To control SPAM, you must now be a registered user to post to this Message Board.
EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's
Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
- Posts: 9864
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
As many who were there at the time attest, Fallingwater followed that first set of drawings almost to the last inch. Obviously there were working drawings made from the sketch (all three levels were drawn one on top of the other), but the design did not stray.
- Posts: 1239
- Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:02 pm
- Location: chicago
The original drawings for Fallingwater were lacking in a variety of ways, including how in the world Wright was planning on holding the thing up! It was there in concept, but still unresolved. Unfortunately, Wes and other structural engineers did their best to make it work without significantly altering the house as described on the original sketches. Wright went on to develop the design, as he did with every project, in order to bring the building to fruition. Working drawings take months to complete and the building evolves during this phase. As with most Wright-designed homes, the construction process allowed for further refinement and alterations. Although Wright ensured that the basic concept of Fallingwater remained, the final product is a much more developed and refined work than that described on the original sketches.
- Posts: 69
- Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2005 9:47 pm
Reidy stated: Storrer counts numerous unsupervised bootlegs, prefabs and the like (including that Corwin house in Racine) as authentic.
What is your reasoning for those homes not being counted? I would tend to agree with Storrer on these, why don't you?
As for the current house being discussed, at best it can be said as "Inspired by the drawings of..."