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

Chahroudi / Massaro residence on Petre Island
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, ... 10, 11, 12  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Wright Chat Forum Index -> Click Here for General Discussion Posts
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
JimM



Joined: 06 Jan 2005
Posts: 1368

PostPosted: Wed May 24, 2006 10:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="pharding"][quote="JimM"]
pharding wrote:
I misspoke and I apologize. I did intend to minimze




Apologize for what?!? None necessary at all; I just had to defend my home town, and look forward to finally "seeing" the Martin House after all these years....."not" intend to minimize, right?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JimM



Joined: 06 Jan 2005
Posts: 1368

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2006 12:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

flwright wrote:
I like to compare this continual argument to movies that are "based upon a true story."....... I am sure this discussion is far from finished!






True, and this proves it! Respectfully, I couldn't disagree more. To me, ultimately it is not an issue of being Wright or not, Taliesin sanctioned, or whatever. It is just that these speculative for profit ventures and much of the Wright housing market are just derivative and uninteresting as architecture, whether "original" designs, or if rehashes having no tangible relevance to Wright other than how they are marketed, usually as "Wright inspired".



It was not necessarily colonial or Tudor houses Frank abhorred, but colonial or Tudor houses built in the 19th century, as well as the "contemporary" Victorians. As much as I admire Frank, through no fault of his own he has become that colonial or Tudor in the 21st century. It's just creepy seeing a "new" "Wright style", whether a non-historic rehash, or that houseboat.....just like that colonial, or that Tudor, or...



Architecture is ultimately subjective, and an argument for emulating and stylizing Wright can be made. But as architecture, these excursions into familiar, safe territory only end up retarding new ideas and opportunities, just as they did when Frank had to deal with it.



Oddly, in a kind of architectural yin-yang, you usually find better organic design outside the Wright realm, and those in charge of Wrights legacy are the "I-beam sticking out of the corrugated steel wall" crowd from LA and New York. The elitists in the hen house. Even Frank would get a laugh out of that irony (maybe).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8298

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2006 12:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JimM, I think you're wrong in one respect: The arguement is finished; you have just wrapped it up!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JimM



Joined: 06 Jan 2005
Posts: 1368

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2006 1:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Roderick Grant wrote:
JimM, I think you're wrong in one respect: The arguement is finished; you have just wrapped it up!




Yeh, I know I'm a broken record! Wright's contributions have only been given lip service architecturally. Trivializing further does not expand the influence of organic architecture, which is alive and well; just not in the context some here would recognize.



The regurgitation aspect is harmful to promoting good architecture.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
therman7g



Joined: 24 Jan 2005
Posts: 263
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2006 1:39 pm    Post subject: Wright Disneyland? Reply with quote

Any thoughts on this Mr. Patrick J. Mahoney?



http://www.savewright.org/talk/viewtopic.php?t=625&sid=4b203060ebfbdec450696687cfba9d07
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pmahoney
Moderator


Joined: 05 Feb 2006
Posts: 170

PostPosted: Thu May 25, 2006 9:35 pm    Post subject: Let's stir the pot. Reply with quote

I do not subsrcibe to the idea that an unbuilt design cannot be realized. Drawings are an architects medium, if the drawing exists the design can be faithfully realized.



Many of Wright's projects received additional degrees of detail from on site direction by Wright. Many structures, considered works by Wright, built during his life received no such direction. Other structures started while Wright was alive were completed after his death, some as designed, some modified by those who Wright entrusted with responsibility. Some unrealized designs are documented to a higher degree than structures realized during Wright's life. An inaccurate restoration of an original structure is more troubling to me than an interpretation of an unrealized design recognized as such.



Regardless, I consider the designs being built today from Wright's plans only to be inspired by his concept. Execution of a concept can be faithful or not. This was as true during his life as it is today. Because Wright's designs were meant to be spatially experienced I would prefer a faithful execution of his concept in addition to his drawings.



Why build a Wright design today, I think it insulting to state that it be done only for financial gain. Many will find a faithfully executed structure to be a thrilling insight into the era of its design. Only recognition of the authenticity of a design built during Wright's life will preserve the value of those original structures and history.



