chateau Style in Canada, Fig. 1) |
Howard Kalman describes them in his monograph, Railway Hotels and the Development of the Chateau Style in Canada as follows:
The designs were asymmetrical, having three stories in the centre, with two on one side and a one-story wing in the other direction. The uppermost floor is shingled, the remainder covered with clapboard. Wooden brackets below the windows, the curving eaves, and the prominent shingles are intended to suggest a Swiss chalet, an appropriate style for the mountainous environment.(21)
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.29: The Great Glacier (The Illecillewaet) as it was in 1889 when Glacier House was built. The hotel can be seen in the lower right. (Putnam, The Great Glacier and Her House, p. 41) | Figure 2.30: Glacier House at Glacier, British Columbia, 1886-1913. Shown here in 1913, at its maximum size. The original structure, as shown in the previous illustrations, is just beyond the small tower on the right. (Putnam, The Great Glacier and Her House, p. 41) |
Glacier House became the most popular of the three hotels. One visitor commented that, "the view from the verandah and windows of the little hotel . . . was one of fairy-like beauty." (22) Its popularity justified enlarging the hotel several times over the years, but when the CPR moved the main line in 1916, tourist visitation declined. Not long after, the once prominent glacier receded out of sight, and, as both of the reasons for the resort's initial construction had disappeared, Glacier House was demolished in 1930.
Coincident with the construction of Glacier House, a much larger hotel was being built at the site of a recently discovered hot springs near Banff, Alberta. The architect commissioned for the new hotel was a New Yorker, Bruce Price, who had recently been retained by CPR's aggressive vice president and general manager, William Van Horne to design another building for the railroad, Windsor Station in Montreal, Quebec.
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.31: Banff Springs Hotel, Alberta. Bruce Price, 1886-88. A view from the Bow River. (Wilcox, Camping in the Rockies, p. 5) | Figure 2.32: Banff Springs Hotel, Alberta. Bruce Price, 1886-88. (CPR photo. Kalman, The Railway Hotels and the Development of the Chateau Style in Canada, Fig. 4) |
The scheme for the Banff Springs Hotel presented by Price was decidedly picturesque: "The steep hipped roofs, pointed finialed dormers, corner turrets, and oriels seem to have been freely derived from a medieval castle, and it was as such a romantic structure that Price wished his hotel to be viewed" (23) (Figure 2.31). The specific origin of the style is not clear, however. Some maintained that the prototype was a French Loire chateau, while others saw a closer connection with the Baronial castles of Scotland, a style largely derivative of the Loire chateaux. The CPR literature expressed in its promotion a preference for the latter interpretation, pointing out that the name "Banff" was derived from the Scottish birthplace of the railroad's president, Sir George Stephen.(24)
The five-story wood frame structure accommodated 280 guests and was laid out in plan "in the shape of an 'H' with an additional wing extending from the centre of a long side towards the scenic Bow River. A large central hall dominates the ground floor, which consists largely of public space. Tiered verandahs at the ends of the wings provide visual access to the mountains" (25) (Figure 2.32).
 Figure 2.33: Chateau Frontenac, Quebec. Bruce Price and others, 1892-1924. The portions beneath the tower and to the right were designed by Price, 1892-99; The Mont Carmel Wing (to the left) by W. S. Painter, 1908-9; the tower and hidden portions by E. and W. S. Maxwell, 1920-24. (Kalman, The Railway Hotels and the Development of the Chateau Style in Canada, Figs. 11-13) |
Price's involvement in the design of the Banff Springs Hotel is significant in that it was through this "tentative version of a chateau," along with his design for Winsor Station, that the Chateau Style was introduced into Canada.(26) Essentially a revival of the medieval French chateaux of the Loire Valley, the development of the style reached its peak through his designs, and is best exemplified by Price's Chateau Frontenac, located in Quebec City, which was begun in 1892 (Figure 2.33). Also a Canadian Pacific Railroad Hotel commissioned by Van Horne, its influence on Canadian architecture was wide spread. It had risen to be what Van Horne had predicted, "the most talked about hotel on this continent." (27) The effect was to establish the Chateau style in its various forms as a national style representative of Canada.
