|
Home > Archive > Architecture > October 2006 > Frank LLoyd Wright
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Frank LLoyd Wright
|
|
|
| Frank Lloyd Wright, is pretty much a household name in architecture. Who is,
or who will be the next household name in architecture?
| |
| clintonG 2006-09-26, 5:25 pm |
| His name is Santiago Calatrava [1] and the @sshole stole all my ideas ;-)
<%= Clinton Gallagher
NET csgallagher AT metromilwaukee.com
URL http://clintongallagher.metromilwaukee.com/
MAP 43°2'17"N 88°2'37"W : 43°2'17"N 88°2'37"W.
[1] http://calatrava.com/
"Dan" <danlorone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:cIdSg.1641$Y24.950@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Frank Lloyd Wright, is pretty much a household name in architecture. Who
> is,
> or who will be the next household name in architecture?
>
>
>
| |
|
|
"Dan" <danlorone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:cIdSg.1641$Y24.950@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Frank Lloyd Wright, is pretty much a household name in architecture. Who
> is,
> or who will be the next household name in architecture?
>
>
>
not this guy
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...6012614333.html
| |
| Pierre Levesque, AIA 2006-09-26, 5:25 pm |
|
"jojo" <cgv_2000@*remove your hat*yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%AeSg.4825$TV3.3473@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Dan" <danlorone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:cIdSg.1641$Y24.950@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> not this guy
>
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...6012614333.html
That reminds
me.....................................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..................
what ever happened to that other great
architect???????????????...........think about that!!!!!!!!!
| |
| Kris Krieger 2006-09-26, 5:25 pm |
| "jojo" <cgv_2000@*remove your hat*yahoo.com> wrote in
news:%AeSg.4825$TV3.3473@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:
>
> "Dan" <danlorone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:cIdSg.1641$Y24.950@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> not this guy
>
> http://www.smh.com.au/news/national...chitect-to-terr
> orist/2006/08/23/1156012614333.html
>
>
>
Just goes to show that the most dangerous murderous fanatics are often the
people who seem to be the most "normal".
| |
|
|
"Pierre Levesque, AIA" <connarchNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:jVeSg.752$Dq3.306@trndny06...
>
> "jojo" <cgv_2000@*remove your hat*yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:%AeSg.4825$TV3.3473@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com...
>
> That reminds
> me.....................................!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!..................
> what ever happened to that other great
> architect???????????????...........think about that!!!!!!!!!
He's been at gitmo for the past 5 years, you worthless dog!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Think about that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
| |
|
| Dan wrote:
> Frank Lloyd Wright, is pretty much a household name in architecture. Who is,
> or who will be the next household name in architecture?
Cham Vincent at http://www.architectsassociates.net/
| |
|
|
"Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
news:1159364556.152890.267380@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
> Dan wrote:
>
> Cham Vincent at http://www.architectsassociates.net/
>
oh my, that was just too damned funny!
jojo
| |
|
| most definitely Todao Ando...
| |
| Godzilla Pimp 2006-09-28, 8:25 pm |
|
"Dan" <danlorone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:cIdSg.1641$Y24.950@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Frank Lloyd Wright, is pretty much a household name in architecture. Who
> is,
> or who will be the next household name in architecture?
Assuming all buildings will eventually look like a pile of wet cardboard
spray-painted silver, Frank Gehry .
GP
| |
| dtrostis 2006-10-05, 5:25 pm |
| That website architecture firm website scam is hilarious! Specially
Kathy McDermott.
jojo wrote:
> "Pat" <groups@artisticphotography.us> wrote in message
> news:1159364556.152890.267380@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com...
>
> oh my, that was just too damned funny!
>
> jojo
| |
|
| Yep. The FBI knows about our buddy.
the dogs! they howl at my work...................!!!!!!!!!!
"Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in message
news:efcnqh01pb3@news4.newsguy.com...
>
> "Pierre Levesque, AIA" <connarchNOSPAM@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:jVeSg.752$Dq3.306@trndny06...
>
> He's been at gitmo for the past 5 years, you worthless
> dog!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Think about that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
| |
|
| There won't be one unless someone designs, patents and self-names a system
that will produce a home in record speed and less than half the cost of
conventional construction.
The world has changed and it changes too fast. It's a fickle place that does
not provide enough time for names too stick.
And who really cares? Someone mentioned Ghery. Whoopie! Calatrava? So what?
What people in and out of the profession don't understand is that Wright did
not rely on gimmicks. He approached his work with an honesty that today's
golden boys (and occasional girl) do not possess.
Flash = Flash-in-the-pan.
The best architects have names you will likely only know if you are a
client, employee, friend or relative of.
I know I've only partially answered your question with a non-answer because
I, as I assume most, have inferred quality, brilliance, etc, as
prerequisites for having a big name. Clearly, they are not.
Never confuse the likes of Ghery with masters like Wright and Aalto.
"Dan" <danlorone@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:cIdSg.1641$Y24.950@newsread4.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Frank Lloyd Wright, is pretty much a household name in architecture. Who
> is,
> or who will be the next household name in architecture?
