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.
'Come to think of it, the whole set of hemicycles should be studied as a group. There are more than a half-dozen of them, aren't there ?
Something tells me our colleague L Virr has probably devoted some time to the study of these houses . . . '
I have studied the hemicycles of Frank Lloyd Wright, Bruce Goff, Charles Montooth, Donald Reed Chandler, and John Randal McDonald.
It requires a particular breed of client from the Western world to accept a hemicycle, or any design incorporating circular elements. Frank Lloyd Wright was unable to persuade Max Hoffmann to embrace the idea. Furthermore, the number of hemicycle designs that remained as projects is high compared to those proposed and built.
Frank Lloyd Wright never succumbed to the practice of the others in making the partitions between spaces radians, at least in the living/dining/kitchen areas.
As one would expect, the Jacobs 2 house, being the first, was, as Roderick Grant suggests, rough. Budget considerations must have had a significant bearing on the choice of structure and materials. Moreover, the 2 story high living area made it difficult to exclude the sun entirely during significant periods of the year, as a consequence of the cantilevering capacity of the rafters. and hence the width of the eaves. Perhaps this effect was mitigated to a degree by the existence of the pool at the western end of the house. Breezes sweeping across it, and being drawn thru the living area prior to exhausting up the fireplace flue, may have been the intention. This approach to climate control would mirror that of the ablutions pool outside a mosque, combined with one of the functions of the minarets.
The E. L. Marting house  was a more elaborate version of Jacobs 2, but it was not until the following year that Frank Lloyd Wright produced his masterpiece hemicycle, the Kenneth and Phyllis Laurent house.
In his houses designed on rectilinear and 60/30 modules he followed the dictum of Louis Henri Sullivan, and paid particular attention to the terminals of his buildings, but in my opinion, this was not always so with the hemicycles. In the case of the Laurent house everything was right.
I would suggest that the 60/30 module combines best with the hemicycle, but FLLW used it, to my knowledge, only in bedroom wings attached to the living/dining/kitchen areas in the John Rayward and Andrew Cooke houses.
Thank you for your query.
To my limited knowledge John Randal McDonald designed only one hemicycle. You will find images of it on these 2 sites:
An apprenticeship with him must have been a great experience. He was a fine architect.
Your notes on the compatibility of the 30/60 module with the hemicycle are interesting. My understanding of the geometry of the Jacobs 2 type hemicycle versus the Laurent type, is that apart from the Laurent type's engaged terrace, the Laurent has a larger radius, yielding a shallower curve. Does this difference factor into the compatability of a module for one type versus the other?
The "prows" created by the intersection of the terrace wall and the house proper rear wall on the Laurent type houses have always brought to my mind equilateral triangles...the length of the radius of these two curves is very important to setting the resulting geometries of the intersections, the proportions of the rooms, and their ability to usable or daylighted. Wright seems to have found an optimal range in the proportion of the radii, or rather, the length and width of the resulting lozenge, in this type of plan.
I also found it interesting that Wright chose rectilinear mass elements to "anchor" the Laurent type plans, while he used circular secondary masses with the Jacobs 2 type...might the tightness of the curve be the driver of this design decision?
Thank you for your contribution to this thread.
I have never been able to reconcile FLLWâ€™s approach to the major and minor forms of the Jacobs 2 house. This was a low budget commission, for which the hemicycle made sense from the aspect of energy costs, but the circular forms of the kitchen and bathroom and their requisite cabinetry could not have been inexpensive. As for designing and fabricating a damper for a circular fireplace for what was to be low cost accommodation..................
The very nature of the brief for the Laurent house meant that it had to be on a single level, and that furnished the architect with advantages of vertical scale that were not available for buildings such as Jacobs 2, and the proposals for E. L. Marting, and Max Hoffmann. Even with the employment of balconies at the extremities of the second floors of the latter 2 projects, it proved difficult to connect the buildings with the earth line.
I hope it is not presumptuous for me to state that whilst the Laurent house is superb in every respect, many of the other hemicycles are disappointing, particularly at the terminals. Laurent has terminals, together with a solid mass at the center of the composition to anchor it, whereas many of the others do not display that rigor.
My reference to the compatibility of the 60/30 module results from my own experience in designing, and in the case of my own house, physically building hemicycles. I would suggest that the greater design flexibility afforded by the 60/30 module makes for a more harmonious integration with the hemicycle than do the employment of circular elements. If you wish, and subject to SDRâ€™s kind offices, I will post a ground plan, so that you can judge for yourself.
FLLWâ€™s use of this module for the Andrew Cooke and John Rayward houses does not integrate the bedroom wings with the hemicycle, the latter are just appendages, and read as such.
We all would love to view the plan of your fine home! I've tried so hard to imagine it in my head from the few photos available and our visits. I wished we had been able to tour Jacobs II. I believe Wright's Laurent house to be the best true version of this concept. Please correct me if my limited knowledge shall prove me wrong.
Winn just does not make much sense. That living room does not seem livable at all. It appears cut off and isolated from Nature and even the rest of the design.
This will prove to be an interesting thread...
-Glenn and Ruth Richardson, Service Station, Automobile Dealership, Restaurant, House
-Stuart Haldorn House, aka The Wave
-Mrs. Ruth G. Keith House, Scheme 1
-E.L. Marting House
-Dr. Paul V. Palmer House, Scheme 1
-Dr. Donald S. Grover House
-Dr. G. Kenneth Hargrove House
-Walter S. Houston House
-William S, Wassell House
-"Boulder House" for Liliane and Edgar J. Kaufmann
-J.J. Vallarino Jr. House, Schemes 1 and 2 and 3
-Robert Llewellyn Wright House, Scheme 1
-Gibbons Gray Cornwell House, Scheme 1
-Jay Roberts House
-Dr. Arthur O'Keeffe House
-Dr. Allen Zieger House
-Art Gallery, Plan for Greater Baghdad
-Calvin Stillman House, Schemes 1 and 2
of sharing with readers here.
I apologize for the quality of some scans. The drawings are not too badly out of scale with each other -- a rough science in my hands as yet.
S.283 Jacobs II (1944)
S.297 Meyer (1948)
S.301 Winn (1950)
S.319 Laurent (1949)
S.320 Pearce (1950)
S.357 Marden (1952)
S.358 L Wright (1953)
S.359 Lewis (1952)
S.360 Cooke (1953)
S.383 Rayward (1955)
S.402 D Spencer (1956)