Wright Chat

 
FAQ FAQ Register Register
Search Search Profile Profile
Memberlist Memberlist Log in to check your private messages Log in to check your private messages
Usergroups Usergroups Log in Log in

>> Return to SaveWright Home Page

Richard Smith House, Jefferson, WI
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wright Chat Forum Index -> Click Here for General Discussion Posts
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8363

PostPosted: Sat Sep 04, 2010 1:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of all the FLW houses accused of being too dark, Weisblatt is the one that most fits the bill. The interior has a lot of concrete and dark wood, with few reflective surfaces. As I recall, the Howe addition was suitably subdued, adding on to the bedroom wing. (Though it has been a long time since I saw it!) The screened porch is one of the nicest touches. The framing, as I recall, was painted Cherokee red. Overall a very livable house. Mrs. Weisblatt was still in residence at the time.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 15860
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat Sep 04, 2010 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Two references refer to the roof of this house as "cantilevered" -- in one case, "from side wall masonry." Mysterious. . .

I haven't found interior photos.



W A Storrer photo and plan



Weintraub photo (published at 2 5/8" wide -- rephotographed with Canon 2MP camera and pocket magnifier)



Weintraub photo (HP all-in-one scanner)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 15860
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 12:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The plan shows a corner-opening pair of doors -- but the photos don't bear that out. . .do they ?

There would have to be stiles at the corner, not mitered glass. . .


SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Paul Ringstrom



Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 3863
Location: Mason City, IA

PostPosted: Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Roderick Grant wrote:
Of all the FLW houses accused of being too dark, Weisblatt is the one that most fits the bill. The interior has a lot of concrete and dark


I have been in this house and I agree with Roderick that this house is dark, but upon examining the the orientation of the two walls of glass in the living room that face south I can only conclude that vegetation to the south is blocking the light. It appears the Wright did what he usually did, place the window-wall to the south. From historical photos it appears that most of these Usonian homes were built on naked farmland and the trees were subsequently not Wright's fault.

Now the Charles Manson House is another story....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tom



Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Posts: 2284
Location: Black Mountain, NC

PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Helpful thread for understanding these roofs
_________________
Nothing lasts forever
FLLW
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
John



Joined: 25 Mar 2005
Posts: 387

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 10:46 pm    Post subject: Smith Reply with quote

"...it could be considered a township site, and as such the choice of random coursed limestone masonry walls is totally inappropriate. "

Please enlighten me.

Can there not be stone quarries in Townships?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 15860
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2018 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The comment you refer to is found on page one of the thread. It was made by an Australian architect; we have learned that many items in the professional
vocabulary have different meanings there. In any event, several posts on pages one and two express differing opinions on the matter . . .

If there was once agreement that rusticated or rough-faced masonry is inappropriate "in town," numerous examples from the past several centuries should
have served as antidotes to the notion. One thinks of Richardson's courageous/outrageous Marshall Field Wholesale Store in downtown Chicago, of 1885-7.

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
DRN



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3491
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 11:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
If there was once agreement that rusticated or rough-faced masonry is inappropriate "in town," numerous examples from the past several centuries should
have served as antidotes to the notion. One thinks of Richardson's courageous/outrageous Marshall Field Wholesale Store in downtown Chicago, of 1885-7.


I suspect Laurie's comments about the appropriateness of rough stone in the city or townships would not extend to the work of HHRichardson at Marshall Fields in Chicago or for that matter, the Allegheny Courthouse and Jail in Pittsburgh as those granite stones (blocks, really) were carefully dressed at their edges to make precise, formal joints between blocks, lintels, and segments of Roman arches.

http://glessnerhouse.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-marshall-field-wholesale-store.html
http://www.pittsburghartplaces.org/accounts/view/111

The comment relative to the Smith house focused on the difficulty inherent in making such an imprecise material as fieldstone or quarried ledgestone conform to such an exacting organizational module as a diamond or triangle. Brick would seem a more logical choice.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8363

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Brick vs. Stone: Every brick building sits upon the earth. Many stone buildings emerge out of the earth, unless the stone is dressed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 15860
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 2:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

. . . and yet, Wright has his brick penetrate the earth in many structures, once he has left the water table behind ? The Kraus house comes to mind; parts of the house are bedded in bordered crushed rock while others rise directly from the grass.

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8363

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

With or without the water table, brick is a manufactured material, not a natural one. It sits upon the ground. You might find FLW houses with brick flooring in front of the fireplace, but never brick growing out of the earth like the FW fireplace. It would look contrived. There are places in FLW's work where stone seems to grow out of the ground and find its way into the interior. Even the brick terrace at Willey doesn't do that; it reaches out from the brick structure into the environment, but does not rise out of the earth.

At T-West, the concrete is so much like the desert floor, that the building seems to emerge out of the desert. Stones lie strewn about the desert, and the stones in the concrete are an abstraction of that natural environment.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 15860
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am fully engaged with Roderick's sensitivity to the nature of building and ground. Does a building grow from the ground, or does man place his
construction upon it in a way that clearly distinguishes one from the other ? What are the differences in this regard between the various masonry materials
with which man chooses to protect his structure, from the waste and ruin nature stands ready to inflict ?

It is interesting to see Wright wrestling with this problem -- in its aesthetics, at least. In 1936, for the Lusk Usonian, at Johnson Wax and at Wingspread,
brick rises from pavement, or from a concrete base where the surrounding is greenery. By the next year, his elevations of the Rebhuhn house show brick
walls rising from the surrounding lawns without an intermediary -- water table, edge of slab, or other.

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8363

PostPosted: Wed Jul 11, 2018 12:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Brick is clearly distinguished from nature, while stone (undressed) is an extension of nature.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wright Chat Forum Index -> Click Here for General Discussion Posts All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Protected by Anti-Spam ACP