>
>
>
>
| |
|
| > "Dan"> wrote
"JD"> wrote[color=darkred]
> Never confuse the likes of Ghery with masters like Wright and Aalto.
When I read the OP's question I was wishing good ol' JD was around. hee hee
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-06, 3:25 am |
| On Oct 5, 7:08 pm, "JD" <laughingarchit...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> There won't be one unless someone designs, patents and self-names a system
> that will produce a home in record speed and less than half the cost of
> conventional construction.
>
> The world has changed and it changes too fast. It's a fickle place that does
> not provide enough time for names too stick.
I think it changes too slowly. If it changed quickly enough there
wouldn't be time to hear the name in the first place. ;)
> And who really cares? Someone mentioned Ghery. Whoopie! Calatrava? So what?
Interesting choice of examples. All are one-name monikers that are
instantly distinguishable. Branding _is_ very important.
> What people in and out of the profession don't understand is that Wright did
> not rely on gimmicks. He approached his work with an honesty that today's
> golden boys (and occasional girl) do not possess.
Indeed.
He honestly believed that he could make his buildings work (even if
time and technology proved otherwise).
He honestly believed that, if there were a problem in the building, the
client should have the moral rectitude to ignore it.
He honestly believed that his apprentices should pay him and spend half
of their time working his estates.
He honestly was a complex man, lived a mythical life and created some
wondrous things.
R
| |
| marcenmoni@cpu-net.net 2006-10-08, 3:25 am |
|
JD wrote:
> There won't be one unless someone designs, patents and self-names a system
> that will produce a home in record speed and less than half the cost of
> conventional construction.
>
> The world has changed and it changes too fast. It's a fickle place that does
> not provide enough time for names too stick.
>
> And who really cares? Someone mentioned Ghery. Whoopie! Calatrava? So what?
>
> What people in and out of the profession don't understand is that Wright did
> not rely on gimmicks. He approached his work with an honesty that today's
> golden boys (and occasional girl) do not possess.
>
> Flash = Flash-in-the-pan.
>
> The best architects have names you will likely only know if you are a
> client, employee, friend or relative of.
>
> I know I've only partially answered your question with a non-answer because
> I, as I assume most, have inferred quality, brilliance, etc, as
> prerequisites for having a big name. Clearly, they are not.
>
> Never confuse the likes of Ghery with masters like Wright and Aalto.
>
The other night I watched a documentary by Sidney Pollack on Frank
Gehry ('Sketches of FRank Gehry' or something like that). A rather
interesting documentary, which clearly shows Sidney's affection for his
long time friend.
In it, Gehry claims to have attended a lecture by Aalto in his late
teens, a lecture which got him into architecture, and he himself
believes he is 'close to Aalto'. Pollack then shows a few examples of
Aalto's work to juxtapose it against Gehry's, trying to convey the idea
that Aalto didn't shy away from curves either.
It's actually a rather humorous sequence except for that Gehry should
know better: after all his scultpural forms don't reflect any specific
site condition or structural requirement. The titanium curved sheets
are just as much as decoration as any painting scheme would be. Hardly
'modenist' by any stretch. More like a futurist statue by Boccioni.
Nothing wrong with that, but the style has absolutely nothing to do
with Aalto.
Aalto is probably rolling in his grave.
Last year I was in L.A. for the opening of an Etro store in Beverly
Hills, and my friend showed me the Disney center. It's okay as a
sculptural piece, but when he asked me what I thought, I told him it's
a work that's impossible to critique aesthetically, and therefore is a
dead end style, with little possibility of growth. I drew comparisons
to the Greco-Roman decorative language and how it's evolved via
Alberti, Palladio, Vignola, Chambers, etc. up to Lutyens. A decorative
language with rules which can be understood, manipulated and tweaked,
violated or misapplied- a system that allows critiquing while providing
a way to decoratively 'organize' a facade.
Curved titanium sheets have no such rules of application. They can be
curved 60 degrees, 70 degrees, more acutely, less acutely, and it
probably wouldn't matter much.
I saw 'Fred and Ginger', Gehry's work in Prague, last year. Fancy forms
that fell apart when compared to the level of detailed design and
decorative minutiae of the adjacent Art Nouveau buildings, which
ultimately were more satisfying from a design aesthetic point of view.
It was actually a rather revealing comparison.
Marcello
| |
|
| Great analysis. And imagine, you haven't even touched the interiors and
function. That's where Ghery is completly lost and any comparison to Aalto
is nothing short of architectural blasphemy.
That's OK. Most of the young, would-be architects who kneel at the shrine of
Ghery will soon be wondering why they're making a career change.
There's room for only so many clowns in the circus.
<marcenmoni@cpu-net.net> wrote in message
news:1160279429.080945.161210@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> JD wrote:
>
> The other night I watched a documentary by Sidney Pollack on Frank
> Gehry ('Sketches of FRank Gehry' or something like that). A rather
> interesting documentary, which clearly shows Sidney's affection for his
> long time friend.
>
> In it, Gehry claims to have attended a lecture by Aalto in his late
> teens, a lecture which got him into architecture, and he himself
> believes he is 'close to Aalto'. Pollack then shows a few examples of
> Aalto's work to juxtapose it against Gehry's, trying to convey the idea
> that Aalto didn't shy away from curves either.
