Peterson/Lovness 2000 ?

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.
Post Reply
SDR
Posts: 20187
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Peterson/Lovness 2000 ?

Post by SDR »

"As a former copy editor, I always feel I am defending the person whose name is being misspelled, not attacking the person who misspells it." Ronald Alan McCrea (1943-2019)

DRN
Posts: 4044
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:02 am
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

Re: Peterson/Lovness 2000 ?

Post by DRN »

Elegant.
Siting, forms relating to the strata, the proportions, mass vs. void, shelter without strict enclosure...all are in keeping with Wright’s principles.
The only diversion is the symmetry. In this respect, I’m led to think of Elliot Noyes’ residence.

peterm
Posts: 6290
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

Re: Peterson/Lovness 2000 ?

Post by peterm »

The article say the walls are “clad in stone”. Does that imply that they are block covered with stone, inside and out?

DRN
Posts: 4044
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:02 am
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

Re: Peterson/Lovness 2000 ?

Post by DRN »

That is most likely the case...a block core affords the ability to place steel reinforcing bars in the walls.

SDR
Posts: 20187
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Re: Peterson/Lovness 2000 ?

Post by SDR »

It would be great to see more drawings. There is this:

https://www.ericjsmitharchitect.com/rec ... ers-studio

When I encounter a little gem like this I sometimes picture in my mind a more substantial residence made in the same way, of the same materials and with the same forms and details.

Another favorite example is the little hospital guard house I've shown before.

Image

Image

Image
"As a former copy editor, I always feel I am defending the person whose name is being misspelled, not attacking the person who misspells it." Ronald Alan McCrea (1943-2019)

SDR
Posts: 20187
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Re: Peterson/Lovness 2000 ?

Post by SDR »

Heh. There's even a roll-out bed, under the stair . . .

S
"As a former copy editor, I always feel I am defending the person whose name is being misspelled, not attacking the person who misspells it." Ronald Alan McCrea (1943-2019)

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10569
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Re: Peterson/Lovness 2000 ?

Post by Roderick Grant »

What is so wonderful about this building - not unlike E. Fay Jones' chapels - is that it is a pavilion. The 'what' of such structures is simple, to the point, and uncomplicated by the quotidian necessities of a house. To expand the pavilion into a large house is difficult at the least. At its best, a pavilion-style house is like Northome, which is a grand pavilion for the music room, and a semidetached extension to contain all the business of the abode. The 9-square houses - like Eliot Noyes' - that were popular at one time can function as pavilions, but are subject to complications in the plan. Farnsworth is pavilion-esqe, but the kitchen area is somewhat less thrilling than the rest of the house. You really don't want to walk around to the back side of the house, do you?

The one detail I would change is to remove the glass railing on the roof terrace, so one might fall off the building if one got too close to the edge. A hint of danger is a good thing. Think of the stair to the waterfall at Fallingwater. One slip, and Oops! you are headed downriver.
"Come back, Shane! Come back!"

SDR
Posts: 20187
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Re: Peterson/Lovness 2000 ?

Post by SDR »

Certainly. Pavilion:

1. a summerhouse or other decorative building used as a shelter in a park or large garden.
2. a usually highly decorated projecting subdivision of a building.

Or, from Fleming, Honour, Pevsner, 1966:

"An ornamental building, lightly constructed, often used as a pleasurehouse or summerhouse in a garden, or attached to a cricket or other sports ground; also a projecting subdivision of some larger building, usually square and often domed, forming an angle feature on the main facade or terminating the wings."

While those may not be the only definitions, and without gainsaying the previous remarks, my thought about enlarging the simple building was only to suggest, quite reasonably I think, that the same forms, materials and detailing might be employed in a larger structure to good effect---regardless of program, plan, or projected use. The simple building as architect's sampler, if you will . . . ?

S
"As a former copy editor, I always feel I am defending the person whose name is being misspelled, not attacking the person who misspells it." Ronald Alan McCrea (1943-2019)

Post Reply