Stromquist House

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.
peterm
Posts: 6341
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

Post by peterm »

The house is for sale, and here is the listing:

http://www.savewright.org/index.php?page=33&id=78

You could try contacting the seller...

SDR
Posts: 22172
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Don't you wish your garage looked like that ?

"Area rug from Nepal not shown in this shot" : hilarious. Was the site sponsored by Area Rugs of Nepal, Ltd ?

S D R

peterm
Posts: 6341
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 10:27 am
Location: Chicago, Il.---Oskaloosa, Ia.

Post by peterm »

I suppose the rug (probably custom designed for the geometry of the room, and expensive...) is included with the sale.

One thing that I find interesting about this house is the lack of lowered light soffits. The ceiling seems to be the underside of the continuous shed roof, making the construction much simpler and possibly more economical. I see only the lowered plate line in the kitchen area, and there it is relatively insignificant. Was Wright moving away from the soffit detail at the end of the fifites, opting for the lighting built directly into the ceiling?

SDR
Posts: 22172
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 11:33 pm
Location: San Francisco

Post by SDR »

Growing weary of his own tropes -- the endlessly restless creative spirit struggling with the too-familiar ?


S

Tom
Posts: 3786
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:53 pm
Location: Black Mountain, NC

Re: Stromquist House

Post by Tom »

ADDENDUM: I am incorrect in what follows in supposing that the built version might have been put together after Wright's death and which I refer to as the WWP version. This drawing shows a note in Wright's hand on what I speculated might not have been approved by him:
https://library.artstor.org/#/asset/286 ... 5821651208

Handwritten note reads something like:
"Dear Stromquist, This is a suggestion for your consideration. Seems to us a good wat to save the ( best of the high ceiling and ___ in ... tact).
Can anyone figure the whole thing out?

ORIGINAL POST:

This is a question for Wright scholars, I think. RG and Kerian come to mind, there are others I'm sure, but I don't know. Also this may have been previously addressed but I cannot find the discussion.
The Avery File on Stromquist shows two different versions. The first version is sketched out by Wright and developed. The second version is signed by WWP in 1960, attributed to Taliesin Associates and seems to have been designed after Wright was dead. It also appears that the second version is the one that was built.


Or maybe Storrer spells this all out.
Anyone know the story here?

Entire File:
https://library.artstor.org/#/search/ar ... e=1;sort=1

Wright's version:
https://library.artstor.org/#/asset/286 ... 5821240241

"WWP version?":
https://library.artstor.org/#/asset/286 ... 5821814392


Actually there may be four versions of Stormquist. The following perspective is found in the Stormquist file. If this is actually for Stormquist and not miss filed, then this is indeed a separate version 1):
https://library.artstor.org/#/asset/286 ... 5818882733

Then there is a plan and an elevation found in the file that seem to correspond to each other. Here they are 2):
Elevation:
https://library.artstor.org/#/asset/286 ... 5819230822
Plan (definitely Stormquist because of the contours):
https://library.artstor.org/#/asset/286 ... 5819314831

... and here is an odd drawing that appears to have the "WWP/Taliesin" version 'collaged' on to a site plan w/ Wright's version. There is also some sketching activity around the carport of Wright's version that indicate the WWP version:
https://library.artstor.org/#/asset/286 ... 5820795042

Roderick Grant
Posts: 11686
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am

Re: Stromquist House

Post by Roderick Grant »

Anyone's guess.

HenryWhiting
Posts: 55
Joined: Thu May 16, 2013 4:10 pm

Re: Stromquist House

Post by HenryWhiting »

I'm just coming across this whole thread for the first time, and would like to offer a few comments. The Teater design preceded the Elizabeth Banning-Morehead 'design'. The Teater name and address had been erased from the original drawings sent to the Teaters and replaced with Banning-Morehead's. I brought this to Bruce Pfeiffer's attention in the mid-1990's and he confirmed it. As did Paul Turner two decades later in his book, 'Frank Lloyd Wright and San Francisco'. Wright's design of Stromquist was clearly derived from the Teater design, both in plan and in elevation. Stromquist develops from the Teater one-room artist studio into a multi-bedroom family house. Main room/fireplace/kitchen relationships are similar in both. One thing that is different is the size of the parallelogram grid. At Teater the grid is 5'-0" on a side, whereas Stromquist has a parallelogram grid 4'-0" between gridlines (the altitude, so to speak), which nets out to a parallelogram with 4'-7 7/16" on a side, ie significantly smaller. The larger grid works well in a single room structure, whereas the smaller grid works better for the Stromquist bedrooms. This also means that the scale of the interior space at Teater is significantly larger than Stromquist. Having been in both, I can attest to this. Teater, with its exposed 4 X 12 rough-sawn rafters and 12 X 18 inch central beam is a much bolder design, imo.

I, too, find the WWP signature on the last set of Stromquist drawings troublesome, but I haven't fully studied his drawings and how much they diverged from Wright's original concept.

One last thing: Paul and I had a lengthy correspondence regarding the Banning-Morehead site. I had always thought the site was in West Marin because the left bank of the Snake River had been erased and overdrawn to look like a larger body of water in the perspective, but Paul, through county property records, was able to confirm that the site was actually above the Marin Civic Center, and the body of water was the San Pablo Bay. The Teater name and address had been erased from both the conceptual floor plan and elevation drawing sheets, though ghosting of the Teater name was evident. These two sheets had been buried in Aaron Green's flat files for decades until he returned them to Taliesin West in the early 1990's.

Post Reply