Lamberson House Restoration

DRN · Post by **DRN** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 9:18 am

My father-in-law can't understand why I don't just get vinyl replacement windows. He also thinks the house needs carpeting,"drapes", and a coat of white paint on the interior to "brighten it up".

My father on the other hand, marvels at the way the sun plays in the rooms, the drama of the cantilevers and the mitered glass, and thinks the accoustics would be great for a Hammond B3.

Some get it, some don't.

Palli Davis Holubar · Mon Aug 17, 2009 10:23 am

and some people aren't aware of getting it and don't have the confidence or capacity to go with their senses. You hear it in the common remark "I like it but I couldn't live here."

peterm · Post by **peterm** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:51 pm

Another common misconception that even well educated people voice is that Wright's architecture is inflexible and dictatorial. "I refuse to be a slave to his design. He didn't like art. There's no place to hang my paintings. He even determined what clothes the women should wear. Where will I put my heirlooms? He tries to kill my individuality..."

The reality seems to be the opposite, that by creating the "gesamtkunstwerk" or complete environment, Wright actually allows the inhabitant to exercise more freedom, the freedom to experience the unity of nature, art and architecture utilizing all of the senses. In order to slow down the vicious cycles of fashion, fad, and consumerism and focus on "higher" human values, an architecture that discourages useless distractions is essential.

DRN · Post by **DRN** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:58 pm

"I refuse to be a slave to his design. He didn't like art. There's no place to hang my paintings. He even determined what clothes the women should wear. Where will I put my heirlooms? He tries to kill my individuality..."

Is my house bugged?

There are places for all things in a Wright house, you just need to think carefully about the nature of the object to be able to place it. There are places in the house that accept objects or hangings and places that don't. The house has places that allow hanging, but we have found the house abhors symmetry and rewards balanced asymmetry. The house also rewards minimalism: display some of a collection, not the whole thing at once (a difficult prospect when there is little unassigned storage in the house)

On the subject of Wright interiors....is it just my wife and me, or has anyone else noticed that most published interior photos of Wright houses are devoid of family photos? I realize having such a thing as a framed wedding picture is bourgeois, but....

Paul Ringstrom · Post by **Paul Ringstrom** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:00 pm

Pedro E. Guerrero said, in his article about Julia Child, "On most kitchen shoots, there was a great deal of arranging and art-directing to do. But this time, in the working kitchen of a genuine cook, the magazine would not be making over the room with new dishes, table linens and plants the way it so often did. The assignment didnâ€™t take long."

It is common practice for the architectural photographer to "make over" and edit the room of personal items to emphasize the architecture and not the owner of the building.

source: http://bitten.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08 ... ith-julia/

GKevinK · Post by **GKevinK** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:01 pm

DRN wrote: On the subject of Wright interiors....is it just my wife and me, or has anyone else noticed that most published interior photos of Wright houses are devoid of family photos? I realize having such a thing as a framed wedding picture is bourgeois, but....

The examples are out there. Look at Peter Beers pictures of the Harper house in Michigan. The whole deck around the seating area in the main room is filled with pictures... and looks quite cluttered to my eye (even though I love this house.) I think that family photos just get added and added ("we can't leave out Aunt Bessy...") until the space is overflowing.

Paul Ringstrom · Post by **Paul Ringstrom** » Mon Aug 17, 2009 5:08 pm

My point exactly, as Peter Beers is not an architectural photographer but a FLW fan.

peterm · Post by **peterm** » Tue Aug 18, 2009 8:09 pm

DRN wrote:
"There are places for all things in a Wright house, you just need to think carefully about the nature of the object to be able to place it. There are places in the house that accept objects or hangings and places that don't. The house has places that allow hanging, but we have found the house abhors symmetry and rewards balanced asymmetry. The house also rewards minimalism: display some of a collection, not the whole thing at once (a difficult prospect when there is little unassigned storage in the house)"

Perfectly put! I have noticed the exact same things.

In addition, the house seems to reveal an object's quality. If the proportions are not pitch perfect, or the colors lacking nuance, the object just does not want to be displayed. The shelves look better with nothing on them, than with a mediocre design taking up space.

I think of the William Morris quote:

"Have nothing in your house that you do not know to be useful, or believe to be beautiful."

He also said this:

"If you cannot learn to love real art at least learn to hate sham art."

DRN · Post by **DRN** » Wed Aug 19, 2009 8:57 am

The Morris quotes are priceless and timeless.

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 3:47 pm

Latest photos from Oskaloosa. I'll let Peter comment on them.

26

27

28

29

30 Note laser level line on brick

31

32

33

34

35 The vertical partition visible provides necessary support.

dtc · Post by **dtc** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 4:43 pm

Things are looking good in Oskalossa...

Great light pouring in the living space and splashing on your table, floor, kilim and upholstery...very exciting indeed.

What kind of interior finish is on the wood at Lamberson?

What will you apply on the shelves? same as on your hassocks and tables?

Keep up the good work Peter. The house finally found the right caretaker!

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:00 pm

It's probably starting to feel like Oska-lossa, to Peter, about now !

SDR

peterm · Post by **peterm** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:05 pm

Thanks SDR once again for posting the photos from my trip to "Osky" last week. Stafford Norris 111 is still there finishing up this phase.

The increase in light coming into the room is due to two factors: The lower autumn sun, which is now reaching the back wall at mid morning, and the fact that we recently removed the overgrown junipers that blocked significant amounts of light to the living room and terrace. They were about ten feet tall with much dead undergrowth obstructing the view of the huge old oak tree which once again has become a focal point. That tree was already quite large when the house was built, and it's great to be able to enjoy it as the Lambersons would have. To compare, see the pictures on page six...

I believe the existing wood finish is shellac. For now we are sealing the new construction with Danish oil Watco to protect against staining, and because we are doing the woodwork in phases, we will apply the final finish when everything is done. We concluded that it would be more practical to do it that way.

Laurie Virr · Post by **Laurie Virr** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 5:55 pm

Peter and SDR:

Thank you for the images. Vicariously, we are witnessing the rebirth of this Usonian, brought about by dedicated owners, and a superb craftsman who is continuing with the same degree of skill he displayed at the Malcolm Willey house.

It is good to see the Festool dust extractor: they are excellent. I cannot discern whether or not the compound miter saw is the 'Kapex' manufactured by the same corporation. Can you inform us please?

peterm · Post by **peterm** » Mon Nov 02, 2009 6:11 pm

I haven't a clue, but I will get back to you as soon as I check in again with Stafford...