Article: FLW Trust buys neighboring property - Oak Park, IL

DavidC · Post by **DavidC** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:54 pm

Frank Lloyd Wright Trust expands its footprint with new house

David

Reidy · Post by **Reidy** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 3:59 pm

Last time I was there, the docent said that Wright's mother lived in the house, contrary to the article's claim that it has no connection to him.

Tom · Post by **Tom** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 4:55 pm

$340,000 for a house in Oak Park sounds like a steal to me.

Roderick Grant · Post by **Roderick Grant** » Thu Jan 04, 2018 6:07 pm

Reidy, I am certain that's correct. Geiger did some research about the property, having come across mention that Anna had lived in an adjacent house, and found out that it was 925 Chicago Ave. I believe she moved into the house and rented it for a while (to be near her boy), and then Wright bought it for her.

DRN · Post by **DRN** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 8:14 am

Again, the writing of an article seems befuddled...let me get this straight:
The just acquired house in the article is to the east of the Home and Studio at 925 Chicago Ave; the Home and Studio is at 950 Chicago Ave.; later in the article it is noted the Trust acquired a house at 931 Chicago Ave. in 1989. (931 stands between 925 and 950)

Numerically, it would seem the just acquired house IS adjacent to the TrustÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s property, but it is NOT adjacent to the Home and Studio itself. When I last visited in 2012, I asked which house had been Anna WrightÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s, as I did not know if her house had been to the east or south of the Home and Studio. I was told AnnaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s house faced Chicago Ave. Having noticed that the house on Chicago Ave. next door to the Home and Studio was being used as an office/support building for the site, I asked if that house was AnnaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s. I was told no, her house was to the east of the adjacent house and the Trust would not disclose the house number of AnnaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s house as it was privately held.

1. Wright and/or his biographers inaccurately noted AnnaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s house as being Ã¢â‚¬Å“next doorÃ¢â‚¬Â� to Frank and CatherineÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s house.
2. If Geiger was correct, this article is unclear or inaccurate about 925 not having historical connection to Wright. Possibly the reporter was trying to note Wright didnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t design the house, but chose obtuse words.
3. Are we (and Brenden Gill) being prejudiced relative to Anna Ã¢â‚¬Å“moving close to her boyÃ¢â‚¬Â�? Could there have been a symbiotic relationship in which Anna watched some of the six kids at times...or that Frank and Catherine provided some assistance to a mentally troubled relative with whom other members of the family had lost patience?

SREcklund · Post by **SREcklund** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 11:17 am

I can't get it to resolve the URL properly due to all the gibberish, but if you copy the entire string below and paste it in a new browser window, you'll see a Google Street image where the Home and Studio is to the right (behind the bus), Anna's House (or not, depending on whom you believe, but already owned by the Trust and used as their offices) is in the center, and the newly purchased house (see the article for a matching picture) is at the left.

https://www.google.com/maps/@41.8943446 ... 312!8i6656

Roderick Grant · Post by **Roderick Grant** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:01 pm

Here is the befuddlement: The inset photo of the white house with the porch in the article is wrong. It is between 939 Chicago (which is adjacent to the Wright property, and is the house once occupied by Anna) and 925 Chicago (the newly acquired house). So, no, there is no FLW association, as is stated in the article.

It is obvious that Anna's peripatetic lifestyle was closely associated with Frank's movements. She moved to Oak Park, because he was there. Taliesin was originally designated as a country home for Anna, seemingly in an attempt to keep the estate out of any divorce settlement with Catherine, and probably paid for with the sale of 939. There is no evidence that Anna ever resided at Taliesin, but she did move into Tanyderi at one point. Frank and sister Jane argued over her stay there, neither of them wanting her. When FLW went to Tokyo to build the Imperial, Anna followed. She was always on his heels.

Roderick Grant · Post by **Roderick Grant** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:10 pm

I should add one caveat: I am not entirely certain that Google always gets its street numbers correct, so if what they show as 925 is not right, the be-porched house next to the Anna Wright House may actually be the one, which would mean there is nothing wrong with the article.

Forest · Post by **Forest** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:49 pm

Checking the US Census:

Anna, Maginel and Jennie lived in Oak Park (then Cicero) in 1900. But no addresses are given on the census forms. FLW and family are the preceeding entry. The property is noted as owned, rather than mortgaged or rented.

Anna lived alone in Oak Park in 1910. The census form lists her address as 424 Chicago Av, but she is the next entry after FLW and his family. Perhaps Oak Park later revised the numbering scheme. The property is noted as owned, rather than mortgaged or rented.

The 1920 census has Andrew T Porter, his wife Jane, their children Anna and Franklin, and Anna L Wright at 931 Chicago Avenue. By this time FLW was in Wisconsin and Catherine lived in Chicago. The property is noted as owned, rather than mortgaged or rented.

I would say that we're looking at the same property for all 20 plus years, despite the address question, and that Anna definitely lived at 931 Chicago.

SDR · Post by **SDR** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:02 pm

Thanks, Forest. To be sure we read you correctly, might you edit this phrase: ". . .but she the next entry after FLW and his family." ?

SDR

Forest · Post by **Forest** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 1:40 pm

SDR, thanks for catching that.

DRN · Post by **DRN** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 3:51 pm

Oy.
To be clear, was AnnaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s house the one currently used as an office, which is right next to FLWs garage (Ginko Tree Gift Shop)? Or, was it 925 Chicago Ave., the next house east (the house just acquired)?

If AnnaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s was the house right next to the Home and Studio, it will be yet another case of the H&S staff giving out inaccurate answers to historical questions posed by me.

Forest · Post by **Forest** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 6:35 pm

AnnaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s house was the one currently used as the offices, immediately next to the garage/bookshop. ThatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s 931 Chicago Avenue. ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s been a while since I last toured the property, but I recall docents identifying it as AnnaÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s house.

DRN · Post by **DRN** » Fri Jan 05, 2018 6:57 pm

Thanks for the clarification Forest...please excuse me while frown and wave a finger (not the middle one) in the general direction of a docent on Chicago Ave.

Roderick Grant · Post by **Roderick Grant** » Sat Jan 06, 2018 12:53 pm

In the Google view, you can see that the brick and wood wall along the Chicago Ave. faÃƒÂ§ade of the Studio has been continued to enclose the adjacent Anna-House, leaving no doubt. But if you enter 925 Chicago Ave., Google will focus on the house past the white Victorian next to Anna.