Personally I don't believe the Massaro house is a faithful execution of Wright's concept. I believe the owners would be the first to admit that finances play a major role in the degree to which they could follow the original plans. These influences were as present during Wright's life as today , maybe more so. The difference is he is not here to disown them. Whether the house is a scar on the original Wright cottage nearby is a matter of opinion.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pharding



Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 2210
Location: River Forest, Illinois

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2006 10:14 am    Post subject: The king's new clothes Reply with quote

pmahoney wrote:
...Why build a Wright design today, I think it insulting to state that it be done only for financial gain. Many will find a faithfully executed structure to be a thrilling insight into the era of its design. Only recognition of the authenticity of a design built during Wright's life will preserve the value of those original structures and history.


The Wright Disneyland buildings are being done purely for financial purposes only. They are designed to draw more tourists to Buffalo for financial gain of the city. They thumb their nose at widely accepted preservation standards. They make a mockery of preservation of authentic historic architecture. Wright's drawings were not complete. They relied on trusted staff who could communicate with FLW daily if need be and knew the institutional knowledge of his organization. Furthermore each of those buildings was also a product of its client, time, place, and technology. This is another example of some truly awful decisions, made after the passing of FLW, that adversely impact his legacy. These awful decisions have been tolerated in the name of politeness by otherwise fine organizations. The silence of the FLWBC and other important preservation organizations on this Las Vegas approach to FLW's architectural heritage and historic preservation is deafening. This is also a missed opportunity for the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation to show moral leadership when it comes to the legacy of Frank Lloyd Wright.
_________________
Paul Harding FAIA Owner and Restoration Architect for FLW's 1901 E. Arthur Davenport House, the First Prairie School House in Chicago | www.harding.com | LinkedIn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
RJH



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 682
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2006 11:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Paul,



I
_________________
www.HaynesHouseLLC.com.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8298

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2006 12:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The critique of FLW buildings constructed after, and in many cases before, 1959 should be on a case by case basis. The Yahara Boat Club is so simple that it's hard to be dogmatic about its being built a century after its design, provided it is done without change and is used as originally prescribed. I have more of a problem with the gas station that will be a tourist gift shop, or Chahroudi, a large, complex design that would have required constant vigilance if built by FLW. When the Burlingham Project was first built in New Mexico, the alterations were so extensive and insensitive that the end result has all the charm of a motel. No drawings existed to show how the massive adobe fireplace was to be held up! Although the other version of that project, built in Phoenix, has never been published, I suspect it was done with much greater sensitivity; at least the scale was not altered. Lykes was designed by FLW but built (and altered by Rattenbury) after his death. It's a good house, included in the canon. Bulbulian was designed and built while Wright was alive, but it is a hopeless mess, the worst FLW house I have ever seen. Possibly because an apprentice had too much to do with it and Wright too little. Who knows? Absolutism is a hard enough sell in religion; it should not be an optional point of view in architecture. Yet I doubt I will be thrilled by the Massaro opus.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dkottum



Joined: 09 Jan 2005
Posts: 400
Location: Battle Lake, MN

PostPosted: Fri May 26, 2006 2:39 pm    Post subject: Chahroudi project Reply with quote

Paul, you are rough on us who have spent years pursuing and constructing our new Usonian dreams.



Aren't you sacking some history yourself in tearing down the Wm Drummond or whoever alteration to your house, and building from original plans so that you may have a more genuine FLLW house?



I am sure this is within some acceptable and established standards of preservation. But let Chahroudi project/Massaro house as well as others be. Their interests, however less noble, are just different from yours.



Doug Kottom, Battle Lake, Minnesota
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
therman7g



Joined: 24 Jan 2005
Posts: 263
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 12:29 pm    Post subject: Having an original Frank Lloyd Wright on our resort ........ Reply with quote

June 01, 2006 08:30 AM US Eastern Timezone



James Monroe Capital Resort Development Announcement



CHICAGO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--June 1, 2006--James Monroe Capital Corporation (Pink Sheets:JMCP), has announced that its Resort Development could now be worth upwards of $30mm when complete. The increase comes because the development has been given the honor of being able to build an original Frank Lloyd Wright building.





