Buildings and homes built AFTER Wright died

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.

Do you think Wright designs built after his Death can be called "Official Wright Designs"?

Poll ended at Thu Mar 08, 2007 12:11 pm

Yes
2
13%
No
7
44%
Depends on who supervises
7
44%
 
Total votes: 16

hypnoraygun
Posts: 561
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Missouri

Buildings and homes built AFTER Wright died

Post by hypnoraygun »

So I was looking online to see some pictures of the 97 Life Dream house and I found a mention by Michael Shuck here on this board about the Nakoma Country Club.




She also built with her own money the country club building at Gold Mountain. It is built from the Nakoma Country Club from 1924 (1928?) that FLW designed but was never built. She refused to make one deviation from the original plans and Taliesin oversaw all of it. It was awesome to walk around that magnificent structure!


I found a few links that show the building. I couldn't get their official site to load. Here are a few good pictures on this one. Audi site no less.



http://www.audiworld.com/news/01/ttwest/content3.shtml



Here is one more that has a few



http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib ... akoma.html





So one thing that I am wondering. Is there a list of the homes and buildings built after Wright died that are not cosidered "official" Wright buildings? I also realize there were homes built after he died that are still offical. That is due to the site, offical contact with Wright, working drawings, Taliesin assistance, etc ..Correct?



I didn't know about this Nakoma one built. And from the way it sounds, and looks, it is VERY much Wright. I realize it is not on the land where it was designed for, and Wright didn't over see it, BUT the Taliesin Architects did. I feel that this type of building warrents some type of recognition of being "official".



I know there is the Building in Hawaii based off of the home for Arthur Miller. And of course the Massaro project.



I guess without making this a big debate if these buildings are Wright's or not, The main thing I am looking for is just a list OF THESE buildings.



So I have Three here. Anyone know of others?



I think these should be included somewhere. As it has been said before, with a lot of horrible Architecture being built today, I personally would rather see an attempt at a FLW structure than a McMansion anyday. I know there are a lot of people that disagree, but their attempts (I feel) should be noted.



Thanks..



One more article I stumbled upon. It is with Tafel and Franklin Toker (author of Fallingwater Rising) talking briefly about Fallingwater etc.. Man that book is hard to read.



http://www.umc.pitt.edu/media/pcc050912 ... SEP12.html

Reidy
Posts: 1597
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 3:30 pm
Location: Fremont CA

Post by Reidy »

No matter how faithfully you follow the drawings, those drawings leave a lot out that is decided on the site, over the phone, etc., and in Wright's day they left out a lot more. A building that goes up today isn't the building he would have built, and it doesn't reflect the decisions he, his appointed deputy or the crew members of the day would have made.



A faithful contemporary execution of one of his designs is worth having, and nobody is deceived, but I still voted no.

outside in
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:02 pm
Location: chicago

Post by outside in »

Wouldn't it be nice if this discussion were to be as clean and simple as the title implies? Many of Wright's later homes (late 1950's) were accomplished with little input from "the master" - construction occurred both with and without the involvement of Taliesin. One could make the argument that some of the later homes were actually accomplished primarily by Jack Howe or Wes Peters, rather than Wright. Then, in 1959, "the end" comes, and many of the homes still on the boards or in construction are completed, e.g. Seth Peterson, Friedman, etc. - historians, right or wrong, consider these homes to be Wright homes. Then MORE time passes, and addition "FLW" projects are completed by TAA, and some of these buildings are considered Wright designs as well. But now, sadly, the legacy of Wright and TAA has become distant, almost to the point of disconnect, and projects are unfortuantely completed by non-TAA people like Tom Heinz.



Two general statements might now be applied:



1. Its probably Wright-designed if the primary drawings were completed with Wright's oversight and was built with TAA's involvement.



2. Because of the current state of TA, starting probably 2 years ago going forward, there will no longer be any projects built that can be considered FLW designs.

hypnoraygun
Posts: 561
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Missouri

Just a list of buildings, that's all I desire.

Post by hypnoraygun »

Thanks for the input. I guess my point is/was that there are buildings and homes that have been built that were designed by Wright, at least initially.. And shouldn

DRN
Posts: 3975
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:02 am
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

Post by DRN »

These are the Legacy projects that I know of:



Nakoma Club House @ Gold Mountain

First Christian Church Phoenix

Blue Sky Masoleum in Buffalo

The two versions of the Burlingham Pottery House: one in Phoenix, one in New Mexico.

The Usonian house originally designed for Bell built in California in the '70's.

The Loveness version of the Peterson Cottage

The Vincent Scully house built in VA in the '80's

The Charoudi house built for Massaro in NY

Monona Terrace in Madison

I seem to remember a house built in Ohio 3 or 4 years ago that was based on a Usonian design originally planned for the 1930's developent that was to contain Goetsch-Winckler and Brauner. It was similar to one of the houses in the group in plan only (roofs changed from flat to gabled).

The towers from the Arizona Capitol project were disembodied and built at Shea and FLLW Blvd. in Phoenix. The daylight drive up bank for Walter Bimson is to be built at this site as well.

The '20's Tidol gas station to be built in Buffalo.

The Yahara boat house is supposedly to be built in Buffalo.

