The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago was constructed by Graham, Anderson, Probst, and White out of a need for a Federal Reserve Bank to oversee the 7^th District of the United States Federal Reserve system. The monument was built in a neoclassical architectural design and considered an architectural marvel of its time – with a massive appearance, white exterior, and colonnade that instilled feelings of impenetrability and trust among Chicagoans and the whole United States. The appropriation of classical antiquities in Chicago was deemed necessary by architects since it allowed for the creation of a culture in Chicago. These classical antiquities were deemed necessary by some and criticized by others, creating a discussion that still exists today. Despite the monuments having survived the test of time, their receptions have been altered and quite possibly do not embody the memory they once did. Thus, exactly what receptions have been made about the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago?

“How fortunate, how godsped are we, to be here on this ceremonial day, and at the very solemn hour that draws their rite unto its close. We may not enter. Surely we may not profane. For such holy precinct shall be doubly sacred to us in our reverence for this unison of old and new. So let us here abide awhile, until such time – their ceremony having reached its ordained ending, and its just and solemn closure – that they come forth, clad in toga, sandals, and their bound-up brows radiant as of yore.”

-Louis H. Sullivan, Kindergarten Chats and Other Writings

The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago was a culmination of Chicago’s industrial and commercial progress – a testament to the city’s growing power that rivaled the likes of New York and Philadelphia. The Bank’s responsibilities included tasks expected from a bank – loans, handling funds from the 7^th district, distribution of Federal Reserve Notes. For this reason, Sullivan was displeased that the “form” did not “follow the function.”

Sullivan ridiculed the banks of Chicago that resembled classical temples, satirically claiming that the people of Chicago should celebrate the “ceremonial day” in which the Chicago Reserve was created. Claiming that the bank tellers will appear in “togas” and “sandals,” a comment on the unnecessary classical features of banks.

The reception made by Sullivan is not one in favor for the Chicago Reserve’s classical features – the dialogue he engages in is one that finds the bank's classical features useless. His general claim is that buildings should not be over decorated, but rather designed to be synonymous with the purpose of the building.

“the impression of dignity and strength, in harmony with the power and purpose of the institution.”

            -Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago

The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago was viewed in a positive light by a newspaper of the time. It is unclear if this reception is one that Graham, Anderson, Probst, and White hoped all Chicagoans would experience, but it is a reception that appreciates the references to classical temples.

This statement acknowledges the stability and power of the Chicago Reserve, but does it do so because of the classical antiquities? Or is it simply because the structure was considered an architectural marvel? One can make the assumption that the strength is in “harmony” with the purpose of the institution, in the way that classical temples were in harmony with their treasury responsibilities.

If this holds true, then this statement is an indication that the monument was capable of spurring classical receptions among people. But can this perception still be found today?

“You must get in the habit of believing and acting on the fact that your bank is part and parcel of the Federal Reserve System...The stronger the Federal Reserve banks are, the stronger will the [banking) system be.”

            -J.B Forgan

This statement is an acknowledgment that the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago is a necessary structure for the success of the United States’ Central Bank. This belief was built by the bank’s growing dependable reputation, with each year demonstrating growth in the budget amount and overall improvement.

Even so, referring to the appraisal of the bank as a “habit” insinuates that the appreciation does not come naturally. Did J.B. Forgan believe the classical antiquities of the Chicago Reserve cannot be appreciated unless a person forces themselves to do so? This is yet another instance where a statement does not acknowledge the receptions made by Graham, Anderson, Probst, and White.

One thing that is made clear by this statement is the Chicago Reserve’s purpose. It cannot be refuted that the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago was created on the need for economic stability and the belief that Chicago’s culture of progress would make it a suitable home.

“classic in style, fully interpreted to harmonize with modern conditions.”

            -Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Annual Report
The Chicago Reserve’s annual reports did not often discuss the architectural and aesthetic characteristics of the monument. These reports were primarily financial reports, which is to be expected of a Bank - making this statement very unique.

The statement praises the neoclassical style of the monument, a style meant to resonate with the classical temples of Rome. It also makes a reception about its dialogue with the present time, stating that it seems to “harmonize with modern conditions.” Is this one of the only positive receptions of the monument made that refers to the present time? Regardless, the idea of classical harmonizing with modern is quite possibly what Graham, Anderson, Probst, and White were aiming to achieve.

Chicago is often referred to as a city of dichotomy – future and past, dark and white, culture and commerce. The Federal Reserve Bank seems to engage a dichotomy of future and past – its classical features referencing classical temples, while its state of the art structure making it a suitable building for the city of progress, Chicago.

“unless the banks shall resume currency payments...so as to restore some feeling of confidence among the masses, there are apt to be such scenes of riot and bloodshed in this city as Chicago has not seen.”

            -A Small Depositor, Letter to Forgan

This statement was made at the time of the Great Depression, where banks were expected to return the money bestowed by the people of Chicago to the Chicago Reserve. This was a time where the perception of impenetrability and strength was shattered by the invincible hand that is the American stock exchange.

Although the structure still stood, the trust in the Chicago Reserve was lost. Is this because trust in a monument is prioritized by reputation and not its structural form? Trust, that when broken, can lead to bloodshed.

Bloodshed is usually the most dramatic means to an issue, and monetary issues were high in the ranks for the people of Chicago at this time. The 1920s were a time of economic prosperity, a time where people lived lavishly and believed they could do so with no end. So the Great Depression was a rude awakening, a realization that prosperity can only last so long. Making the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago an easy target for all the anger and disappointment of the people of Chicago.

Despite the Great Depression, the Chicago Reserve did not close down and has since returned to function smoothly.