>
> It's actually a rather humorous sequence except for that Gehry should
> know better: after all his scultpural forms don't reflect any specific
> site condition or structural requirement. The titanium curved sheets
> are just as much as decoration as any painting scheme would be. Hardly
> 'modenist' by any stretch. More like a futurist statue by Boccioni.
> Nothing wrong with that, but the style has absolutely nothing to do
> with Aalto.
>
> Aalto is probably rolling in his grave.
>
> Last year I was in L.A. for the opening of an Etro store in Beverly
> Hills, and my friend showed me the Disney center. It's okay as a
> sculptural piece, but when he asked me what I thought, I told him it's
> a work that's impossible to critique aesthetically, and therefore is a
> dead end style, with little possibility of growth. I drew comparisons
> to the Greco-Roman decorative language and how it's evolved via
> Alberti, Palladio, Vignola, Chambers, etc. up to Lutyens. A decorative
> language with rules which can be understood, manipulated and tweaked,
> violated or misapplied- a system that allows critiquing while providing
> a way to decoratively 'organize' a facade.
>
> Curved titanium sheets have no such rules of application. They can be
> curved 60 degrees, 70 degrees, more acutely, less acutely, and it
> probably wouldn't matter much.
>
> I saw 'Fred and Ginger', Gehry's work in Prague, last year. Fancy forms
> that fell apart when compared to the level of detailed design and
> decorative minutiae of the adjacent Art Nouveau buildings, which
> ultimately were more satisfying from a design aesthetic point of view.
> It was actually a rather revealing comparison.
>
> Marcello
>
| |
| Warm Worm 2006-10-10, 8:25 pm |
|
"JD"
> Great analysis. And imagine, you haven't even touched the interiors and
> function. That's where Ghery is completly lost and any comparison to Aalto
> is nothing short of architectural blasphemy.
>
> That's OK. Most of the young, would-be architects who kneel at the shrine
> of Ghery will soon be wondering why they're making a career change.
>
> There's room for only so many clowns in the circus.
Maybe another problem is that it's a circus.
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-10, 9:25 pm |
| On Oct 10, 6:50 pm, "Warm Worm" <w...@worm.ca> wrote:
> "JD"
>
>
> Maybe another problem is that it's a circus.
That's where the bread is.
R
| |
|
| "Warm Worm"> wrote
> "JD"
>
> Maybe another problem is that it's a circus.
All the worlds indeed a stage and we are merely players
Performers and portrayers, each anothers audience
Outside the gilded cage.
| |
|
| "RicodJour"> wrote
>"Warm Worm"> wrote:
>
> That's where the bread is.
I likes me sum raison bread wif applebutter spread all ober it.
Mmmmmm.......
| |
| Jude Alexander 2006-10-11, 9:25 am |
|
"Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in message
news:eghmo402p6i@news4.newsguy.com...
> "Warm Worm"> wrote
>
> All the worlds indeed a stage and we are merely players
> Performers and portrayers, each anothers audience
> Outside the gilded cage.
I've always enjoyed that quote. Many people also don't like it when it
stick to the script assigned us! lol And, one last thing..... some the guy
was just plain Frank Lloyd Wrong.... lesson learned from a child's story
"The King Has No Clothes."
| |
| Jude Alexander 2006-10-11, 9:25 am |
|
"Jude Alexander" <Cajun@middle of the swamp.com> wrote in message
news:Zs5Xg.12545$O65.339@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in message
> news:eghmo402p6i@news4.newsguy.com...
>
> I've always enjoyed that quote. Many people also don't like it when it
> stick to the script assigned us! lol And, one last thing..... some the
> guy was just plain Frank Lloyd Wrong.... lesson learned from a child's
> story "The King Has No Clothes."
Geez. Don't know what's a happening... Is it my brain or my typewriting
editing gone wrong???
Correction: Many people also don't like it when we don't stick to the
script assigned us
and
Correction: sometimes the guy was just plain Frank Lloyd Wrong...
>
>
| |
|
|
"Jude Alexander" <Cajun@middle of the swamp.com> wrote in message
news:cv5Xg.12549$O65.9224@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
> "Jude Alexander" <Cajun@middle of the swamp.com> wrote in message
> news:Zs5Xg.12545$O65.339@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
> Geez. Don't know what's a happening... Is it my brain or my typewriting
> editing gone wrong???
>
> Correction: Many people also don't like it when we don't stick to the
> script assigned us
>
> and
>
> Correction: sometimes the guy was just plain Frank Lloyd Wrong...
Cute. I usually hear that from people with no talent and less understanding.
Can you back up your quip with something meaningful?
Maybe you're never wrong.
Did Wright make some mistakes? Probably. Were they significant? Can't think
of any.
| |
|
|
"RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
news:1160530614.422063.304670@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 10, 6:50 pm, "Warm Worm" <w...@worm.ca> wrote:
>
> That's where the bread is.
Bread? Oh, you mean money? I didn't realize you were that old.