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.34: Banff Springs Hotel, Alberta, c. 1905. Bruce Price. Here seen at its largest extant as a wooden structure. (Hall and Dodds, Canada: A History in Photographs, p. 93) | Figure 2.35: Banff Springs Hotel, Alberta. Bruce Price, 1886-88, W. S. Painter, 1912-14. As seen in 1920 overlooking the Bow river. The center wing and tower are by W. S. Painter. (Byron Harmon Photo. Harmon, Great Days in the Rockies, photo # 25) |
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.36: Banff Springs Hotel, Alberta. Tower, W. S. Painter, 1912-14. Flanking wings, J. W. Orrock, 1924-28. View from the Bow river. (CPR photo. Kalman, The Railway Hotels and the Development of the Chateau Style in Canada, Fig. 19) | Figure 2.37: Banff Springs Hotel, Alberta. Bruce Price, W. S. Painter, J. W. Orrock 1886-1924. The hotel as it stands today, with the Bow river and the Fairholm mountains in the distance. (Gowans, Looking at Architecture in Canada, p. 174) |
In the years 1912-14, (some ten years after Bruce Price's death), the Banff Springs Hotel began a program to enlarge and replace the original wooden building, which itself had been enlarged prior to 1905 (Figure 2.34), with a fireproof structure. A center wing was added, along with a fourteen-story tower both designed by an active chateau-style architect, W. S. Painter (Figure 2.35). When the remaining wooden wings were destroyed by fire in 1925, the rest of the original structure was finally replaced. The new wings, added by CPR engineer J. W. Orrock, brought the building into the form it maintains today (Figures 2.36 and 2.37).
The Scottish influence mentioned above dominated this later construction. All reference to the French medieval features distinguished in Canada's other Chateau style buildings did not appear on the Banff Springs Hotel. The continuity of style, apparent despite the different building periods, stems from this consistent deviation from the French Chateau style established by Price.
 Figure 2.38: Lake Louise Chalet, Alberta, c. 1905. (Byron Harmon Photo. Harmon, Great Days in the Rockies, photo #36) |
The historical development of the Chateau Lake Louise, also a CPR hotel in the Alberta Rockies, followed a similar course as the Banff Springs Hotel. The first hotel at Lake Louise was a modest wooden chalet, built in 1899, but was "superseded by a far more ambitious half-timbered building" within the decade.(28) (Figure 2.38) When the building was again enlarged in 1912-13 it was done so by W. S. Painter who was currently at work on the first of the Banff Springs Hotel fireproof additions. The new concrete wing on Chateau Lake Louise abandoned the Chateau style as it had been developed by Price in favor of a more modern approach (Figure 2.39). "The new wing had a flat roof and no dormers. It only vaguely recalls the Empress Hotel (Victoria B.C., 1904-08) with its flat-arched 'loggia', actually the dining room windows, between two towers, one of which seems to have been inspired by an Italian villa; and by the slight projection of the upper story." (29)
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.39: "Chateau" Lake Louise, Alberta. W. S. Painter, 1912-13. Barott and Blackdecker, 1924. The Painter addition is to the left of the central tower. This facade faces Lake Louise. (Scharff, Canada's Mountain National Parks, p. 15) | Figure 2.40: Lake Louise, Victoria Glacier, and the Lake Louise Chateau, Alberta. W. S. Painter, 1912-13. Barott and Blackdecker, 1924. (Scharff, Canada's Mountain National Parks, p. 8) |
With the demolition in 1924 of the wooden portion of the building, a return to the traditional Chateau style was mandated. "By this time the style had achieved symbolic value over and above that of a simple hotel. It had come to signify things Canadian, and Mr. Harkin (the National Park Commissioner responsible for realization of the Lake Louise project) presumably believed that any building in a National Park, Hotel or not, must be in the Chateau style." (30) The new addition was designed by a Montreal firm, Barott and Blackader, whose selection was, at least partially, a reaction against the less traditional direction taken by Painter twelve years earlier (Figure 2.39). The final result, while described by Rogatnick in his article "Canadian Castles" as a "splendid edifice," (31) lacks the continuity both in form and style, of the Banff Springs Hotel, and seems less well suited to its spectacular mountain site (Figure 2.40).
The impetus that brought about the establishment of Yellowstone as the world's first National Park (on March 1, 1872) was the protection of the natural "curiosities" and "wonders" for which it had become widely known, from acquisition by private speculators anticipating "the demands which tourists would make to see them." (32) Interest in Yellowstone National Park was intense, especially among the railroad companies "who hoped that Yellowstone would become a popular vacation mecca like Niagara Falls or Saratoga Springs with resulting profit to the only transportation line serving it." (33)
While the railroads were not allowed to operate within the confines of the park it was they who supplied the transportation to its perimeter. Eventually, through a bailout of the ailing Yellowstone Park Improvement Company, The Northern Pacific Railroad became the line responsible for the park's internal transportation and lodging concessions. The Northern Pacific had been involved in the promotion of the park's image since before its inception, but it was not until 1886, when it became the sole owner of the Yellowstone Park Improvement Company's replacement, the Yellowstone Park Association, that it was able to assert a direct influence over building decisions.
