Page 1 of 1

Never-built Wright design on display in Racine, WI

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:57 pm
by Guest
Never-built Wright design on display

Chicago Tribune (IL)

March 5, 2006

Author: Mark Hertzberg, The Journal Times

Estimated printed pages: 3



America was filled with postwar optimism in 1946 when Racine's YWCA bought land for a new building at 740 College Ave., across from the 14-story Racine County Courthouse.



H.F. Johnson Jr. retained Frank Lloyd Wright to design the new building in May 1949, but two other architects also competed for the commission. John Batten, another Racine business leader, preferred local architect Frank Hoffman. Fitzhugh Scott Jr., who had designed the Milwaukee YWCA, submitted plans, and was ultimately hired.



Scott's building, which opened in 1953, is streamlined, with a round corner and a circular, glass-lined stair tower at the southeast end. Visitors find themselves in a typical lobby and reception area. A variety of doors lead to the pool, locker rooms, a meeting room, and the stairs. It has served the community well for 50 years, but it is not the bold, and exciting building Wright had proposed.



"Right for Racine but Wright Wrong for Racine's YWCA" is the catchy, alliterative title for a new exhibit at the Racine Heritage Museum, 701 Main St. Museum director Christopher Paulson says there are two key themes to the exhibit, which will be on display for the next two years.



"There is the perseverance they went through to acquire a new building, and within that story, working with Frank Lloyd Wright, and the rapid deterioration of their relationship when he discovered that the Y board was doing their due diligence when they requested proposals from other architects," he said.



Wright's plans for the Y, like many of his public buildings, brought in natural light to celebrate the interior. There were few holes punched into the sides of the building to serve as traditional windows. Instead, there were clerestory windows, which Wright often used, and a dramatic glass canopy over the entrance, a glass waterfall cascading down from a glass roof. They illuminated the open lobby and a rooftop swimming pool. The roof was, literally, the crowning touch.



Visitors would have entered a large open reception area. There were no walls, furniture or low ceiling to compress space. Wright's lobby was an atrium which flowed up into the glass roof, allowing the whole building to breathe. His lobby led to three floors connected by ramps, with tropical plants, under the skylight roof. Plans included an activity room for teens, music and crafts rooms, bowling alleys and a gymnasium.



Wright drew two sets of plans for the project; the first in 1949, and the second in 1950. The builder would have been Ben Wiltscheck, who had worked with Wright on the Johnson Administration Building and Research Tower at Racine Street and 21st Street, and on Wingspread, the conference center in Wind Point. Two letters from Wright to the Y explain why his building was not built.



On Jan. 30, 1950, Wright sent a pleasant letter to Barbara Sargent, secretary for the YWCA Building Committee.



He wrote that his revised plans included "all the changes except the solid roof." He explained the kind of roof he wanted, "I had hoped for a translucent overhead, sloped so that it would require cleaning but twice a year--no danger of leaks in this over-lapping form of glass-slab technique."



Then he addressed the cost of the building. "I have had as my goal in this case a straight-forward building costing within $500,000 and believe it can be built for that sum without difficulty." Furniture, except for built-in furnishings, was not included in the estimate.



He chided her not to be guided by the "wholly irresponsible" cost estimates from "so-called outside experts" who wouldn't be familiar with his building techniques. Perhaps he hoped that committee members didn't know his reputation for going over budget, assuring her, "In the light of my previous experience--it is considerable--I think you have no reason to fear much, if any, increase over the half-million as mentioned."



All that was needed, Wright concluded, was a note from the board to Johnson, approving the plans and a request for him to make presumably more detailed plans, "a tedious clerical business requiring some time." It would be worth it. "I think we are going to have a remarkably fine and useful structure; one to be proud of and one the Y.W.C.A. does need as a sign of cultural vitality no matter how self-satisfied it may be."



Wright resigned the commission six weeks later, in a terse note, on March 17, "My dear Ladies: Concerning the work I have done in your behalf by generosity of Mr. Herbert Johnson, there seems to be some mistake. Mr. Wiltscheck . . . tells me you have been deliberating between these drawings submitted by me and those of other architects. This deliberation places me in a position I have never accepted knowingly and never shall. I do not compete for work."



Five decades later, Johnson's son, Sam Johnson, recalled the project. "He [H.F. Johnson Jr.] was really irritated that they didn't think twice about having Wright do the building."



Wright scholar Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer saw the Y proposal as "a remarkably detailed and thought-out scheme that could serve as a community center for any smaller American city."



When the museum was looking at designs for a new building in 2003, the board asked to see if Wright's YWCA plan could be adapted. The cost was prohibitive.



Racine is rich in Wright buildings, although this one was not built. His built and unbuilt work in Racine ranges from 1901-1954 and represents almost every significant stage of his career after 1900.

