Unbuilt Design ... by Van Bergen

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.
jhealy
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 8:11 pm
Location: Oak Park, IL

Unbuilt Design ... by Van Bergen

Post by jhealy »

Following on the discussion of un-built designs, but, yes, off the chair topic ... here is one un-built house design that I like from Van Bergen. Unique. Would have been interesting to see.

http://www.johnvanbergen.org/johnvanber ... /wood.html

I think (perhaps more modern day thinking) it would be good to possibly include a built-in table, with high back chairs, to separate the kitchen from the living room, rather than a wall.

Jay

SDR
Posts: 19778
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

I am reminded of another unbuilt plan:


Image
(Kitchen and Dining Room top, Bedrooms middle, Living Room bottom)


By this date, Mr Wright had moved (temporarily) beyond the shallow hipped roof !


Image

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

Post by Matt »

Was all the space under that T-P roof unused? Was there a purpose to it, or was it just for drama?

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10406
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

Check out photos of the Davis House, Matt, and you can come to your own conclusions.

JPB_1971
Posts: 81
Joined: Wed Feb 11, 2009 12:50 am

Post by JPB_1971 »

I believe there have been problems relating to the ability of Davis' fireplace to successfully ventilate smoke that may or may not have been complicated by the expansive open volume resulting from the roof design.

Macrodex
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 2:11 pm

Post by Macrodex »

Personally, I'm more reminded of this.

Image

Also, I can't be the only one who spotted this pseudo-Coonley plan.

Image

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10406
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

Macrodex, Van Bergen's Rogers Project is closer to FLW's Elizabeth Stone Project of 1906 (Mono 2/248-9), a one-story precursor to Coonley in B&B. Stone would have been a delightful house, much less refined and more "woodsy" than Coonley, which could have been to its advantage.

SDR
Posts: 19778
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

In any event, the co-incidence of plan is hard to miss. Van Bergen's work includes some of the most overt "borrowing" from Wright to be found in the portfolios of his imitators.


SDR

Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4364
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

Macrodex,

Does that drawing have a Taliesin number associated with it? Is it included in BBP's new Complete Works?

What book did you get the drawing from?
Owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond

Macrodex
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 2:11 pm

Post by Macrodex »

Taschen 1885-1916, #0013

I didn't, at first, catch the reminiscence of the Stone residence; though, no plans exist, I can only guess Wright worked from that plan into the Coonley.

Image
Much like this precursor to the Hardy residence: done in board-batten and then in stucco, etc -- with a level added.

Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4364
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

The plan Macrodex posted above by FLW reminds me of a plan by Walter Burley Griffin called Intersecting Squares which was the inspiration for the new Architectural Interpretive Center here in Mason City, IA.
Owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10406
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

Paul, I think the plan looks a lot like the work of WBG, not at all like anything else FLW did.

outside in
Posts: 1265
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:02 pm
Location: chicago

Post by outside in »

the placement of the stair is almost bizarre

Macrodex
Posts: 236
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 2:11 pm

Post by Macrodex »

I don't know when WBG was employed by Wright; however, the plan is dated 1904, #0409, if anyone wants to look into it further.

SDR
Posts: 19778
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

It's amusing (or discomfiting) to hear Wright-o-philes claim that a plan or design is suspicious because "Wright never did that [before]. . ." . . . even were it the case.

There is no shortage of house plans -- starting perhaps with the Sullivan bungalow of 1890 -- in which asymmetrical function (i.e., room layout) is shoehorned (fitted neatly) into a symmetrical or nearly symmetrical building envelope. A list of such plans would include Charnley (bungalow and residence), McArthur (residence remodel and garage), Clark, Blossom, Emmond, Parker, Winslow (stable), Moore, Gerts cottage, Ross, Johnson, Walser, Westcott, Barton, and Cheney -- bringing us to 1904, the year of the Scudder project posted above. The list would go on: Brown, Hardy, Beachy, Hoyt, Fuller, Horner, Como Orchard (clubhouse and cottages), Gilmore, Stewart, Ingalls, Balch, etc, etc.

Of those listed, at least fifteen houses are planned within a rigorously symmetrical plan (like Scudder); several more are "spoiled" only by a stair, a chimney, or a small entry module. Several others are just a bit more asymmetrical and were excluded.

SDR

Post Reply