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.
Storrer said the Wright claim is based on conjecture and guesswork. He said he believes if Wright had designed the building, there would be architectural plans of it somewhere.
Storrer seems to be his usual peevish self, displeased in this case that somebody else might have discovered a new building. Does he have drawings for any of his alleged discoveries, such as that Dutch colonial in Racine?[/b]
employed alternately as structure and as decoration, the unordered placement of openings and the prosaic fan-paneled gabled dormer do not suggest Wright
-- to me. The mis-matched horizontal siding may reflect alteration, as might the plain porch posts, which suggest later insect screening of the space.
There is record in the form of drawings for Wright's revisions to the Chauncey Williams dormers, and Wright himself acknowledged his authorship by publishing photos of the house in 1911 (with revised dormers)and in 1942 (with original dormers). It is interesting that Wright published his revised version of Williams in 1911 and the unrevised version years later in 1942...I'm not sure if there is any connection with this to Cecil Corwin's death in 1941...it has been suggested that Corwin collaborated on Williams just before his departure from Chicago to New York. It further has been suggested that Wright may have worked on the Dutch Colonial in Racine (Mitchell) with Corwin as a collaboration, I suspect the drawings for it are in Cecil Corwin's archive, if it still exists somewhere, as it was primarily his commission.For a building that early I wouldn't say that a lack of drawings is conclusive. We have none for Chauncey Williams, from the same year, yet nobody denies that it's Wright's. ..... Does he have drawings for any of his alleged discoveries, such as that Dutch colonial in Racine?
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/151 ... man-corwin
The article notes a March 1894 Inland Architect listing in which Wright is noted as the architect for the island cottage for Blossom as well as a city house (the article isn't clear if the city house was existing at the time of publication, we know it was)... the city house for Blossom was a "bootlegged" house done in 1892 under Cecil Corwin's name. Was Wright, now an independent practitioner, "setting the record straight", making it clear to the readers of Inland Architect that Blossom was a return client? Still we don't know what Wright designed or, as Roderick notes, if what Wright may have designed was actually built. It was my understanding the Inland Architect listings often announced projects in process prior to construction to allow contractors to call on architects to bid the work...this was not necessarily an announcement of a completed building.
In any case, I'd like to see more photos of the cottage inside and out.
I like to think that somewhere between 1911 and 1941 FLW revisited Chauncey Williams, and regretted redesigning those dormers. The originals look so much better than the "witches hat" style.
Stafford Norris III supplies the page from Inland Architect. See lower left corner. Stafford says nothing important is missing.
So this is infamous listing in which CorwinÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Mitchell house and WrightÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s Bagley house are noted on the same page...consecutively. The Blossom cottage commission is also noted, but there is no mention of the Blossom city house as the article linked at the top of the thread implied:
Ã¢â‚¬Å“In the March 1894 edition of the Inland Architecture New Record, a single paragraph announces that a cottage for George W. Blossom was to be built Ã¢â‚¬Å“on Manitou by Frank Lloyd Wright.Ã¢â‚¬Â� The announcement also mentioned a home in Chicago that Frank Lloyd Wright built for Blossom. That building was documented and has long been attributed to Wright, but the North Manitou structure had somehow been lost.Ã¢â‚¬Â�
Notice the particulars of the proposed construction of Mitchell and Bagley are listed but no mention of the particulars of the cottage...as if the commission had just been obtained but no design work had begun? Did it ever?
The Blossom's house was called "Beechwood"...might there be any record of a house by that name in the island's history?