Article: Restoring the Dana House - Springfield, IL

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
DavidC
Posts: 7912
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 2:22 pm
Location: Oak Ridge, TN

Article: Restoring the Dana House - Springfield, IL

Post by DavidC »


Meisolus
Posts: 264
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 8:47 pm
Contact:

Post by Meisolus »

The article mentions a gate at the front door that was removed in 1910. Does anyone have a picture of it in situ?

SDR
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Undated photos in standard works:


Manson, p 122

Image


Hanks, p 78

Image

SDR
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Two images from Monograph 1 (the house is listed under 1901). No drawings in that reference show an entrance gate; perhaps one of the later volumes -- sketches and studies -- will show the gates.


Image


Image

SDR
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Photo in the Bramhall "Ausgefuhrte Bauten." No photos there show the gates closed.


Image

SDR
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

I'd suggest that the gates were a client request, perhaps post-construction, which the architect had not anticipated and which displeased him. That would perhaps explain their absence in published photos and drawings . . . ?

SDR

Roderick Grant
Posts: 10302
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Post by Roderick Grant »

"In the Cause of Architecture" was published in the March 1908 issue of The Architectural Record (pp 155-221), 3 years before Ausge.
On page 175 is a view from the same vantage point as the above, but, because the vines are significantly shorter, taken earlier.
There is no sign of the gates, proving that they were a later addition, some time between 1908 and before the 1911 publication of Ausge, probably 1910.
But since the photo with the gates in place was used in Ausge, it would appear that FLW had no problem with them, or he would have used the earlier shot with the vines not quite so overwhelming.

SDR
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Or, perhaps he liked the foliage, and was willing to use the photo(s) as long as the gates were shown opened, thus virtually invisible ? There are seven
exterior photos of the house in the book; in five of them the entrance is visible. Of those, only the one above, and another from the same vantage that
includes more of the facade, show the gates in place.

One of the photos, on page 34, might have been retouched to eliminate the gates; in that photo the ivy (?) is less plentiful.

Thanks for the dates -- that's useful.

SDR

HOJO
Posts: 63
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2006 4:11 pm
Location: Belgium

Post by HOJO »

In the above Ausge-picture it looks like the gates were removed and only the suspension construction remains.
The length of the shed shadow under the suspension construction is not long enough.

What I don't see in the Ausge-picture is this gate:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/zaruka/32 ... 8Dk-CXPDMq

Meisolus
Posts: 264
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 8:47 pm
Contact:

Post by Meisolus »

The gate was curious to me because it looks like it was basically right up against the door. It doesn't seem very practical. But I love the fact that Wright would do gates from time to time in a similar manner. There is one at the Burton Westcott House in Springfield, OH. It had been removed and was reproduced during the restoration. To me, this one makes more sense as it does somewhat enclose a space, instead of butting right up against the door. Still, it would be nice to see a photo with the gate closed. I'm curious how it relates design wise to the rest of the building.

Image

SDR
Posts: 19634
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Good work, guys. The gate(s) in the Flickr image do seem to occupy the correct near-square rectangle . . .

As for what appears in the Dana photo, those hook shapes, top and bottom, read perfectly as the pintles upon which the gates would be hung. But their
shadows also indicate that they -- the mounting frames -- project beyond the face of the surrounding masonry -- which it seems to me is most un-Wright.


Is there any other use of a similar decorative texture in this commission ? The corner blocks to the gates do resemble those on the iconic double-pedestal
table lantern in the house.

SDR

Post Reply