Frank Lloyd Wright has been called America's greatest architect. When he died, there were some designs that had not been built. Architect Charles Montooth, of Montooth & Hamblin, was Wright's apprentice from 1945 until the time of his death. Montooth will be overseeing the project the same way he supervised the construction of some of Wright's other original designs. Montooth & Hamblin will be designing the rest of the Resort, which will be "not on the land, but of the land," in true Wright style. Architect Floyd Hamblin commented: "Its pretty inspiring. I am incredibly enthusiastic about the opportunity to work with such natural beauty, and create something that will reflect that natural beauty and grace the landscape." Elements of the Montooth & Hamblin design will include open-air showers, rooftop planters, exterior rooms without walls, and dramatic, serene shapes.



James Monroe Capital CEO Chris McGovern said, "Having an original Frank Lloyd Wright on our resort is a lot like getting an original Picasso painting. It's a piece of art, and our target market loves it. Its construction will attract international attention to our resort, Rainforest Beach(TM), and we will be able to charge premium rates because the rare nature of the architecture will bring tourists from all over the world. This sort of project doesn't happen very often."



http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20060601005269&newsLang=en
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
pharding



Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 2210
Location: River Forest, Illinois

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 1:19 pm    Post subject: Re: Having an original Frank Lloyd Wright on our resort .... Reply with quote

therman7g wrote:
June 01, 2006 08:30 AM US Eastern Timezone

James Monroe Capital CEO Chris McGovern said, "Having an original Frank Lloyd Wright on our resort is a lot like getting an original Picasso painting. ...


This is another example of shameless exploitation of FLW's legacy to make a buck by all parties, the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, the developer, and Montooth & Hamblin, the architect. Just to drive home the point the developer makes a preposterous claim that the architect is the original FLW. Just think of the value and the credibility that one could achieve by reproducing a Picasso painting and calling it an orginal Picasso. This is Wright Disneyland No. 2.



The Frank Lloyd Foundation is in the business of peddling knock-offs and fakes to make a buck. Business is good. Want to make preposterous statements about the greatest American architect? No problem as long you pay the vigorish.



Priority No. 1 is not about preserving the legacy of FLW. Priority No. 1 is about selling the legacy.
_________________
Paul Harding FAIA Owner and Restoration Architect for FLW's 1901 E. Arthur Davenport House, the First Prairie School House in Chicago | www.harding.com | LinkedIn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JimM



Joined: 06 Jan 2005
Posts: 1368

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:13 pm    Post subject: Re: Having an original Frank Lloyd Wright on our resort .... Reply with quote

pharding wrote:
Priority No. 1 is not about preserving the legacy of FLW. Priority No. 1 is about selling the legacy.




How true. I may have missed something, but they did not even bother to mention what Wright design (if any!) they are so thrilled to desecrate. I hope it isn't San Marcos



The aging fellows have teamed up with their own apprentices, who also "learned by doing" (how to steal designs for lack of originality). These apprentices are in turn either shameless emulators or culled from the "compounds" like Sciarc. I always laugh at the usual comments like "of the land" and assumptions they will "grace the landscape". Must be nice to know how good you are at pedestrian design.



The comments about their "target market" and "premium rates" says it all. WWFLLWD?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RJH



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 682
Location: Fort Wayne, Indiana

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 2:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is great news! I can
_________________
www.HaynesHouseLLC.com.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
pharding



Joined: 25 Jun 2005
Posts: 2210
Location: River Forest, Illinois

PostPosted: Thu Jun 01, 2006 3:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are widely accepted, established standards within the professions of architecture and historic preservation. These professional standards are what separates professions from pop culture. There are widely accepted professional standards for authorship of architectural work which should not be flaunted by any organization, including FLW organizations.



There are standards for historic preservation and what constitutes historic preservation. Recreating demolished buildings or unbuilt projects is not historic preservation.



The Wright Disneyland approach does not work. Mona Terrace is widely regarded within the the professions of architecture and historic preservation as being awful.



This whole discussion is about following professional stardards versus pop culture standards. It is also about money. Some people will always pursue pop culture solutions. It is easy, painless, and cheap. What I find amazing is that organizations, dedicated to the preservation of Wright's legacy, are pursuing pop culture solutions and undermining their very reason for being.
_________________
Paul Harding FAIA Owner and Restoration Architect for FLW's 1901 E. Arthur Davenport House, the First Prairie School House in Chicago | www.harding.com | LinkedIn
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
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, ... 10, 11, 12  Next
Page 2 of 12

 
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