Part 1: https://martineztribune.com/2017/04/14/ ... city-hall/
Part 2: https://martineztribune.com/2017/04/21/ ... city-hall/
Part 3: https://martineztribune.com/2017/04/28/ ... ne-wright/
Part 4: https://martineztribune.com/2017/05/05/ ... city-hall/
Part 5: https://martineztribune.com/2017/05/15/ ... -building/
Martinez City Hall
-
Paul Ringstrom
- Posts: 4777
- Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
- Location: Mason City, IA
Martinez City Hall
Last edited by Paul Ringstrom on Mon May 15, 2017 3:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Former owner of the G. Curtis Yelland House (1910), by Wm. Drummond
For a current view, start here https://tinyurl.com/lupm6up
One can circumnavigate the building with the mouse. Nice color. The projecting "roof" seems to have been trimmed back, while retaining an original-looking profile. Most unusual.
SDR
One can circumnavigate the building with the mouse. Nice color. The projecting "roof" seems to have been trimmed back, while retaining an original-looking profile. Most unusual.
SDR
-
Paul Ringstrom
- Posts: 4777
- Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 4:53 pm
- Location: Mason City, IA
Wait a minute....
The five articles note the building as being in the Prairie Style, of which Frank Lloyd Wright was a leading proponent or "father", that the building was designed by the firm Stone & Wright, but nowhere does the article identify the Wright principal of Stone & Wright, Louis S. Stone is noted...is it being implied FLW was part of this firm?
The summation in the last article is troubling...is the author making a case that Frank Lloyd Wright had direct involvement with the design of this building...or, is this just obtuse writing?
The five articles note the building as being in the Prairie Style, of which Frank Lloyd Wright was a leading proponent or "father", that the building was designed by the firm Stone & Wright, but nowhere does the article identify the Wright principal of Stone & Wright, Louis S. Stone is noted...is it being implied FLW was part of this firm?
The summation in the last article is troubling...is the author making a case that Frank Lloyd Wright had direct involvement with the design of this building...or, is this just obtuse writing?
That's not how I assess the piece -- though the enthusiastic author briefly comes close to the kind of fuzzy thinking that characterized the arguments of the owner of the Texas property we dealt with recently. In this case, though, I don't see the advocate actually claiming Wright as the designer.
Looking for Stone & Wright, I first find this:
http://pcad.lib.washington.edu/firm/2425/
. . . which in turn leads to a look at Stockton schools.
Looking for Stone & Wright, I first find this:
http://pcad.lib.washington.edu/firm/2425/
. . . which in turn leads to a look at Stockton schools.
