Help Put Wright's Call Building Model Back At Taliesin

Jeff Myers · Post by **Jeff Myers** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 6:30 pm

Internet photos of 2 renders, 2 models, and the ones on the Kickstarter page of the 1940 model.

Jeff Myers · Post by **Jeff Myers** » Sat Oct 24, 2015 11:58 pm

The SktchUp model's dimensions are:
37'1" wide
263'10" tall
173'8" deep

Paul Ringstrom · Post by **Paul Ringstrom** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 11:40 am

Jeff Myers · Post by **Jeff Myers** » Sun Oct 25, 2015 11:49 am

I used the model as a reference to floors and spacing. For 24 stories I should be at 259' not 263'.
I have wondered if I did something wrong in the spacing at the bottom.

Jeff Myers · Post by **Jeff Myers** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:21 pm

The height is now 259', the average height for a 24 story building. The floor spacing is 7'7" except at the top and bottoms.

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 7:00 pm

Just found a photo which could help establish the size and proportions of the 1940 (?) model:

from The Show to End All Shows (2004; MoMA; Smith, p 54)

Matt · Post by **Matt** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:11 pm

Was this project every seriously going forward? Or was the model a sort of make-work project to keep the apprentices busy and try to lure in bigger/taller projects.

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:15 pm

It's never too late for an architect to present a favorite project -- especially in the context of a retrospective exhibition !

SDR

Jeff Myers · Post by **Jeff Myers** » Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:09 pm

To be honest this building is fascinating.
I always wondered why there are 2 variations
In the model design.

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 2:57 pm

Copied from page 3 of the thread:

Two versions of the project. First, as shown in In the Nature of Materials:

And, as reproduced in FLLW Three-quarters of a Century of Drawings, 1976 (the Italian show):

The models were preceded, of course, by the design work. Many of Wright's designs went through more than one iteration on their way to completion. This project was no different, though neither version of the design was built.

Here is the text and floor plan from Taschen Vol I, pp 462-3:

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:34 pm

Further images displayed in the Taschen entry:

Details of the perspective drawing 1207.001 published in In the Nature of Materials (see above), Taschen I p 463, with regrettable distortion of images due to my extreme close-up photography:

Elevation and view 1207.002:

Detail of above. In the Taschen text (see above) Mr Pfeiffer refers to this perspective sketch with its "arched Sullivanesque entrance"; he doesn't mention the more finished view drawing (displayed above, and here) with arched opening. This pair of drawings (the thumbnail and the plate below) might reinforce the notion that these represent the initial design -- though it's odd to find the earlier version carefully sketched on a hard-line elevation of the later one. It is hard to argue that the later design isn't the more sophisticated, with its interpenetration of elements including a more aesthetically secure attachment to the existing domed tower.

Jeff Myers · Post by **Jeff Myers** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 6:55 pm

In the Taschen is there a floor plan for typical and club floors?
I'm amazed at the column details. The arch does make sense as the Press Building does have an arch way.

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 7:01 pm

http://dreamoftime.com/places/call-building-downtown

I suppose a semi-circular arch would not be incompatible with the Call Building's tall Roman-arched openings . . .

No -- this is all that Taschen shows. The description of other floor plans is tantalizing. I've only seen the pair of plans found here:
http://savewright.org/wright_chat/viewtopic.php?t=6426

SDR

Jeff Myers · Post by **Jeff Myers** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 8:53 pm

This is the latest updates. The details in the drawings are so unnoticed.

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Tue Oct 27, 2015 9:16 pm

Jeff, there appears to be a discrepancy between the layout of the vertical masses visible in your close-up of the digital model, and the same elements seen in the detail of the drawing of the same part of the tower. Did your measurements come from a different version of the design ?

It's great to see the two Burnham Street ASBH duplexes next to your model; they go a long way toward establishing the scale of the larger structure.

SDR