The solar hemicycle house built in Hilo, Hawaii.

The Club House in Hawaii based on the Arthur Miller house.



There may be others, probably private houses that have not been picked up in the press. Anyone else know of others?

hypnoraygun
Posts: 561
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Missouri

Post by hypnoraygun »

DRN thank you! That is exactly what I was looking for! Thanks!





Here is an article talking about the Legacy Program, etc..



http://www.nationaltrust.org/magazine/a ... 060206.htm



Here is another one about a home that was built by the Legacy Program



http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2003/0 ... ede16.html
Last edited by hypnoraygun on Wed Feb 07, 2007 4:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

outside in
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:02 pm
Location: chicago

Post by outside in »

its a slippery slope, I think...........



Whereas I agree that many of his designs are still applicable to today's building environment, there are far too many obstacles to overcome.



1. Wright and his associates built using unconventional methods - many of his works are inconsistent with the Universal Building Code, for example.

2. With the passing of so many Fellows, the technical and construction knowledge has disappeared as well. Very few architects, if any, could pull it off. (I think that this is the primary problem.)

3. The buildings would be INCREDIBLY expensive - and I think it would very difficult to find a client that would be willing to participate.

JimM
Posts: 1551
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: Austin,Texas

Re: Just a list of buildings, that's all I desire.

Post by JimM »

hypnoraygun wrote:
I

hypnoraygun
Posts: 561
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Missouri

Post by hypnoraygun »

So I have been trying to find contact information for the Legacy program to see if they could give me an official list. I realize it is the FLW Foundation. Wasn't this offically called off? Now it is back on again? Anyone know who would have that information?



There are some great ideas on here about this. I guess I can't hardly let go of the fact that Wright isn't here, he isn't going to build, he isn't going to design, and he isn't going to supervise anymore. I have experienced several of his designs and would love to see more built. Just let go! ha..I feel like these designs never built are like a lost novel, missing painting, or buried treasure just waiting to be built, discovered and enjoyed.



Thanks for the comments and thoughts on the topic.



PS if anyone wants to pay for me to get an Architecture degree I will come to work for you! ha..

RJH
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Contact:

Post by RJH »

Just my 2 cents as a genuine FLW homeowner and who

pharding
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: River Forest, Illinois
Contact:

Post by pharding »

The are many better options available to someone looking for a well designed home than knocking off a Frank Lloyd Wright House. I personally believe that Mr. Wright would abhor anyone aiding in the knocking off of one of his original works, whether it be a na
Paul Harding FAIA Restoration Architect for FLW's 1901 E. Arthur Davenport House, 1941 Lloyd Lewis House, 1952 Glore House | www.harding.com | LinkedIn

JimM
Posts: 1551
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: Austin,Texas

Post by JimM »

RJH: No doubt an "authentic" Wright home (a problematic term in of itself!) could be built (and better) today, although many of your points would appear to be reasons not to! I would think the compromises usually made would put you on the "opposing" side.



Fortunately, the recurring debate whether they should be built need not consider the cost to do so!



If I had the means, I'd resurrect Taliesin One..... but only for the benefit of mankind, mind you, and not via the Legacy program. Certainly my legions of lawyers could do battle with the Foundation. :wink:

JimM
Posts: 1551
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: Austin,Texas

Post by JimM »

pharding wrote: The Commercially Degenerate Architect in Selected Writings Volume 1.


Why don't you tell us what you really think, Frank?



Thanks, Paul, I'll check it out.

RJH
Posts: 682
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:33 pm
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana
Contact:

Post by RJH »

Pharding,



Your comments on this topic amaze me. A Wright purist irreversibly alters a Wright design (Glore) for thirty pieces of silver?



I
Last edited by RJH on Thu Feb 08, 2007 2:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Ed Jarolin
Posts: 277
Joined: Mon Apr 03, 2006 1:06 pm
Location: Wyoming

Post by Ed Jarolin »

The question of whether Wright would reject the spread of his designs through outright 'cookiecutter' copies seems to have been answered by the Master himself on multiple occasions. One need only recall the American Ready-cut System houses or the Marshall Erdman houses. Neither of these could be said to be site specific except in the broadest

sense.



Let me quote Eric Lloyd Wright on the Usonian Automatics.



" It was my grandfather's desire that, ultimately, these blocks could be picked up in any building supply yard and stacked up by individuals wanting to build their own houses. The building supply yard could furnish a variety of plans ...or get graph sheets and design their own"



Do we really think Wright expected that he or his office would have much, if any control, under these circumstances? Perhaps he intended that the County Architect, a position touted as part of the Broadacre City scheme, would provide professional input to the homeowner/builder. I think his deep felt wish was to provide the benefits of Organic Architecture to as many people as possible. Certainly he stood ready to provide custom designs for the well heeled or not so well heeled, but the dissemination of the idea was the goal.



Do I want to see row upon row of identical UA's, Glore's, Haynes' or any others? Not really. Could a talented architect/developer pull off a well integrated (with nature) community using exact duplicates of Wright designs? Why not? Could a talented architect/developer do it with new designs? I see no evidence of either being done any time soon. What I do see is cookie cutter garbage despoiling the rolling hills around me and I know the same is going on from sea to shining sea.

Post Reply