To be fair, the same three questions should be asked about my claim that Louis Sullivan was destroyed by a capitalist structure.
1. That the person was destroyed: Wikipedia tells us that after the Panic of 1894 forced the dissolution of his partnership with Adler "He went into a twenty-year-long financial and emotional decline, beset by a shortage of commissions, chronic financial problems and alcoholism." 2. That the person was an artist (and not just a wannabe): Even if "the Jury is always out" on this kind of question -- if it stays out more than a few minutes for Sullilvan, we need a new jury. 3. That the person was destroyed by the capitalist structure rather than by some personal failure- possibly including a failure to accomodate it.: This is a tough call. We can certainly blame the capitalist structure for the kind of financial panic that ended his partnership. And maybe we can blame the free market economy that had practically no market for his kind of building after the Columbian Exposition. But nobody held a gun to head and made him drink -- and did he ever even try to find another Dankmar Adler to run interference for his feisty personality? In 1895 he was 39 years old, healthy, smart, and with an incredible resume of achievement. I'm afraid that we can only blame his subsequent decline on his own damn self. ____________________________________________________________ Click to learn how to become a world famous writer or poet. http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/BLSrjnxUALjxpQoLZJLll0i5g3uNBJ GbjpBHSckdprYVLPbiEgJ5TIn4FQc/