So, do you speak from experience or the usual Rico assumptions.
| |
| Kris Krieger 2006-10-11, 5:25 pm |
| "JD" <laughingarchitectNOSPAM@sbcglobal.net> wrote in news:9%8Xg.13257
$e66.11868@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com:
>
> "RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
> news:1160530614.422063.304670@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Bread? Oh, you mean money? I didn't realize you were that old.
>
> So, do you speak from experience or the usual Rico assumptions.
>
Gee, I'd thought he was making a quip on "Bread and circuses"...
| |
| Jude Alexander 2006-10-11, 5:25 pm |
|
"JD" <laughingarchitectNOSPAM@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:rY8Xg.13254$e66.11193@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com...
>
> "Jude Alexander" <Cajun@middle of the swamp.com> wrote in message
> news:cv5Xg.12549$O65.9224@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
>
> Cute. I usually hear that from people with no talent and less
> understanding. Can you back up your quip with something meaningful?
What? Do you take a less than respectful attitude toward FLW personally so
that you have to insult me? I SAID SOMETIMES. Do you think he was perfect?
Do I have to explain my opinion?
> Maybe you're never wrong.
What kind of projection is this? Did I EVER say that I was never wrong or
that EVEN FLW was always wrong. The fact is about myself is that I think
people are childish to have heros they can't look at completely.... that
their heros have to be "perfect," and they becomes like gods insofar that
those who don't worship them are thought of as infidels.
> Did Wright make some mistakes? Probably. Were they significant? Can't
> think of any.
What would you call a mistake? What would you call a ugly unattractive
structure?
For instance, I loved the concept of bringing people up to the top floor and
letting them walk down a gentle slope toward the bottom floor while viewing
the artwork and I also liked the concept of the atrium. However, the
building looks like a upside down bowl of that era. What was that style of
dishware? It escapes me right now.
| |
| Jude Alexander 2006-10-11, 5:25 pm |
|
.... Sorry.... that would be the Guggenheim.
| |
|
| "Jude Alexander"> wrote
> Frank Lloyd Wrong....
HA!
| |
|
|
"Kris Krieger" <me@dowmuff.in> wrote in message
news:gdcXg.5877$Lv3.807@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "JD" <laughingarchitectNOSPAM@sbcglobal.net> wrote in news:9%8Xg.13257
> $e66.11868@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com:
>
>
> Gee, I'd thought he was making a quip on "Bread and circuses"...
I thought it was bread and butter.
Er, butter and gunz.
Errrr....gunz N rosez.
| |
| gruhn@rararchitects.com 2006-10-12, 3:25 am |
| > most definitely Todao Ando...
Are you confusing "the architect you most admire" with "the next
household name"?
| |
| Kris Krieger 2006-10-12, 9:25 am |
| "Don" <one-if-by-land@concord.com> wrote in
news:egk54h04a4@news3.newsguy.com:
>
> "Kris Krieger" <me@dowmuff.in> wrote in message
> news:gdcXg.5877$Lv3.807@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> I thought it was bread and butter.
> Er, butter and gunz.
> Errrr....gunz N rosez.
>
Git it right, son:
gunz 'n' beer...
;)
| |
| Warm Worm 2006-10-12, 8:25 pm |
|
"Don"
> "RicodJour"
>
> "I likes me sum raison bread..."
That or expertly-baked hot cross buns:
- Cut open;
- Sprinkle a good dusting of cinnamon over both halves;
- Add a good layer of brown sugar on top of the cinnamon layer;
- Top that with refridgerated pure salted butter shavings;
- Set oven to broil;
- Immediately place in oven on top (or second from top) rack;
- Watch through window until cinnamon, sugar, and melted butter start to
merge;
- Let the merged mix start to bubble and brown slightly
- Around about where the edges of the bread starts to burn a little,
carefully remove from oven;
- Let cool somewhat (topping can be very hot!) until topping hardens into a
satisfying crispy crust;
- Enjoy (maybe with a glass of fresh cold milk)
| |
|
| "Warm Worm"> wrote
> "Don"
>
> That or expertly-baked hot cross buns:
>
> - Cut open;
> - Sprinkle a good dusting of cinnamon over both halves;
> - Add a good layer of brown sugar on top of the cinnamon layer;
> - Top that with refridgerated pure salted butter shavings;
> - Set oven to broil;
> - Immediately place in oven on top (or second from top) rack;
> - Watch through window until cinnamon, sugar, and melted butter start to
> merge;
> - Let the merged mix start to bubble and brown slightly
> - Around about where the edges of the bread starts to burn a little,
> carefully remove from oven;
> - Let cool somewhat (topping can be very hot!) until topping hardens into
> a satisfying crispy crust;
> - Enjoy (maybe with a glass of fresh cold milk)
OUCH!
That made my teefs hurt!
But Mmmm-Mmmm-Mmmmmmm
| |
| Boozer's, Cosmo's, Malcolm's, Miles' and Sebastian 2006-10-17, 8:25 pm |
| "What would you call a ugly unattractive
structure?"
I suppose that would depend on the point of view - from inside or from
outside the "upside down bowl"... =)
| |
| Frank Lloyd Fan 2006-10-17, 8:25 pm |
| > Did Wright make some mistakes? Probably.
