not richardson

I visited the Cambridge Public Library yesterday. Despite the oft-remarked upon demise of print media there wasn't an empty seat in the entire building. I suppose people still need spaces to process information, even if they have portable devices that make nearly all information immediately accessible (side note: Siri and Google have reached the singularity).

I'd like to comment on the original Library building, designed by van Brunt & Howe, which is a knock-off/tribute to H.H. Richardson. How can we tell that it isn't a pure H.H. Richardson building? For one thing, the massing is just slightly off--the section of the building on the left side of the tower is only slightly larger than the right. Richardson would have made the difference more pronounced. The tower is a bit timid looking, both in scale and detailing. The dormers on the roof above the arches on the left are oversized and the ornamentation is fussy. Finally, the intersection between the tower and the gabled portion of the facade is weakly executed. There is a little scrap of roof that connects the two pieces. Richardson tended to jam building elements together more tightly and adjust the details to make everything appear dynamic and muscular.