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.
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:
Text and images Â© 2009 by TASCHEN GmbH and by the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation
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.
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:
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.