Most definitely.
> What would you call a mistake?
1. Nearly everything Wright built leaked, especially his most
spectacular creations.
2. As a husband and father, he made numerous (and sometimes
catastrophic) personal mistakes...
> Were they significant?
Really depends on your point of view. IMHO - His functional failures
were clearly overshadowed by the success of his forms.
> What would you call a ugly unattractive structure?
Whether the Guggenheim is ugly and unattractive or not depends
primarily on your taste and your point of view (meaning, as you so
aptly put it, from the inside or the outside of the "upside down
bowl").
| |
| Kris Krieger 2006-10-18, 8:25 pm |
| "Frank Lloyd Fan" <flip@flipsworld.com> wrote in
news:1161134247.032732.45920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
> Most definitely.
>
> 1. Nearly everything Wright built leaked, especially his most
> spectacular creations.
> 2. As a husband and father, he made numerous (and sometimes
> catastrophic) personal mistakes...
What does that have to do with his buildings?
>
> Really depends on your point of view. IMHO - His functional failures
> were clearly overshadowed by the success of his forms.
>
> Whether the Guggenheim is ugly and unattractive or not depends
> primarily on your taste and your point of view (meaning, as you so
> aptly put it, from the inside or the outside of the "upside down
> bowl").
>
I was in it, early on in life. I found it breathtaking, uplifting, like
rising on a comumn of light. I thought that, wiht only a few exceptions,
the stuff on the wall was an affront to the building...
De gustibus.
| |
| Jude Alexander 2006-10-19, 9:25 am |
|
"Kris Krieger" <me@dowmuff.in> wrote in message
news:BryZg.8905$Lv3.447@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "Frank Lloyd Fan" <flip@flipsworld.com> wrote in
> news:1161134247.032732.45920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
>
>
> What does that have to do with his buildings?
>
>
> I was in it, early on in life. I found it breathtaking, uplifting, like
> rising on a comumn of light. I thought that, wiht only a few exceptions,
> the stuff on the wall was an affront to the building...
>
> De gustibus.
What may be less known about FLW is that when the clients insisted on having
their way, he would sometimes do a little "nasty" design detail relative to
that issue. One I remember had to do with a built in desk.
In college, we were told that a client once called FLW up at his home on the
weekend and was yelling about a roof leak to which FLW flippantly told him
to call a plumber and hung up on him.
| |
| Jude Alexander 2006-10-19, 1:25 pm |
| I missed this for a long time because you didn't keep my header on it to
identify that it was addressed to me. I didn't even look at it. I
accidentally came across it as I was searching for something else.
Nearly everything Wright built DID leak, one house was badly out of
alignment, and he went against his engineers who told him he needed to add
reinforcement. He was a bully toward his fellow man and clients, arrogant
to the core. Someone I would NOT admire as a human being, I don't care how
many good looking and interesting buildings he produced. However, you
might be surprised that I actually do admire a good bit of his work. He was
what he was. No more and no less.
I find it sad when I come across people who act like you're talking against
God when someone criticizes their "heroes." All men have feet of clay.
Significant structural failure on some, many leaks on others, out of
alignment on yet others were COMMON on his structures and he went against
his OWN ENGINEERS simply because he SAID that to do so would render his work
monetarily out of market value. To do the RIGHT THING ions, would be to
make the client incur costs they probably wouldn't have wanted to incur even
if FLW was doing the design.
No kidding about whether someone things something is ugly is a personal
opinion? Of course, it's ALWAYS someone's personal opinion that something
is beautiful also. So what? There's a whole lot of people who think
Guggenheim is a silly looking building. It's the idea of making the
experience of seeing artwork that is unique. Yes, the look is unique also
but it DOES look like a bowl. Anybody who denies that it does, is just
plain stubborn. Not only does it look like a bowl, it looks like a
particular supperware that was popular at the time but I just can't remember
it's name.
Who said that architecture was the art and science of building well?
If the roof doesn't leak, the architect hasn't been creative enough.'" FLW
"Early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and hypocritical
humility. I chose the former and have seen no reason to change" FLW
"I feel coming on a strange disease -- humility" FLW
"Move the chair" - Wright's response to a client who phoned him to complain
of rain leaking through the roof of the house onto the dining table.
From several sites:
Of the roughly 1,141 buildings he designed, 409 still stand. And while he is
lauded as a creative genius, perennial cracking and leaking seem to be a
feature of much of his work.
The Guggenheim's rotunda is under scaffolding to fix cracking that has
plagued it opened in 1959.
