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 love to know that my work can be useful in the open debate of rebuilding these masterpieces. When I started this project it was precisely because I wanted to visit these buildings that no longer exist, it would be wonderful to visit them physically someday, although I know that it takes more than just a few images for that.
I understand why the Larkin building is a very ambitious goal but the Pauson house or Ocatillo camp are quite affordable.
I wonder why nobody has thought of building the Pauson house as their own home, it is obvious that the market value would be considerable.
And as for Ocatillo camp, There's enough land near Taliesin West:
http://image.shutterstock.com/z/stock-p ... 738580.jpg
It would be a perfect complement to the visit. They can even charge the visit separately to finance it.
I think they recently built this model:
They just have to go one step further and make it bigger!
Plimoth Plantation, and perhaps Colonial Williamsburg, come to mind as precursors. There are buildings at the latter which have been moved from their original locations, I believe, with other structures created from scratch, while at Plymouth (Massachusetts) everything is a hypothetical recreation -- no photographs exist of the original site(s) !
These attractions exist to inform the interested public of their national history. In this regard they perform the same function that would recreations of Wright sites . . .
And when they tore the place down, what did they do with all the furniture?
Matt wrote: I still don't know exactly how the penthouse level garden eating areas looked.
Matt.... maybe you've seen this from Quinan's book. Not a great photo.
You don't see formal place settings (for the workers anyway) in employee lunch rooms these days. Silverware, ceramic tea pots..... where's the microwave?
The bricks from Larkin were used to fill the Ohio River Basin. The 24" steel I-beams that supported the 10" concrete floors went to West Virginia mines. Larkin was seriously vandalized over the years. The furniture was most likely stripped out long before demolition, along with 50 tons of copper & steel, every light fixture & doorknob.
Here's an interesting site, an ongoing Larkin Building project. Rendered furniture, lights, interiors....very nice work, but not the same caliber as James.
Those aren't chairs at the ends of each table. What are they ? Do they support something not present in the photo -- like the mid-desk raised platform in another photo on the previous page (81) ? Were they intended to contain lighting ?
On the two pages before that, we see a Lounge and a Library, also with amazing furnishings -- chairs in particular !
"When I toured Fallingwater this year, they emphasized that it could NOT be built today, due to current codes. It would be a very different building."
Good to know that the realities of the work are being addressed by docents at Fallingwater.
As for recreating Larkin, the comments contain one delightful idea: that the world needs a Frank Lloyd Wright museum !
The chairs in the lounge are early Barcaloungers (aka Lay-Z-Boy). The chair originated in Buffalo around the time of Larkin construction.
I see only one questionable point: the horizontal (rail) beneath the cap of the leg element is perhaps too tall; note the difference when looking at its light-colored counterpart at the far end of the nearest table in the photo.
(Oh, yeah; can you make the grain of the back-rail run horizontally ?)
Now -- are your chairs modeled separately from the table ? Can we see one of those from the front and the side ?
Roderick, is that lounge chair really a standard La-Z-Boy (note sp.) product of the period -- untouched by Wright's restless hand ?