Several major hotels were built within Yellowstone National Park prior to 1900: the Mammoth Hot Springs Hotel (1883), the Lake Hotel (1889), and the Fountain Hotel (1891). These, along with numerous smaller lodging concessions, were the basis of multiple-day Grand Tours which began and ended at any one of the several railheads near the park. By the turn of the century the hotels themselves began to turn a profit and, in 1902, the Northern Pacific hired a young architect, Robert C. Reamer, to design a hotel for one of the park's more popular scenic attractions, the Old Faithful Geyser. A serious need for a "first-class hotel" near the geyser had been lamented by many of the wealthier tourists who at the time "either had to make the rough ten-mile trip from the Fountain Hotel or spend the night in one of a succession of disreputable lodges that were erected near the geyser." (34)
Reamer's design for the Old Faithful Inn marked a significant conceptual change of direction for hotels of monumental scale confronting a wilderness environment. He chose to adopt the Rustic style identified with the Adirondack Great Camps to emphasize the Inn's compatibility with the unique and compelling natural surroundings. The Old Faithful Inn was to complement the site, it was not intended as simply an end or destination in itself.
Old Faithful Inn was the largest public structure by far to be built in the rustic idiom. Although Reamer's reasons for turning to the Adirondack Rustic have not been specifically outlined, numerous published examples of rustic buildings had appeared by 1902 and some were undoubtedly familiar to him. It is not unlikely that to him those buildings truly appeared to be a product of the forest. The literal and illusory connection to nature was inherent, deeming the style ideally suited for an unassuming building intended to become a part of the forested park setting.
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.41: Old Faithful Inn, Yellowstone National Park. Robert C. Reamer, 1902. (Postcard, c.1907, Northwest Collection, University of Washington Libraries, Seattle) | Figure 2.42: Old Faithful Inn, Yellowstone National Park. Robert C. Reamer, 1902. Main Lobby. (Campbell, "Grand Hotels in the National Parks," p. 34) |
The success of the Old Faithful Inn is largely attributable to its ability to keep the guests in constant contact with nature. It did not isolate them from the outside environment but served as a continual reminder of the rustic and wild National Park they had come so far to see. For example, the siting was such that upon arrival by coach or stage, (private cars were not allowed into the park until 1915) the guests were presented a direct view of the geyser from the porte-cochere (Figure 2.41).
Emphasis was to have been placed on viewing the geyser without the protection of the Inn's interior. Neither the guestrooms nor the Inn's lobby faced the geyser, thus, to experience the once-an-hour eruption, one was compelled to venture outside, beyond the intervening barriers of the building envelope. To further emphasize this, two exterior observation areas were designed as integral to the structure. The most popular formed the roof of the porte-cochere and the other was a thirteen by seventy-two foot railed platform along the Inn's ridge line (Figure 2.42). Access to this upper platform was by way of a labyrinth of open stairways winding their way up the inside of the lobby's eighty-five foot high interior. Reaching the platform required a significant climb, but was probably well worth the effort.
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.43: Old Faithful Inn, Yellowstone National Park. Robert C. Reamer, 1902. Main entry with porte-cochere and viewing platform addition. (Muench, Along Yellowstone and Grand Teton Trails, p. 46) | Figure 2.44: Old Faithful Inn, Yellowstone National Park. Robert C. Reamer, 1902, 1913, 1927. (McMillon, The Old Lodges and Hotels of our National Parks, p. 46) |
Following the precedent of the Adirondack Camps, the original 1902 Inn was a singular structure "suggesting the romantic notion of a frontiersman's cabin enlarged to gigantic proportions." (35) Huge logs, originally left unpeeled, were assembled into an elaborate framework of columns, trusses, and brackets to enclose the sixty-four-foot square lobby (Figure 2.43). The enormous open space of the lobby is dominated by a proportionately massive stone fireplace; fourteen feet on each of its four sides and containing eight fireplace openings. Some five-hundred tons of local rhyolite was required for its construction.
