Frederic P. Lyman

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.
Tom
Posts: 3145
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:53 pm
Location: Black Mountain, NC

Post by Tom »

I saw that - which leads me to some kind of question about the building cycle?
Twenty years struck me as very short.
They rebuild every twenty years.
What do they do with the "old" version?
... 20 years is nothing

SDR
Posts: 19286
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Somewhere this week I read that the used material is employed for other worthy, if not sacred, uses ...


. . . . . . . . Here are the relevant passages and pictures from Drexler's MoMA book.



Image

ImageImage

Image


Image
Image


Image
Image


Image
Image


Image


Image
Image

Image

Copyright © 1955 by The Museum of Modern Art and by Arthur Drexler
Last edited by SDR on Sun Aug 18, 2019 9:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Tom
Posts: 3145
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:53 pm
Location: Black Mountain, NC

Post by Tom »

Incredible
Pretty sure I've never seen this building before.

SDR
Posts: 19286
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

There are four structures in the compound, as well as entry gates in each of the walls surrounding the sacred site.

S

SDR
Posts: 19286
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

The parallels found in comparing Lyman's house to the shrine buildings are several: in addition to the general form---a rectangle covered by a prominent
double-pitched roof---the two buildings share a floor raised nearly a full storey above the ground, a post-and-beam structure with mortise-and-tenon joinery
and clad with flat boards abutting each other (horizontally oriented in Japan, vertically in Malibu), down to the exterior stairs formed from solid logs (the Ise
example is found at the nearby Ise Geku shrine, not illustrated here).

The ridge poles at Ise, independently supported by a pair of poles that rest on grade, are a unique solution to a common structural problem.

S

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10120
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

The profound difference between Ise and Lyman is that the temples, because of their use, are entirely inward looking, while Lyman's house is transparent from front to back.

The same can be said of Ennis v. Uxmal. Comparisons of these sorts have a limited value.

SDR
Posts: 19286
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Rather than negating the validity of a comparison, Roderick's observation of the buildings adds to the information---and the value---of that comparison, it seems to me. It is hardly possible to omit Ise from any discussion of
Lyman's house; Buckner writes (p 29) that "In Lyman's studies, the Ise Shrine particularly captivated him."

Indeed, the observation alerts me to the fact that both ends of Lyman's volume are closed---despite the impression given by a couple of the photos, where reflections give the appearance of a glazed third wall---and in turn add to
an understanding of Lyman's statement about the value of his rigid frame: while the opaque end walls read as fixed planes, in fact the floating boards, contained by a pair of "bookends" wedged in place, top and bottom, couldn't
possibly function as shear walls.

The same, presumably, would be the case at the temple structures, where the boards are laid horizontally and ride in dadoes in the fat columns.

S

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10120
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

My observation was not meant to comment on structure at all, but on the space within. Ise is not a house, and Lyman is not a temple. Well, in a way, there is a temple-like attitude to Lyman, but focus of it is not Ise-like.

Not only do the glazed walls of Lyman invite in views of a pre-overdeveloped Malibu, but the skylight over the roof ridge and the glazed gables help to dematerialize the entire opus. (One photo seems to show skylights over the two subsidiary structures, bath and carport.) The solid end walls imply that the lot may have been narrow enough so privacy from future neighbors might have been compromised by too much glass.

An interesting note on the plan refers to the house as the "Mr. and Mrs. Frederic P. Lyman Residence," although when the house was published in the 50s, there was no Mrs. It was referred to as a bachelor pad. I can well imagine that once Fred married, family needs quickly outgrew the house.

SDR
Posts: 19286
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Buckner writes that, when the couple adopted twin boys, "it presented insurmountable problems." (The house had what amounted to an open-air
sleeping loft, containing a tent of blue sailcloth.) "To house the family, the Lymans purchased a more appropriate house in Malibu and turned the
Lyman House [sic] into an office space. The lower floor became a conference room with a reception desk for the office assistant, and the upper
floor was converted into a drafting and model-making room [presumably enclosed ?]." The Lyman house once again became a bachelor pad when the
Lymans separated in 1969. Lyman returned to his house to live and work, installing a bed on the main level. After the Lymans divorced, Lyman moved
his office a few blocks away to a building on Pacific Coast Highway. Lyman kept his house as a residence, converting the drafting room to a painting
studio ..."

Lyman purchased a thousand acres in Minnesota in the early '80s, after which he sold the house.

Oddly, it is not the neighboring lots which the solid walls face, but rather the canyon and the road.

S

Post Reply