Fallingwater, the country home Wright built on top of a waterfall for
department store owner Edgar Kaufmann in Pennsylvania, has undergone near
constant repair and plagued with structural problems since its 1939 ."Holding
Up Fallingwater" illustrates the structural rehabbing of the terraces and
framework. The lower concrete terrace sagged from level by as much as 7"
(visible to the naked eye), and when warned by engineers in 1995 of
"possible massive structural failure and collapse," the conservators jacked
up the building so it wouldn't fall apart while they figured how to save the
building. They also dealt with water leaks in the roof seams, window seals
and skylights. The continual water damage had wrought cracking walls,
peeling paint, warping doors and rotting artworks. $11 million was needed to
restore what was once the vacation home of a man who reportedly referred to
the place as "Rising Mildew", and has been open as a public museum since
1964. Floors were ripped out so concrete-anchoring blocks with steel cables
could be inserted to keep the structure from sagging any further. The irony
of this particular repair was surely not lost on any surviving engineers and
contractors who ignited the wrath of Wright in 1936 when they questioned the
lack of support rods in his structural specifications. To avoid further
irritating the architect - who threatened to quit if they didn't do it his
way - the builders simply snuck in twice as many steel enforcing rods as
called for when Wright had his back turned. It still wasn't enough,
apparently, but you could only cram in so many extra rods while Frank was
out to lunch.
The Johnson Wax Headquarters had severe leaking of the roof after it's
completion.
The Robie House is crooked and out of alignment. If you walk along the long
exterior wall it can be seen how crooked it is and actually wriggles like a
snake.
Wright was known for his strong opinions and developed a reputation for
narcissism and hotheadedness in his dealings with clients.
In a letter to Kaufmann during Fallingwater's construction, he wrote: "I
have put so much more into this house than you or any other client has a
right to expect that if I haven't your confidence ... to hell with the whole
thing."
A large percentage of Wright's visionary reputation centers on his complete
control of every design detail. From roof to throw rug to how the furniture
he designed should be placed in a room, no aspect of his houses could exist
unless he said so. The concerns and needs of clients and builders were often
ignored. Wright claimed he was chiefly concerned with making houses that
would encourage spiritual comfort for the families living within yet there
are enough documented complaints from bewildered owners to prove he failed
at this lofty goal.
To subsequent architects, his technical failings seem not to matter when
compared with his artistic flare. This may be why many practitioners seem
perfectly happy to have demoted the physical sciences necessary for sound
buildings in order to concentrate solely on design. Wright was Ground Zero
of this concept. In fact, there are those who believe that FLW was in
actuality a lousy architect but rather was an outstanding and pioneering
building artist of his day.
"Frank Lloyd Fan" <flip@flipsworld.com> wrote in message
news:1161134247.032732.45920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Most definitely.
>
> 1. Nearly everything Wright built leaked, especially his most
> spectacular creations.
> 2. As a husband and father, he made numerous (and sometimes
> catastrophic) personal mistakes...
>
> Really depends on your point of view. IMHO - His functional failures
> were clearly overshadowed by the success of his forms.
>
> Whether the Guggenheim is ugly and unattractive or not depends
> primarily on your taste and your point of view (meaning, as you so
> aptly put it, from the inside or the outside of the "upside down
> bowl").
>
| |
| Jude Alexander 2006-10-19, 1:25 pm |
| I missed this for a long time because you didn't keep my header on it to
identify that it was addressed to me. I didn't even look at it. I
accidentally came across it as I was searching for something else.
Nearly everything Wright built DID leak, one house was badly out of
alignment, and he went against his engineers who told him he needed to add
reinforcement. He was a bully toward his fellow man and clients, arrogant
to the core. Someone I would NOT admire as a human being, I don't care how
many good looking and interesting buildings he produced. However, you
might be surprised that I actually do admire a good bit of his work. He was
what he was. No more and no less.
I find it sad when I come across people who act like you're talking against
God when someone criticizes their "heroes." All men have feet of clay.
Significant structural failure on some, many leaks on others, out of
alignment on yet others were COMMON on his structures and he went against
his OWN ENGINEERS simply because he SAID that to do so would render his work
monetarily out of market value. To do the RIGHT THING ions, would be to
make the client incur costs they probably wouldn't have wanted to incur even
if FLW was doing the design.
No kidding about whether someone things something is ugly is a personal
opinion? Of course, it's ALWAYS someone's personal opinion that something
is beautiful also. So what? There's a whole lot of people who think
Guggenheim is a silly looking building. It's the idea of making the
experience of seeing artwork that is unique. Yes, the look is unique also
but it DOES look like a bowl. Anybody who denies that it does, is just
plain stubborn. Not only does it look like a bowl, it looks like a
particular supperware that was popular at the time but I just can't remember
it's name.
Who said that architecture was the art and science of building well?
If the roof doesn't leak, the architect hasn't been creative enough.'" FLW
"Early in life I had to choose between honest arrogance and hypocritical
humility. I chose the former and have seen no reason to change" FLW
"I feel coming on a strange disease -- humility" FLW
"Move the chair" - Wright's response to a client who phoned him to complain
of rain leaking through the roof of the house onto the dining table.
From several sites:
Of the roughly 1,141 buildings he designed, 409 still stand. And while he is
lauded as a creative genius, perennial cracking and leaking seem to be a
feature of much of his work.
The Guggenheim's rotunda is under scaffolding to fix cracking that has
plagued it opened in 1959.
