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.
or wall supporting the windows grows a bit in its exposure as it slides downslope. No piers were moved; the planter pier to the left of the windows remains as it was.
The two versions are distinguishable in the two photos posted on the previous page.
As the windows grew nearer the edge of the eave above, they received more daylight.
FLW designed alterations for several years after the house was built, some of which (a complete rethinking of the master bedroom layout; skylights along the east side of the living room which are set into the floor of the balcony above; the row of windows along the south faÃƒÂ§ade) were built, some (a shallow reflecting pond following the floricycle; skylight over the stair hall; a cantilevered grand piano) were not.
Moving the windows forward was done very shortly after the Martins moved into the house. Isobel's sewing room was in that area, and she thought it too dark. Early on in the restoration, there was a controversy over whether to move the windows back or to leave them where they were. There are valid arguments on both sides, but I favored the one that won out.
No, SDR, I meant Hitchcock. The photo in Hitchcock, which is the one last chance posted, dates from the late 1930s. The 1904 date has been mistaken as the photo date, but was meant to be the construction date.
The sill height remained the same; the amount of "spandrel" (wall visible below the windows) increased; the light reaching the glass had less distance to travel and (more critically) the shadow of the eave struck the glass at a higher point, thus letting in more light to the room. I guess we're agreed on that ?
okay, and yet the amount of light is fixed by the eave, the piers, and the spandrel sill height.
Moving the glass back and forth does not change that.
The quantity that changes is the room area and volume.
It's a picky point but that's why I said what I said.
BTW, "more light?"... Goethe's dying words.
expanded as it was, more light would fall on a table or a lap at a given time of day, at a given distance from the fenestration. A person standing at that
distance from the glass could find sunlight striking him further from the floor.
https://digital.lib.buffalo.edu/Items/b ... lection=33
Also, explore this website for architecture and beyond in Buffalo.
Here's Wright's page on the website above.
Addressing Isabelle's vision problems first involved enhancement of interior lighting, but her her general dislike for the house always was an exascerbating issue. Not surprisingly, Wright's life at the time with Mamah was seen as an embarrassment by association in polite society. The modifications to the second floor bedroom wall were first discussed on a (demanded) visit by Wright to Buffalo in 1913. At the same time Martin insisted Wright address the entry hall skylight, changes to the living room verandah, and modifications to the first floor reception room, but nothing came of any of it. Martins frustration was evident as written to Wright mid 1914 " I have no language at my command to express my disgust at the treatment Mr. Wright has accorded me."
The Taliesin murders occurred soon after, but as could be expected, eventually Martin regrouped and tried again. In 1916 Martin proposed to Wright a scheme, apparently conceived by Isabelle, that would have demolished the entire porte cocheres end of the house replacing it with a new 2 story wing to the North parallel to the unit room on the East end of the house. Wright's response was a proposal to convert the conservatory into a "Garden House" for entertaining. Upon certain rejection, Wright submitted a plan similar to the original request, which Isabelle objected to asking that it also project southward, which would have given Martin an ungainly H-shape. Wright correctly responded it would be a serious mistake and would basically transform their house into nothing more than a hotel. Martin abruptly terminated any further discussions about changes to the house.
By 1920 Wright's general absence in Japan allowed minimal contact between them, and Martin hired a former Wright draftsman, Andrew Willatzen, to make some of the changes first discussed in 1913 and 1916. This was actually when the second floor window wall was extended 3 feet outward, finally bringing Isabelle into the light. The only other modification to the West end (fortunately) was the addition of a large trunk storage room beneath the eave at the back of the second floor bedroom wing. This alteration was also removed during the current restoration.
In 1926 Isabelle eventually received pretty much what she would have first preferred, Graycliff, albeit a summer home. Martins fortune was essentially lost in the market crash of 1929. Isabelle remained in the Buffalo house for less than two years after Martins death in 1935, moving into a neo-Gothic apartment building. "Darwin's House" stood empty until the City took possession for unpaid taxes in 1946.... it's been a long road back to what we see today.
I thought this might be of interest and is summarized from Jack Quinan's "Frank Lloyd Wright's Martin House; Architecture as Portraiture". Knowing my growing interest in architecture, I'm indebted to my father for taking me at the age of 12 to see "a really strange house" in the city. My first direct exposure to Wright was the Martin House in all its derelict beauty.
On the U Buffalo Libraries pages I found the colored version of the image, and (for comparison) a March 1905 photo of the house---hand-tinted by persons unknown.
Look at Wright using a photograph of the house---how else ?---to place trees in his rendering ...
color images Ã‚Â© 2019Ã‚Â University at Buffalo and by the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation