Journalism, Apples and Oranges

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.
Post Reply
peterm
Posts: 6293
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

Journalism, Apples and Oranges

Post by peterm »


SDR
Posts: 20290
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

. . . and bright red doors -- Wright's, or Olga's ? -- with shiny trim. There was a time when Wright didn't like "shiny." Or was that Schindler ?

On a darker note, I haven't heard a Wright house labeled "sinister" until now. Do some of the public think of the early houses as they would the Bates Motel house-on-a-hill ? In black and white, maybe they do, or did . . .

SDR

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10614
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

Post WWII generations are accustomed to interiors that banish shadows as if they are evil. Try to find a hint of shadow in the Anshen & Allen designs for Eichler. It's understandable that one so young might find the darkness of generations past, only recently introduced to the light bulb, disquieting.

One with so limited an exposure to Wright's architecture should not be writing about it without further education.

peterm
Posts: 6293
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

Post by peterm »

It's the mixture of a tiny bit of fact and a lot of feeling and opinion that has become the norm in so much online journalism.

The part that I find most disturbing is her statement that Wright's Prairie houses are so "conservative". Is she truly completely unaware of how radical they were for their time, or is she more concerned with establishing the groundwork for her "thesis"?

lang
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2010 6:19 am

Post by lang »

I recently found this old article. The Author describes Wright's work as perverse and claustrophobic ! A house with floor to ceiling glass is claustrophobic? Really? Fortunately, a new addition allows one to " Experience a Wright house while not being condemned to live in one." Sounds like a hatchet job, rather than an informative article! http://swamplot.com/houstons-only-frank ... 010-11-24/[/code]

SREcklund
Posts: 822
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2013 8:24 pm
Location: Redondo Beach, CA

Post by SREcklund »

Let's see ... converting a Wright Usonian into a 7.5 bath, 11,000 sq ft behemoth and then complaining it's too big. There's a term for that ... that's right - horse's ass ...

DRN
Posts: 4054
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:02 am
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

Post by DRN »

I've always liked the Bush/Thaxton/Arnold plan type and thought it was a livable house that was open to the outdoors with a measure of privacy. The addition to Arnold by Howe/TAA muddied the elegance of the plan for me, but I'm sure it made the house work for its owner in a seamless manner....I wish I could say the same for Thaxton. One wonders why the owner of Thaxton bought the house in the first place....they wanted a Wright designed "piece" in their front yard?

Post Reply