Any truth to this claim?

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.
Post Reply
Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4777
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Any truth to this claim?

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

Former owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond
SDR
Posts: 22365
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

No. Once again a geometric and "modern-looking" unidentified object has had Wright's name pasted to it, for reasons that needn't be spelled out.

My joining of eBay, reluctantly entered into, has paid off, it seems, in that it's easy for me to ask a seller what the _____ they're doing by claiming, without evidence, that Mr Wright had something to do with their wares. Craigslist can be accessed by anyone, so that's easier. The sentence "Just because it looks like it could have been designed by Frank Lloyd Wright is not proof or evidence that it was" is going to get a workout, I guess, as time goes on. I'll paste it into my Notes app for easy retrieval . . .

SDR
SDR
Posts: 22365
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

My note to the seller:


Sir or madam

When advertising an object said to be designed by an historically-important architect or artist, it is usual and expected that some form of provenance -- list of past ownership, supporting documentation, etc -- will be provided. Most of Frank Lloyd Wright's work has been photographed and published; a photo of this firescreen in situ in a known Wright residence, for instance, could help support a claim that it is a Wright design.

I see that the screen has been photographed in front of two different fireplaces, in your ad. While Mr Wright did design such screens for a few of his houses, it is not uncommon to find non-Wright objects in Wright-designed houses. A more complete accounting of what you know about this object would enhance its value for a potential buyer -- and not incidentally burnish your own reputation as a seller of historically important objects.

Thank you. Stephen Ritchings
Paul Ringstrom
Posts: 4777
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
Location: Mason City, IA

Post by Paul Ringstrom »

SDR,
Anxiously awaiting their response.
Former owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond
SDR
Posts: 22365
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Me too -- though I doubt I'll hear anything. The price doesn't reflect any great value to this piece, and it is represented only as a reproduction. The Wright claim should be challenged, to my way of thinking -- but, well, it's a seller's market ?

SDR
Post Reply