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 6:17 pm
by hertz
Thank you for noticing my story. I have sent a note to this site, that the article is on my www.wrightinracine.com



As a journalist, I have to ask, again, that we not post entire articles on this site. We can include a few sentences and, by all means, the link to the web site, but should not cut and paste the whole story. One reason has to do with copyrights. The other is that newspapers and magazines want you to go to their web site home page. The sponsorship you see on the home page as well as registering 'hits' or 'page reads' are the things that make the web sites economically viable.

Thank you.



Mark Hertzberg

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 2006 7:41 pm
by Guest
Mark,



Sometimes in order to see the article it asks you to log in and register. Personally, I do not want to do that for privacy reasons. Also, many times the article had expired and can no longer be viewed.



Posting the text of the article despite the copyright issues gains more exposure for you. So, why not chill out and let everyone enjoy the piece? It still has your name on it.



If you are looking to put up a stink about this then I will definitely not be buying any of your books.



O

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:27 pm
by JimM
What "stinks" is an inability to respect the wishes of someone who puts time and effort into their work. If you don't want to register, fine, then don't read it, but what makes you think you are entitled to minimize traffic to his site when even a REQUEST to honor his wishes is ignored?



If I don't want to register to see a link, I must not want to see it bad enough. I have never been asked to register at Marks site. Another argument for registration.....

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:28 pm
by Guest
JimM,



I

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 6:41 pm
by JimM
If true, yes that stinks.



I'm not sure that changes anything in most situations about respecting original sourcing of information on web links. I do believe in the free flow of information on the internet, but creators also deserve some degree of control over their work. I'm not a lawyer and don't really know much about proprietory rights on published works vis a vis the internet.



If you can link these stories without legal reprisal, have at it!



Thanks for not taking my reaction personally.

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:05 pm
by Guest
O,



I agree with you regarding Mark's demands of not posting an article on the site. There have been numerous times I've hit a link and something's happened with the article not being there, or I have to take the time to fill out a registration for the Des Moines Gazette or something like that. So long as a byline is present and appropiate credit is given to the author, I think that's reasonable to expect. Mark can sit on it for all I'm concerned.



Now, I assume from your message that you own a Wright house and have been asked in some way to contribute to a publication. I agree that the scenario you point out stinks. If you did the author a favor, in my book he should give back. You were wronged!



I also want to say thank you for making your property available for study. I would urge you to reconsider your position, though. Authors such as myself may in the end make some money if we're lucky, but I don't write for the money. The joy in this work is the work itself. Its exploring the houses, and the personalities behind them. Since Wright has arguably the most interesting personality in the 20th (and late 19th) century, there is always something interesting with his houses, beyond the wood and brick or cement.



By writing, we communicate with those desiring to know more. With McMansions popping out of every vacant lot now, people need to know more about Wright more than ever. We are not trying to take advantage of you for financial gain, that's for sure. I hope you reconsider your decision for the sake of scholary work.



EJ

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:19 pm
by jackless
EJ & Guest - so then you both think that piracy in all forms is acceptable? Piracy of music on the internet is OK as long as you give attribution to the artist? Piracy of movies likewise is acceptable? Any intellectual propety should be free for anyone to do anything with at any time?



What is it about the law and theft that you all do not understand? You seem to have the idea that if you want to steal something that's OK as long as it serves your own purpose.



I would hope that the moderator's of this site would dlete the first post and repalce it strictly with a link.

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:28 pm
by Wrightgeek
Dear "Guest"-



Under the cloak of anonimity, you take the liberty to take potshots at others on this forum without even having the credibility to identify yourself to those you are attacking. In my eyes, and I speak only for myself, that in itself diminishes the validity of your outbursts, regardless of their content.



If you aren't interested enough to register here or with other websites to explore their content, then obviously what they have to offer isn't very important to you. In the mean time, please spare the rest of us your ranting and raving. If you are so interested in protecting your privacy, then please keep your "private" thoughts to yourself.

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 2006 9:33 pm
by Guest
EJ,



If I understand it correctly, the author signs contracts with a publisher. Therefore the author/publisher is required to collect fees for use of his published copyrighted material under the terms of contract. Meanwhile, the person who gave the author the information for free gets absolutely nothing!



The only way around this legal issue is if the author pays the fee out of their own pocket so the owner who originally contributed the information to the author for free of charge can use the author

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:13 am
by Guest
Wrightgeek,



Take a look at the bottom of my post and you'll see my name. My name is EJ. Everyone else seems to have gotten it.



Next time, try reading the whole post before you go off on somebody.



Just a suggestion. :roll:





EJ

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 7:24 am
by Guest
O,



Well, I am sorry that you feel that way because of a bad experience. Despite laying blame on me (someone you've never dealt with) the power and choice is still with you whether to let others learn more about your corner of the Master's work.



For the sake of our common passion, I would urge you to reconsider for the future. Perhaps one good experience would help you.



EJ

Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 12:13 pm
by hertz
Re:It