Fallingwater, the country home Wright built on top of a waterfall for
department store owner Edgar Kaufmann in Pennsylvania, has undergone near
constant repair and plagued with structural problems since its 1939
.."Holding
Up Fallingwater" illustrates the structural rehabbing of the terraces and
framework. The lower concrete terrace sagged from level by as much as 7"
(visible to the naked eye), and when warned by engineers in 1995 of
"possible massive structural failure and collapse," the conservators jacked
up the building so it wouldn't fall apart while they figured how to save the
building. They also dealt with water leaks in the roof seams, window seals
and skylights. The continual water damage had wrought cracking walls,
peeling paint, warping doors and rotting artworks. $11 million was needed to
restore what was once the vacation home of a man who reportedly referred to
the place as "Rising Mildew", and has been open as a public museum since
1964. Floors were ripped out so concrete-anchoring blocks with steel cables
could be inserted to keep the structure from sagging any further. The irony
of this particular repair was surely not lost on any surviving engineers and
contractors who ignited the wrath of Wright in 1936 when they questioned the
lack of support rods in his structural specifications. To avoid further
irritating the architect - who threatened to quit if they didn't do it his
way - the builders simply snuck in twice as many steel enforcing rods as
called for when Wright had his back turned. It still wasn't enough,
apparently, but you could only cram in so many extra rods while Frank was
out to lunch.
The Johnson Wax Headquarters had severe leaking of the roof after it's
completion.
The Robie House is crooked and out of alignment. If you walk along the long
exterior wall it can be seen how crooked it is and actually wriggles like a
snake.
Wright was known for his strong opinions and developed a reputation for
narcissism and hotheadedness in his dealings with clients.
In a letter to Kaufmann during Fallingwater's construction, he wrote: "I
have put so much more into this house than you or any other client has a
right to expect that if I haven't your confidence ... to hell with the whole
thing."
A large percentage of Wright's visionary reputation centers on his complete
control of every design detail. From roof to throw rug to how the furniture
he designed should be placed in a room, no aspect of his houses could exist
unless he said so. The concerns and needs of clients and builders were often
ignored. Wright claimed he was chiefly concerned with making houses that
would encourage spiritual comfort for the families living within yet there
are enough documented complaints from bewildered owners to prove he failed
at this lofty goal.
To subsequent architects, his technical failings seem not to matter when
compared with his artistic flare. This may be why many practitioners seem
perfectly happy to have demoted the physical sciences necessary for sound
buildings in order to concentrate solely on design. Wright was Ground Zero
of this concept. In fact, there are those who believe that FLW was in
actuality a lousy architect but rather was an outstanding and pioneering
building artist of his day.
"Frank Lloyd Fan" <flip@flipsworld.com> wrote in message
news:1161134247.032732.45920@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Most definitely.
>
> 1. Nearly everything Wright built leaked, especially his most
> spectacular creations.
> 2. As a husband and father, he made numerous (and sometimes
> catastrophic) personal mistakes...
>
> Really depends on your point of view. IMHO - His functional failures
> were clearly overshadowed by the success of his forms.
>
> Whether the Guggenheim is ugly and unattractive or not depends
> primarily on your taste and your point of view (meaning, as you so
> aptly put it, from the inside or the outside of the "upside down
> bowl").
>
| |
| RicodJour 2006-10-20, 3:25 am |
| JD wrote:
> "RicodJour" <ricodjour@worldemail.com> wrote in message
>
> Bread? Oh, you mean money? I didn't realize you were that old.
That is not what I meant and I am ageless, thank you.
> So, do you speak from experience or the usual Rico assumptions.
It is impossible to speak, or live for that matter, without making
assumptions. It is apparently not impossible to be cranky without
cause. Consider working in a mid-day nap. 
R
| |
| Frank Lloyd Fan 2006-10-25, 9:25 pm |
| Collectively,
(Let's try a different format)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"What would you call a mistake?"
FRANK LLOYD FAN:
"1. Nearly everything Wright built leaked, especially his most
spectacular creations."
"2. As a husband and father, he made numerous (and sometimes
catastrophic) personal mistakes... "
KRIS KRIEGER:
"What does that have to do with his buildings?"
RESPONSE:
#1 clearly relates to his buildings.
#2 relates to the man, himself, since the question did not limit itself
to his work. I am a great fan of his work, and an amused (and somewhat
bemused) fan of the man, himself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"What may be less known about FLW is that when the clients insisted on
having their way, he would sometimes do a little "nasty" design detail
relative to that issue. One I remember
had to do with a built in desk."
RESPONSE:
I knew that he insisted upon his own way, but I never knew that.
Thanks!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"I didn't say anything about his home life? You got the >s all wrong
and I don't remember who made that statement."
RESPONSE:
That was me, again, going beyond the work.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"As far as I remember from his bio, his mother pampered him and
shielded him from his father who was a bit distant and stern. "
RESPONSE:
In addition to your remembrance, my sketchy memory of his bio recalls
that, reportedly:
- He "stole" some of his mentor's (Louis Sullivan) client=E8le
- He left his first wife and kids (I can't remember the reason)
- His Taliesin school was founded chiefly to raise money because he
could not pay his bills
- He cheated on his second wife, who was subsequently killed with their
child in the first Taliesin fire by an insane servant who Wright had
given numerous "second" chances
- Subsequent to the above, he married his mistress
Now, my memory is horrible, so some of those details may be completely
mis-stated, but it should serve to point out the level of intrigue that
surrounded Wright throughout his life.