Two additions, built in 1913 and 1927 (both by Reamer), do not share the rustic opulence of the original structure. However, the overall character of the pile has not been compromised. The entrance and lobby, both built in 1902, generate the deepest and most lasting impressions and, while the guestroom interiors of the most recent wing can be best described as anonymous "motel modern", the exteriors of both wings complement well the main portion's rustic intent.(36)
A 1959 earthquake significantly weakened the structure, forcing the closure of the upper reaches of the lobby, but the lower three balconies remained safe enough to be left open to guests.
Despite the damage, recent restoration efforts have assured preservation of the structure which introduced the Rustic Style into the National Parks. No other public building of its size was so lavishly rustic. The influence that Reamer's Old Faithful Inn had over building construction and design throughout the park system was substantial, both because of its adoption of the rustic style and its emphasis on the harmony between the building's form and its setting.
 Figure 2.45: The Canyon Hotel, Yellowstone National Park. Robert C. Reamer, 1910-11. (Limerick, America's Grand Resort Hotels, p. 136) |
Robert C. Reamer's other hotel at Yellowstone was very different from the Old Faithful Inn. Built near Yellowstone's Grand Canyon during the winter of 1910-11, the form of the Canyon Hotel was much more refined (Figure 2.45). It "recalled the work of members of Chicago's Prairie School or the wooden bungalows of West Coast architects like Charles and Henry Green." (37) Exquisite craftsmanship and careful joinery were found throughout. Sawn timbers stood in place of peeled logs and the fixtures, handrails and brackets of twisted branches were nowhere to be seen. The interiors showed a decided emphasis on the horizontal, a radical departure from the soaring lobby of the Old Faithful Inn.
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.46: The Canyon Hotel, Yellowstone National Park. Robert C. Reamer, 1910-11. Main lounge as seen from the sun parlor. (Limerick, America's Grand Resort Hotels, p. 136) | Figure 2.47: The Canyon Hotel, Yellowstone National Park. Robert C. Reamer, 1910-11. Stairway and musicians' stage at entrance end of main lounge. (Limerick, America's Grand Resort Hotels, p. 136) |
The Canyon Hotel was also different from most other resort hotels in that Reamer decided to condense the many rooms normally dedicated to various independent social activities into one large lounge (Figure 2.46). A cascading stairway, lead from the entrance lobby, past an intermediate landing suitable for use as a musician's stage, down to the lowest level, providing a dramatic introduction to one end of the lounge (Figure 2.47). The other end of the room, by contrast, "was almost entirely glazed and acted as a sun parlor." (38)
The large guestroom wings contained the dining room and service areas, with the lounge wing projecting perpendicularly from the center. A broad hipped roof, dotted with hipped dormers, covered the entire structure.
The powerful 1959 earthquake which damaged the Old Faithful Inn was not as forgiving to the Canyon Hotel. The structure suffered extensive damage eventually spelling its demise. Within the year, the decision was made to tear down the hotel rather than try to restore it although there is some indication that the motivation was due more to economics than safety, and the earthquake only provided a ready excuse to eliminate an unprofitable business venture.(39)
As one of the earliest western park hotels with a lodge-like atmosphere, the Canyon Hotel served Yellowstone National Park well in its earlier years. It was, in Reamer's words, "beautifully placed on its hillside site," and was built, "in keeping with the place where it stands." (40) With tourist visitation to the National Parks today reaching unforseen levels, hotels such as the Canyon are missed on the one hand for their accommodations, but more importantly for their inimitable and irreplaceable character.
As a National Park, Glacier owes its existence to the zealousness of one man, Louis W. Hill, and his railroad, the Great Northern. He recognized that by creating a park out of "some of the most moving and sublime scenery in America," the benefits to his railroad could be enormous.(41) But in contrast to his father, James J. Hill, his interest in Glacier National Park was not just to profit the Great Northern but also to conserve its natural splendors. The four major hotels eventually constructed to serve the park's visitors all saw the influence of the younger Hill's hand and reflect his attitude towards a sympathetic mountain aesthetic.
The first of the four hotels erected by Hill, Glacier Park Lodge was actually built outside the park boundary but within walking distance of the Great Northern Railway terminus, on land purchased from the Blackfeet Indians. The main lodge opened in 1913, three years after establishment of the park, with a connecting one-hundred-eleven room annex in service a year later (Figure 2.48). The dining room, sixty-one of its own guestrooms, and the impressive lobby allowed the main section of the complex to be self sufficient during the first winter.
