New Wright House built on orignal design site - Massaro home

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.
PWhitt4654
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:33 pm

New Wright House built on orignal design site - Massaro home

Post by PWhitt4654 »

This may be old news for most of you but architect and FLW scholar Thomas Heinz recently completed a FLW design on it's original site. This was a house that was designed to be built on a New York island but it was never built while FLW was alive. Using the original FLW design & the site it was planned for, it implements a large rock on the site as a wall and roof support. Quite an accomplishment read about the project and the architect here.



http://www.apple.com/pro/profiles/heinz/

PWhitt4654
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 5:33 pm

Update

Post by PWhitt4654 »

Should have read previous posts on this sorry, this subject has already been much discussed in previous posts & I really don't want to get the whole debate started again. I for one was happy to see that one of Wright's designs was built in the original site but I know there are "Wright purists" out there who think it would have been better to let the plans go to dust than build it.

outside in
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:02 pm
Location: chicago

the problem is...

Post by outside in »

Its not a matter of being a purist - its just that it was done SO badly! The stonework, the height of the sills in the living room, so much effort with such mediocre results. I think nearly everyone agrees that it is an interesting house (as designed) but the execution was very badly done. Unfortunately, its projects like this that the "purists" can point to and quite convincingly make the argument that the unbuilt works should left in the drawers at the Foundation. But keep in mind, the Foundation had nothing to do with this.....

Collinst3
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:23 pm
Location: Lebanon, OH

Post by Collinst3 »

In hockey, one never knows what will happen until one takes a shot. If I miss a shot, I learn what I have to do better the next time to get closer to making it.



Attempts a recreating Wright's genius is an impossible task--but it is a nonetheless worthy endeavor. While we who have attempted this might not have created a masterpiece, the resultant structure inspires those that felt a production home was all they could hope for.



Frank Lloyd Wright is no longer alive and we will never see his genuius again. But does that mean that no one should take a shot at the goal even though there is 100% chance that we might miss? Even if one gets half of the feel of a Wright home, we are better off.



What a sad world this would be if the purist got their way and no one attempted to recreate what Wright devoted his life too.
Tony Collins
___________
FLW addiction recently fed by building a wright-inspired ranch designed by former senior Taliesin Fellow.

pharding
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: River Forest, Illinois
Contact:

Massaro House is a Really Dreadful Building

Post by pharding »

By any standard the Massaro House is awful. It is absolutely dreadful. It is a good example of why it is idiotic to take a schematic design by FLW and build it. A bad building in the manner of Frank Lloyd Wright is still a bad building.
Paul Harding FAIA Restoration Architect for FLW's 1901 E. Arthur Davenport House, 1941 Lloyd Lewis House, 1952 Glore House | www.harding.com | LinkedIn

Michael Shuck
Posts: 197
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Wichita, KS

Massaro House--What Are the Ground Rules?

Post by Michael Shuck »

Hopefully you can educate me on the Massaro house project. From the press, the message given is that FLW designed this house for this actual site. But from reading here, he did not. If the house had been built from his actual drawings and not just his schematics alone for this same site, would that have made it an acceptable FLW dwelling? Is the message here that FLW is dead, and, therefore, NOTHING since his death qualifies? Weren

outside in
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:02 pm
Location: chicago

don't need photos

Post by outside in »

Sorry jackless,



I've seen a number of photos of the house - enough to convince me that I really DON'T want to visit the place. The stamping of the copper work is weak, barely enough to make the pattern, the stonework is absolutely dreadful - I could go on and on. I would like to make the point, however, that this does NOT mean that constructing unbuilt works is not feasible - I firmly believe that in the proper hands, a good set of working drawings, the assistance of the Foundation, as well as the knowledge of how Wright put buildings together, it can be done! I just wish this one wouldn't have happened!

pharding
Posts: 2253
Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: River Forest, Illinois
Contact:

Re: Massaro House--What Are the Ground Rules?

