For sale: A. Quincy Jones' Schott House - Los Angeles, CA

[DavidC]

A Luminous Midcentury Home and ADU in Los Angeles Ask $3.2M


David

[Roderick Grant]

The Case Study Clan certainly produced an impressive list of architects.

[SDR]

The simplicity of the "clerestory" (sic) glass in the living room is refreshing. Too bad about all the painted CMU; I would try painting it "light concrete gray" in an effort to reclaim the mood. (Good luck trying to strip it . . .)

S

[Roderick Grant]

I think the current obsession with white throughout reflects a distaste for shadows. The dark has always frightened people, and it may extend to shadowy spaces. Even in movies, which started out as black and white, must be in full color, even lurid, rather than B&W. Film noir produced some of the finest movies ever made. "The Third Man," "Night and the City," "Long Day's Journey Into Night" come to mind. Without shadows, there is a lack of depth and complexity, in movies and architecture.

[SDR]

Indeed. There is a case to be made, however, for too much shadow in film and on TV. Underlit movies abound on the small screen (I'm frozen in time, happily, at 24" diagonal measurement) and are virtually unwatchable as a result. Such material can probably be enjoyed on the large screen, in a darkened theater; it fails miserably under other conditions. The cynic in me suspects that dimly-lit settings are capable of concealing all kinds of lackings, in art direction, set building and decoration, special effect defecits, etc.

The case of film noir, on the other hand, is quite different; there, the aim is contrast of dark and light, spectacularly exploited in any number of films both "high" and "low"---and even some relatively early TV. I imagine Roderick, with experience in the industry, will have further light to shed (ahem) on the subject ?

S

[Matt2]

I think the white is often a knee-jerk reaction to a modernist home....everything must be white, right? But folks don't understand that a lot of modernism used both natural materials and at times was painted some vibrant colors (De Stijl anyone?). Blame some bad prints of Film Noir movies to perhaps exaggerating the high-contrast effects. If you go back and see films from the original negative, there was a lot of gray in BW movies.

[Roderick Grant]

SDR, you are not cynical. The origin of noir was entirely economical. Sets and proper lighting cost $$$, and "B" movies were on a strict, limited budget. I, too, am limited to 24", but have no trouble at all seeing what's going on in the film. As I admonished before, it may be time to replace your Muntz Special with a modern LED.

[Roderick Grant]

Matt2, you are correct about the "knee-jerk," I believe. The colors initially were more varied, with some very bold hues. But today everything is whited out. FLW's houses were first published in B&W photos, so people thought they were white stucco with black trim, which as we know is false. If there was one area where the Victorians got it right, it was their willingness to go wild with color, but many of the surviving Vics have been painted white from top to bottom, inside and out. Even many of those so-called "Painted Ladies" in SF have be so maligned.

While De Stijl was obsessed with color (mostly primary + white, gray and black), Bauhaus tended to shy away from color (almost?) entirely. This is also true of the Case Study Clan, with the exception of Eames.