 Figure 2.48: Glacier Park Lodge, and Annex, Glacier National Park. S. L. Bartlett,(41) 1912-15. The hotel is also called "the Big Trees Lodge". ("The Call of The Mountains," p. 11) |
To many guests the most lasting impression of a visit to the lodge is of the great "forest" lobby (Figure 2.49). Louis Hill had seen the Forestry Building in Portland, Oregon a year earlier and asked a Chicago architect S. L. Bartlett to pattern the lodge at Glacier after it (Figure 2.31).(42) The similarity between the two buildings is striking, the Glacier Park Lodge emulates the Forestry Building with surprisingly few modifications.
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.49: Glacier Park Lodge, Glacier National Park. S. L. Bartlett,(42) 1912-15. The great "forest" lobby. (Limerick, America's Grand Resort Hotels, p. 138) | Figure 2.50: Forestry Building, Lewis and Clark Exposition, Portland, Oregon. Ion Lewis and A. E. Doyle of Whidden and Lewis, 1902. Interior "Nave" with colonnade of Doric tree-trunk columns. (Vaughan, Space Style and Structure, p. 318) |
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.51: Forestry Building, Lewis and Clark Exposition, Portland, Oregon. Ion Lewis and A. E. Doyle of Whidden and Lewis, 1902. (Vaughan, Space Style and Structure, p. 318) | Figure 2.52: Forestry Building, Lewis and Clark Exposition, Portland, Oregon. Ion Lewis and A. E. Doyle of Whidden and Lewis, 1902. Sketch by Doyle: "View of end." (Vaughan, Space Style and Structure, p. 316) |
"By far the most interesting and unique" building of Portland's 1905 Lewis and Clark exposition, the Forestry Building was touted to be "The Worlds Largest Log Cabin" and even a "Cathedral" by its promoters.(43) While it was a log cabin in construction and many of its details, the underlying intents were drawn from antiquity. The design was symmetrical, "basilica" in plan, and included two matching "transepts" at each end (Figures 2.51 and 2.52).(44) The skylighted "Nave" was rimmed by a colonnade of Doric columns executed in wood; each a massive, unpeeled, Douglas fir tree trunk several feet in diameter (Figure 2.50). Designed principally by Ion Lewis and his apprentice, A. E. Doyle of the Portland architectural firm, Whidden and Lewis, it was the only deviation at the exposition from the classical style considered proper for that genre of exhibitions at the turn of the century.
 Figure 2.53: Glacier Park Lodge, Glacier National Park. S. L. Bartlett, .n 41 1912-15. The hotel is also called "the Big Trees Lodge". ("The Call of The Mountains," p. 25) |
The Forestry Building transplanted well to Glacier National Park. The massive log-cabin type construction of the body of the building was given over to more conventional methods, but the symmetrical basilica plan was retained (Figure 2.53). Ionic capitals appeared on the Doric columns but otherwise the Glacier Park Lodge lobby is nearly an exact replica of the Forestry Building. In fact the trees required for the columns had to be imported from the Pacific Northwest as none sufficiently large were available from within the park.
 Figure 2.54: Lake McDonald Lodge, Glacier National Park. Cutter and Malgram, 1913-14. (McMillon, The Old Lodges and Hotels of our National Parks, p. 38g) |
Also based on the Portland Forestry Building but smaller and more intimate than the Glacier Park Hotel, is the lodge at Lake McDonald. It was built on the site of the Snyder Hotel, the first hotel on the Glacier Park area (Figure 2.54). Lake McDonald itself is the largest and most accessible lake in the park and has been subject to commercial development since the 1880s. It supported many small resorts, especially after the arrival of the Great Northern Railway in 1891.
The Snyder hotel was built in 1895, sold to J. E. Lewis in 1906, who later substantially enlarged it during the winter of 1913-14. Lewis employed the Spokane firm of Cutter and Malmgram to prepare the design which he renamed the Lewis Hotel.(45) Louis Hill took over its operation in 1930 and gave it its present name.
Construction of the Lewis' hotel followed closely that of the Glacier Park Lodge but there is no indication that the similarity of the two designs was intentional. The Lake McDonald Lodge may have simply relied upon the same source for its inspiration. The architects also drew from a broader vocabulary, as stylistic reference to the Swiss alpine chalet are present, yet carefully restrained, giving it a comfortable, less formal appearance.
The Lodge's intimacy is unique among the Glacier Park hotels. Even rising a full three stories, the lobby gives a sense of containment and comfort not found in the monumentality of the other structures. The feeling is more that of a private hunting lodge.(46)
In contrast to the lobby, whose focus is directed inwardly, the diningroom and verandahs consciously extend their views in the opposite direction, towards the lake and distant peaks. Lake McDonald Lodge offers the visitor both the protection and isolation of an intimate retreat and the opportunity to experience the spectacular, unobstructed views of the surrounding park.
