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

Guggenheim Museum Opening Day October 21, 1959
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  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
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8457

PostPosted: Tue Oct 29, 2013 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I cannot imagine FLW accepting an interior color that did not match the exterior color, even though that calls up some disturbing images of the early projects for the building done in various shades bolder than sand. To say that a white background is essential to the proper display of art suggests that anyone who has a private collection in their home should paint the interior of their house white. It's as short-sighted as the cants whined by the artists who protested the building as it rose: "It violates the artists' rectilinear framework of reference!" FLW didn't buy that argument then, and subsequent generations have proved that all Guggenheim did was free artists to explore a greater range of options.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Paul Ringstrom



Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 3932
Location: Mason City, IA

PostPosted: Fri Nov 01, 2013 12:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://architizer.com/blog/mad-proposal-would-triple-height-of-frank-lloyd-wrights-guggenheim-museum/
_________________
Owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tom



Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Posts: 2298
Location: Black Mountain, NC

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 7:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Three nice shots of the Guggenheim:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/diorama_sky/12376724093/in/photostream/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16027
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The tiny bit of conventional building in the first photo is sweet . . .


The extended spiral of the Guggenheim manages to shut out the oculus altogether -- adding insult to injury ? Still, adding humor to our day can't be all bad.

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Tom



Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Posts: 2298
Location: Black Mountain, NC

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Had not noticed the little piece of building in that shot. I agree, nice touch.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16027
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 8:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Like an earring at the corner of a lovely face ?


Tad Kaminskas made a crisper version of this NYC photo, in 1999:


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Rood



Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Posts: 992
Location: Goodyear, AZ 85338

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To my eye, the truly hideous building is the one behind Wright's Guggenheim in photo 2, that God-awful addition.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16027
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wright drew something comparable as a backdrop building -- having no more to do with the Guggenheim itself than the built one ?











My regret has to do with the new color of the museum -- perhaps chosen in part only to distinguish it from the tower, which is closer to Wright's original Guggenheim hue. Also, Wright's "bow tie chimney" is gone . . .


Here is insult to architecture, writ large:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/28/arts/design/28yale.html?_r=0

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Roderick Grant



Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 8457

PostPosted: Sun Feb 09, 2014 5:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The slab that FLW designed had more to do with hiding the clunky side of the apartment building on the next lot than with the museum. The scheme was for an apartment structure only 25' wide with a glass curtain wall facing the park. If built (I believe there was to be only one apartment per floor) imagine the rent it would provided.

The Gwathmey Siegel slab wouldn't be so horrid if it had been limited to the 25' width, but as built, it impinges on the museum. The interiors of it are bland enough to make an artist's heart sing.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16027
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Sun Feb 09, 2014 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What function(s) does the new building serve ?

[Man, I need a (s) key on my keyboard, don't I . . .!]

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
egads



Joined: 13 Apr 2009
Posts: 887
Location: Long Beach CA

PostPosted: Sun Feb 09, 2014 10:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are several large box galleries and one of those enormous art transporting elevators. There are connections to the spiral on a few levels.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
DRN



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 3545
Location: Cherry Hill, NJ

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2014 11:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I totally agree with SDR about the color...the original intention of the architect should be respected and the original color of the Guggenheim should be reinstated. The only sticky issue is that Wright intended the color to be the same inside and out, and the warmer tone of the original color, I suspect, is not neutral enough for the artists and curators as a background for display of the art.

I never understood why the Guggenheim Foundation chose to crowd the Wright building by occupying the "figural space" left by Wright to balance the composition of his building on the street front. Surely with all of the money that it has spent on other venues and planned venues, the Guggenheim could have set up or partnered with a dummy organization to quietly and progressively buy up lots (or even individual condos) in the block to the east of the Wright building. That method would have eventually allowed expansion at a respectful distance with more subtle connections to the original.

MOMA seems to have no difficulty creeping like a bamboo shoot along its block....shame about the Williams-Tsien Folk Arts Gallery, truly a loss.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16027
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2014 11:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

A designer has to know when to let go of a cherished ideal, in the service of function. A sea shell is lined with a different material than its exterior substance -- for good reason.

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Rood



Joined: 30 Oct 2010
Posts: 992
Location: Goodyear, AZ 85338

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2014 1:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SDR Wrote: "Wright drew something comparable as a backdrop building -- having no more to do with the Guggenheim itself than the built one ?"


Wright's design was light and airy ... open, friendly, welcoming. The built structure looks like a forbidding war-time bunker, complete with gun slits.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
SDR



Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Posts: 16027
Location: San Francisco

PostPosted: Mon Feb 10, 2014 4:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wright's background building, c. 1951, seems to quote his 1897 Luxfer building -- "A type of facade now fashionable," he wrote in 1957.




It is too bad, as DRN suggests, that the "background" building was shoved so far forward, when finally built. And yes, we could do without the extraneous slits. But with the (almost) blank tartan grid, and the sandy color, it could be argued that Gwathmey et al were at least trying to speak Wright's language -- far more sympathetically than they did contra Rudolph, in New Haven ?

SDR
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
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  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
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