Post by pharding »

Michael Shuck wrote:If the house had been built from his actual drawings and not just his schematics alone for this same site, would that have made it an acceptable FLW dwelling?
Given that FLW died almost 50 years ago it is safe to say that nothing built today could considered a building by Frank Lloyd Wright.
Michael Shuck wrote:Is the message here that FLW is dead, and, therefore, NOTHING since his death qualifies?
Yes he is dead and nothing completed today can be considered an architectural work of Frank Lloyd Wright.
Michael Shuck wrote:Weren
Paul Harding FAIA Restoration Architect for FLW's 1901 E. Arthur Davenport House, 1941 Lloyd Lewis House, 1952 Glore House | www.harding.com | LinkedIn

Deke
Posts: 692
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:18 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Deke »

Boy, such venom about this house. Imagine passing judgement based on photos! I've seen enough architecture to know that photos rarely capture the spirit of a building. For me, FLW's work is about space...the sequence of volumes, much more than the materials (wood, copper, stonework) that form the boundaries of that space. You could take a Wright design, build it out of old cardboard boxes, and still appreciate the space he was creating. I hope they give tours of this house. I'd like to see it. See and experience what works and what doesn't (a purely subjective feeling and having nothing to do with FLW's intention). Then I can take those lessons and apply them when I build a knock-off of my own some day. Of course, if I want a faithful FLW replica, then I'm left with copying one of his built designs stick for stick...maybe Pawson, or Pew, or that great Loveness Cottage...

JimM
Posts: 1551
Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 5:44 pm
Location: Austin,Texas

Re: Massaro House--What Are the Ground Rules?

Post by JimM »

pharding wrote:When he was alive he was available to provide input into the project without visiting the site. He had control over the project and the way that his staff did the work. He chose his level of control. He was there to make that choice.


Just a note... when Wright was not particularly engaged in a project for whatever reason, the results were often unsuccessful and easily distinguished from those shown sufficient interest. Point being, even during Wright's life some of the later work was as uneven as the results found in Massaro. Wright's absence aside (still the biggest factor!), the interpretations and compromises common in these projects especially prevent them from being considered Wright buildings, and by any definition.



We should be inspired and awed by the built work as well as the "projects"; but the option to credit any newly built architecture to Frank Lloyd Wright ceased to exist on April 9, 1959.

outside in
Posts: 1261
Joined: Sat Jul 29, 2006 9:02 pm
Location: chicago

photos or no photos

Post by outside in »

Sorry Deke,



Your point is well taken (i.e. the photos) but have you seen the photos of the Living Room? Something went terribly wrong there. The windows, the volume of the room, the unsightly fireplace - it is not "good space" as you describe. I also disagree with you about architectural volumes and space defining architecture. I believe that good architecture is ALL of the above, including beauty in materials. Finally, what good is it trying to build, especially in a project like this, unless its done well?

Deke
Posts: 692
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:18 am
Location: Los Angeles
Contact:

Post by Deke »

Okay, mea culpa...there are some buildings that...from mere pictures, I can sense are clunkers. And if this one strikes you as a clunker then a) your entitled to your opinion and b) your senses may well be more refined than mine. What strikes us as clunkers...and what attracts us to much of Wright's work, is a subject that fascinates me. There is a great book on this subject by Hildebrand called "The Origins of Architectural Pleasure." BTW, I think it would be fascinating to go through FLW's latter projects and identify which ones he lavished attention upon, and which he dished off to an apprentice.

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10303
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

I haven't seen pictures of the finished house, but what I have seen of the masonry looks like concrete with a bad case of acne. It's possible to build after the fact if there is sufficient information. If it weren't, Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue's masterpiece, the Nebraska State Capitol Building, constructed after his death, would not qualify. In the case of FLW's Burlingham Project, the drawings he made were too rough to justify anything more than "inspired by." Not having seen Chahroudi's drawings in full, I don't know if there was enough there, but I doubt, no matter how extensive the plans, that it was built accurately. It is also worth noting that the cottage, which was executed faithfully, is one of the true works of genius by Frank Lloyd Wright, and totally his. A tiny wonder.

Greg Coatsworth
Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 10:37 pm
Location: The Great Lake State - Michigan

Wright-Inspired Ranch

Post by Greg Coatsworth »

To Tony Collins (see entry above). At the risk of unleashing more venom of much of the membership (I think), I for one would enjoy seeing photographs of your "Wright-Inspired Ranch" being posted for all to see.

Collinst3
Posts: 42
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:23 pm
Location: Lebanon, OH

Post by Collinst3 »

To Tony Collins (see entry above). At the risk of unleashing more venom of much of the membership (I think), I for one would enjoy seeing photographs of your "Wright-Inspired Ranch" being posted for all to see.


To Greg, follow this link and browse the pics under the Collins Gallery. http://www.rust-architect.com/gallery.html



Enjoy! (or not).
Tony Collins
___________
FLW addiction recently fed by building a wright-inspired ranch designed by former senior Taliesin Fellow.

Post Reply