I would also like to point out that I do not offer the above as an
indictment, because no one can really know the reasons that another may
have for doing such things. I am merely
pointing out that Wright had a troubled life, fraught with bad luck
and/or bad choices.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"No kidding about whether someone things something is ugly is a
personal opinion? Of course, it's ALWAYS someone's personal opinion
that something is beautiful also. So what?"
RESPONSE:
Actually, I was simply adding my support to your thread. I did not
mean to offend.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"Fallingwater...has undergone near constant repair and plagued with
structural problems since its 1939"
"=2E..the conservators jacked up the building so it wouldn't fall apart
while they figured how to save the building."
RESPONSE:
While I certainly agree that Wright paid less attention to engineering
than aesthetics, one of his chief design principles was that structures
are not made to be permanent. Wright was
a strong believer in Nature as "God" and Fallingwater's demise falls
right in line with this belief. Fallingwater was supposed to fall
someday (although perhaps not as soon as it began to) as all things
against nature must do. While I admire this sentiment, I am also quite
pleased that the trustees at the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy (the
organization entrusted with Fallingwater's perpetual care by Edgar
Kaufmann, Jr., the son of the clients for whom Fallingwater was built)
chose to forgo Wright's wishes and preserve the masterwork.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-------
Also to Jude Alexander, thanks for the quotations. Some I had seen
before, some I had not.
As always, all of the above is IMHO...
| |
| Jude A 2006-10-26, 9:25 am |
|
"Frank Lloyd Fan" <flip@flipsworld.com> wrote in message
news:1161827477.188092.297710@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Collectively,
(Let's try a different format)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"What would you call a mistake?"
FRANK LLOYD FAN:
"1. Nearly everything Wright built leaked, especially his most
spectacular creations."
"2. As a husband and father, he made numerous (and sometimes
catastrophic) personal mistakes... "
KRIS KRIEGER:
"What does that have to do with his buildings?"
RESPONSE:
#1 clearly relates to his buildings.
#2 relates to the man, himself, since the question did not limit itself
to his work. I am a great fan of his work, and an amused (and somewhat
bemused) fan of the man, himself.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"What may be less known about FLW is that when the clients insisted on
having their way, he would sometimes do a little "nasty" design detail
relative to that issue. One I remember
had to do with a built in desk."
RESPONSE:
I knew that he insisted upon his own way, but I never knew that.
Thanks!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"I didn't say anything about his home life? You got the >s all wrong
and I don't remember who made that statement."
RESPONSE:
That was me, again, going beyond the work.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"As far as I remember from his bio, his mother pampered him and
shielded him from his father who was a bit distant and stern. "
RESPONSE:
In addition to your remembrance, my sketchy memory of his bio recalls
that, reportedly:
- He "stole" some of his mentor's (Louis Sullivan) clientèle
- He left his first wife and kids (I can't remember the reason)
- His Taliesin school was founded chiefly to raise money because he
could not pay his bills
- He cheated on his second wife, who was subsequently killed with their
child in the first Taliesin fire by an insane servant who Wright had
given numerous "second" chances
- Subsequent to the above, he married his mistress
Now, my memory is horrible, so some of those details may be completely
mis-stated, but it should serve to point out the level of intrigue that
surrounded Wright throughout his life.
I would also like to point out that I do not offer the above as an
indictment, because no one can really know the reasons that another may
have for doing such things. I am merely
pointing out that Wright had a troubled life, fraught with bad luck
and/or bad choices.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"No kidding about whether someone things something is ugly is a
personal opinion? Of course, it's ALWAYS someone's personal opinion
that something is beautiful also. So what?"
RESPONSE:
Actually, I was simply adding my support to your thread. I did not
mean to offend.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JUDE ALEXANDER:
"Fallingwater...has undergone near constant repair and plagued with
structural problems since its 1939"
"...the conservators jacked up the building so it wouldn't fall apart
while they figured how to save the building."
RESPONSE:
While I certainly agree that Wright paid less attention to engineering
than aesthetics, one of his chief design principles was that structures
are not made to be permanent. Wright was
a strong believer in Nature as "God" and Fallingwater's demise falls
right in line with this belief. Fallingwater was supposed to fall
someday (although perhaps not as soon as it began to) as all things
against nature must do. While I admire this sentiment, I am also quite
pleased that the trustees at the Western Pennsylvania Conservancy (the
organization entrusted with Fallingwater's perpetual care by Edgar
Kaufmann, Jr., the son of the clients for whom Fallingwater was built)
chose to forgo Wright's wishes and preserve the masterwork.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also to Jude Alexander, thanks for the quotations. Some I had seen
before, some I had not.
As always, all of the above is IMHO...
Actually, I enjoyed reading your post. I knew about Sullivan, which I
actually did a piece of Sullivan's bank in Wisconsin (I think). I knew
about his troubled marriage. I didn't know about the loss of his child by
somehow he obviously tried to help. That is tragic.
Like I've said before, we all have feet of clay, strengths and weaknesses.
Thank you for you informative and peaceful post.
|
|
|
|
|