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.
I wonder what plans Mr. Hall donated to them? And, will they have to get Foundation approval before lifting a finger on the project?
Looking further, again in Taschen, a 1958 project for Mr and Mrs Crosby-Lambert, in Colbert County, Alabama, project number 5823 (p 524), is a square-unit single-story flat-roofed one-bedroom residence of masonry construction, with an unusual quarter-round living-room window wall. Working drawings were prepared by TAA after Wright's death.
The Rosenbaum house, in Florence, is the only constructed Wright project in Alabama. Florence is in Colbert County, in the far northwestern corner of the state. Troy is in Pike County, in southeastern Alabama.
This drawing would be the initial presentation, of 1958; perhaps by the next year (the notation in 3/4), Lilian had become the principle supporter of the project. I imagine Mr Crosby-Lambert (?) cooling to the prospect, perhaps based on cost -- thus the removal of the garden wall and a suggestion of change from stone to concrete block (another note on the drawing) ?
Architect Donald Lambert (Lambert Ezell Durham, Florence) was engaged in the restoration of Rosenbaum following its purchase by the city. Could he be related to the Crosby-Lamberts, residents (apparently) of the same county ?
The idea of another unbuilt coming to fruition, particularly if it is carried out with the care shown at the FSC Usonian, is tantalizing. The prospect of the house being used as a place in which to live for visiting artists/faculty is an oddly rare use for the current crop of newly built or relocated "Wrights"?
The Crosby-Lambert Project is not a bad design. As a guest house for visiting dignitaries, a one-bedroom house could be more functional than as a private residence.
How the college could construct a plan with major alterations scribbled on it, plus a "future study and sewing" room, "future carport," "future shop" and what appears to be a walled terrace off the bedroom, may become controversial. What do you do, keep the curved living room wall and concentric garden wall, obviously designed to accommodate the lay of the land? If so, what about the 2 added units? There are 4 units with a big "X" in the bedroom; what does the note say? I can't read it. Stone vs. concrete block? As digs for visitors, a shop may not be necessary, but the addition of it would be very desirable to integrate (and support) the added carport.
Unless this design was extensively clarified in subsequent drawings, before FLW's death, I think it should not be built.
Like most universities, one would hope that, in time, the administration realizes their duty is to provide a superior education rather than creating "bright shiny objects" that gets them in the news. There is no benefit to building this house.
Is the FSC faculty house a travesty ? Is the relocation and reconstruction of Bachman-Wilson a valid form of conservation ? (Is it valid only if every scrap of original material is employed ?) Aren't there many shades of gray, each project calling for its own rhyme and reason ?
Cannot there be more than one kind of respect paid to the architect, and to the waiting world ? The recreation of lost or unbuilt designs needn't take away from the primacy of in-situ rehabilitation -- unless we allow it to !
This subject has been over-studied and discussed extensively on this site and I apologize for reinvigorating the discussion, as there is no answer, no right or wrong. Ultimately the building will stand for what it is, interpreted in a variety of ways now and in the future.
You're right, John, this is rehashing hash. But then, that's what we do.