 Figure 2.55: Many Glacier Hotel, Glacier National Park, 1915-17. "The showplace of the Rockies along Swiftcurrent lake." ("The Call of The Mountains," p. II-19) |
Described by Hill as "the Showplace of the Rockies" upon its completion in 1915, Many Glacier Hotel is surrounded by some of the most spectacular natural scenery in the park (Figure 2.55). Including the 1917 annex, the hotel hugs 900 feet of shore along Swiftcurrent Lake, the longest of four glacially carved lakes extending from the hotel to Swiftcurrent pass.(47)
The largest of Hill's hotels, Many Glacier is the most remote, or at least was at the time of construction. The nearest railhead was fifty miles distant and the road which had been laid to the site was graded but as yet unsurfaced. Transporting the construction machinery and materials, including those required for the temporary saw mill, planing mill and kiln, nearly destroyed the road. In addition, the huge timbers imported from Oregon and Washington had to be skidded the full length of the road from East Glacier.
As with the other Glacier Park hotels, Many Glacier features an open, airy, full length lobby rising through all four stories to a truss supported roof. The main fireplace is simple but unusual, consisting of a large, square, raised hearth, centered in the west end of the lobby with a copper hood and flue suspended above it.
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.56: Many Glacier Hotel, Glacier National Park, 1915-17. Main entry with Mount Wilbur in the background. ("The Call of The Mountains," p. II-22) | Figure 2.57: Many Glacier Hotel, Glacier National Park, 1915-17. View from Swiftcurrent lake. (McMillon, The Old Lodges and Hotels of our National Parks, p. 38i) |
A modified alpine style now dominates the hotel since the original Indian motifs have been completely eliminated. Although the scale and immense rambling form are hardly in the manner of a Swiss chalet, the broad gable-hipped roof and carved window trim are appropriately derivative (Figure 2.56), as are the tiers of balconies and the stone understory visible from the lake (Figure 2.57). On the interior, the association with the Swiss alpine has been carried so far that "shields of Swiss cantons decorate the doors of the rooms and the staff dresses in lederhosen and dirndls" (48) The Many Glacier hotel is befitting of its alp-like setting in all aspects of its design--its plastic yet continuous and cohesive form, its grand scale, and its conscious cultural derivations.
This hotel is the last of the series built by Louis Hill (Figure 2.58). It is not located in Glacier park proper but in Canada's Waterton Lakes National Park. The two parks together combine to form the million-acre Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park.
 |
 | |
| Figure 2.58: Prince of Wales Hotel, Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, 1926-27. Cover of "The Call of The Mountains: Vacations in Glacier National Park and Waterton Lakes National Park," published by the Great Northern Railroad. | Figure 2.59: Prince of Wales Hotel, Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, 1926-27. View south towards the U. S. and Glacier National Park. (Scharff, Canada's Mountain National Parks, p. 37). |
The Prince-of-Wales hotel, named after the future Edward VII, sits resolutely on a 100 foot promontory overlooking Waterton Lake, commanding a southerly view toward the international border and the broken topped peaks of the continental divide.(49) (Figure 2.59)
 Figure 2.60: Prince of Wales Hotel, Waterton Lakes National Park, Alberta, 1926-27. (McMillon, The Old Lodges and Hotels of our National Parks, p. 38i) |
Hill's preliminary plans for the hotel called for a 200 room lodge similar in design to the Many Glacier hotel, but indecision and the ravaging effects of winter weather during the construction period lead to numerous and substantial design changes. The outcome of Hill's haphazard planning is a successful farrago of styles: the Swiss alpine chalet, whose more literal interpretation than is seen at the Many Glacier Hotel is reflected in the oversized brackets and illusion of projecting upper stories; the Stick and Queen Anne styles, responsible for the hotel's tower, modest tracery, and possibly the steep, slightly flared roof; and, finally, the fact that it stands on Canadian soil may have lead Hill to adopt the flat gabled dormers characteristic of the Chateau style designs at Banff (Figure 2.60).
Little is remnant of the original scheme paralleling the Many Glacier design, with the possible exception of the over-all vertical configuration: a smoothly rusticated ground level with several (seven instead of five) floors of guest rooms above. The interior also shows more refinement than the other hotels in the park by its use of wallpaper and sawn square columns and meticulous attention to finish detail.
Continue to CHAPTER II - PART 3
Back to Chapter II - Part 1
Table of Contents