Chahroudi / Massaro residence on Petre Island

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.
SDR
Posts: 18838
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Yes -- to that small degree. But as you say, some houses were "less Wright" right from the beginning.

Some would argue that a real Usonian was a bit on the flimsy side -- like a Japanese lantern, compared to a bronze and crystal chandelier ? -- so your changes would be an improvement in their eyes.

Come to coastal California, where the climate permits a lighter form of construction ! (120-yr-old houses, built without indoor "conveniences," have their retrofit plumbing waste lines displayed on the side walls like Alien decoration; roofs ready for re-shingling are seen to consist of skip-sheathing -- 1x4s placed on the rafters just where needed for nailing of the roof cover. These practices have of course been superceded. . .)

SDR

DavidC
Posts: 7407
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »


SDR
Posts: 18838
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »


DRN
Posts: 3921
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:02 am
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

Post by DRN »

The golf buddies-turned-filmmakers had hoped to debut the documentary on PBS, but their marketing fee of $15,000 “is just too high,� says Massaro.
With all the money he seems to have poured into this endevour, $15K to PBS to promote an ego boosting film for a wealthy egoist was too much to pay? Later on Massaro notes he is an aggressive negotiator...

The house looks fine from a distance, and I'm sure it is a great way to experience the lake, if the fake looking stonework and too flat relief of the copper panel isn't the visual equivalent of scratching a blackboard to the observer.

MichiganBill
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 3:01 pm

Massaro vs Chahroudi

Post by MichiganBill »

So the discussion goes on. I worked with the predecessor to Massaro to get Chahroudi built but, of course, never came to fruition.
Everything Randolph Henning says is spot on.
It clearly was not build to Wright's plan. Where is the ladder down to the lake. Massaro didn't want it, so it was deleted.
That is enough to say NOT Wright.

SREcklund
Posts: 813
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:24 pm
Location: Redondo Beach, CA

Re: Massaro vs Chahroudi

Post by SREcklund »

MichiganBill wrote:So the discussion goes on.
Actually, I'd argue that it _doesn't_, given that this article is a reprint from 2012. No one outside a small handful consider this a Wright - at best, it is "Wright-inspired" based on the limited drawings created. Changes by the owner only serve to dilute the already-limited pedigree.

Maybe I'm just prejudiced, but working with Massaro colors my perception of Heinz's work in a negative way ...
Docent, Hollyhock House - Hollywood, CA
Humble student of the Master

"Youth is a circumstance you can't do anything about. The trick is to grow up without getting old." - Frank Lloyd Wright

SDR
Posts: 18838
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

I don't object on principle (or for any other reason, I guess) to the creation of an unbuilt Wright design -- especially on the originally-intended site. But the object must be a good-faith attempt at Wright's design. Massaro, even with its presumably-qualified architect, fails on several points, as mentioned. And it's much too late to take Wright's name off of it, unfortunately, try as one might; there are too many references -- online, if nowhere else -- to it as a Wright house, which it clearly attempts to be. I wonder if a future owner will attempt to correct the most obvious flaws . . .

SDR

MichiganBill
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Feb 21, 2015 3:01 pm

Post by MichiganBill »

There is only one catalog of Wright's work and It will go into its 4th edition on May 22 of this year and It does not include Massaro-Chahroudi

Craig
Posts: 560
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 7:25 am
Location: California

Post by Craig »

So how many catalogs of Wright's work are there? :wink:
ch

SREcklund
Posts: 813
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:24 pm
Location: Redondo Beach, CA

Post by SREcklund »

Craig wrote:So how many catalogs of Wright's work are there? :wink:
Personally, despite my feelings about his association with Massaro, I use Heinz's guidebook.
Docent, Hollyhock House - Hollywood, CA
Humble student of the Master

"Youth is a circumstance you can't do anything about. The trick is to grow up without getting old." - Frank Lloyd Wright

DavidC
Posts: 7407
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »


DavidC
Posts: 7407
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Post by DavidC »


Roderick Grant
Posts: 9895
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

At least the cottage, a true structural marvel, is in good shape. The main house could be remedied with some effort to get rid of the stone acne. As a concrete monolith, it would be quite handsome.

SDR
Posts: 18838
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

One assumes that the marvel mentioned is the employment of the light decks around the perimeter of the cottage to restrain the thrust of the dome-like roof. Pfeiffer: "It is by means of these decks that support and stability is
provided for the roof . . ." (Monograph 8, p 19).

One thinks of the iron hoops or chains used in former times on certain European church domes. Given the support at mid-point on both halves of the quasi-oval shape of the roof, the decks presumably provide two roughly equal
C-shaped members, tied into the masonry masses, to counter outward movement of the half-domes . . .?



Image


Image

© 1988 A.D.A EDITA Tokyo Co., Ltd. and by the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation


Image


Image


Image
Last edited by SDR on Mon Jan 15, 2018 3:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Matt
Posts: 430
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 11:24 am

Post by Matt »

Is that the original stone work in the cottage? Seems off to me...or was the main house based on that stone-work?

And I take it no insulation in that cottage roof, huh?

Post Reply