Built/Unbuilt Ratio ?

[Tom]

Found myself wondering this morning about the hard numbers ... and that I don't know them.
But I figure someone here does.
How many buildings did Wright get built / How many buildings were designed but not built?

[Roderick Grant]

I think it's about 35% built.

[SDR]

Today's linked "My Modern Met" article on David Romero says:

Frank Lloyd Wright created 1,171 architectural designs, but 660 were never built.

S

[Tom]

Wow, almost 50% ?
Not a bad average considering the risque nature of it all.
1,171 buildings - excluding candle sticks, furniture, plates, rugs .... ?

[SDR]

He was dedicated---possibly "driven" ?---and relentless . . . and ultimately successful.

(Imagine having next to no work, in the "Roaring Twenties" no less, and your 'fifties are passing by all too quickly ?)

Architecture is an old man's art. And a lot of them never make it. Today is the first day of the . . .

S

[Matt2]

Compared to another MCM architect I've researched, a 50% ratio is really high. Most architects wanted to keep build everything they designed...they wouldn't go far down the road unless there was a high probability of the project going forward. Wright's high percentage of projects that didn't go forward are probably a mix of the experimental nature of the design and the unpredictable costs involved.

[Roderick Grant]

One commission that FLW knew was going nowhere from the beginning was the house for Ayn Rand, so he recycled another failed project rather than start fresh.

[DavidC]

Wright was, also, practicing during the Depression and World War II - a pair of histories that, undoubtedly, kept more than a few from coming to fruition.


David

[SDR]

It would be possible to list the various reasons why Wright's failed commissions weren't built; the evidence would presumably come primarily from client letters to Wright. From that list---necessarily incomplete, as not every client communication would have survived---the most common reasons could be derived and ranked in order of frequency.

In his Frank Lloyd Wright and San Francisco (2016; Yale University Press) Paul V Turner suggests that the most common reason for the work of any architect not to reach construction is a problem with finances. As for Wright's unbuilt commissions---in the Bay Area at least---he found all of the following:

Personal problems befalling the client
A client's unwillingness to go along with an unconventional design
Difficulties keeping the design within budget
A client's unreasonable demands
Lack of a client (as in a speculative project)

He wrote, "In only a small number of cases can a personality conflict between Wright and a client be seen as contributing to the miscarriage of a project." (p 6)

In his book Mr Turner takes the unusual step of finding letters written to and from Wright, Aaron Green, and their clients, quoting from them as needed to illuminate aspects of the (largely unbuilt) projects that came to Wright in the greater San Francisco area, mainly in the last decade of his life. It is a very effective---some might say essential---means of revealing what happened in each case, and not incidentally introducing readers to these individuals and describing their motivations in seeking out Mr Wright as their architect.

S

[Matt2]

The Nesbitt project was probably fairly typical. Nesbitt was an enthusiastic client who was eager for a Wright house and had set an ample budget. When the construction estimates came in from a contractor at multiples of that budget, the project went south. There were attempts to adjust the design to economize, but ultimately that is hard to do with a Wright design. So the project is abandoned with a lot of bad feelings.