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.
Then the 2nd question: "Would you be willing to do individual homes in the project if you were not to do them all?" Wright replies "Yes, provided I could protect what I did by a veto on what took place alongside." Wright was looking for the right to review and veto plans for a home immediately adjacent to one of his homes. I think the Association at the time agreed to this. To our knowledge this right was never exercised. There was probably just one house built before Wright died that was adjacent to one of his houses, and we've never heard that Wright reviewed the plans for that home.
The photos from the MLive article are the best collection of recent photos. We hope to have Andrew Pielage here this summer to photograph. FYI, the house was put on the National Register of Historic Places shortly after this article ran.
I have another question for you: your dining chairs represent a unique design among all Usonian furnishings, I think, in that they have a seat which appears identical (in the one or two photos I can find) to the hassocks made for the house---to which has been added a frame supporting the back.
Can you tell me if the seat is in fact identical to the hassock in every way ? Does the seat come off the back frame ?
Thanks for your kind attention to our ramblings here at Wright Chat !
My husband and son (6'8") also have to duck to get through a doorway - at least the ceilings are vaulted throughout the house!
An easy fix can be pictured to address that problem, and incidentally to raise the chairs a bit in the process: a rectangular panel of 1" or 1 1/2" thick plywood, in matching finish, could be screwed to the bottom of the legs, approximating the size and shape of the footprint of the hassock---or even larger. Its edges could be bevelled inward for appearance, and a small reverse bevel be provided at the bottom edge to make movement easier and to protect both the plywood and the carpet from unnecessary damage.
As these are not Wright originals, no harm would be done with such a modification, it seems to me---and in any event the screw holes in the bottom of the chair legs would be forever unseen. The change in stability would be immediately apparent. I believe the result would not be un-Wrightian in character.
The table as well could be discreetly raised, without harm, by means of a "second table" standing a bit taller over which the present table would be nested. The effect would be a largely invisible second leg panel inside the existing one, at each end. If constructed correctly, no holes in the existing table would be necessary . . .
These changes might make the table and chairs comfortable for your guys at every meal ?