Frank Lloyd Wright’s Coonley House is Returning to Market
David
For sale: Coonley House
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 11815
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
I have this recurring dream of Ron Burkle and Joel Silver pairing up to rescue and restore the property - each manning a bulldozer to scrape the non-original houses off the property ...Roderick Grant wrote:One can only hope that the whole estate (including the properties sold off for development) can be reunited and restored to the Coonley family era ... though that's probably a foolish dream. Nothing else of the Oak Park era tops the original Coonley House, and few (built or not) match it.
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 11815
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
If the south wing isn't restored or (gulp!) demolished, it may be hard to convince anyone to pay $2M for the north half.
Last edited by Roderick Grant on Thu May 14, 2015 12:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
PrairieMod
- Posts: 494
- Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 12:40 pm
- Location: www.prairiemod.com
Acknowledging recent friction among neighbors of residences that become house museums, the fact that there are multiple owners of this property, the fact that the state has no money to do anything, let alone a governor that is a far cry from being preservation/archi-tourism minded, and the unbelievable amount of money it would take to put humpty-dumpty back together again...
...it would still be beyond amazing to see the Coonley estate restored back to its intended whole form a la what has been done at the D.D. Martin house.
Big dreams...
...it would still be beyond amazing to see the Coonley estate restored back to its intended whole form a la what has been done at the D.D. Martin house.
Big dreams...
PrairieMod
www.prairiemod.com
www.prairiemod.com
A side note…. I received my copy of Dean Eastman's self published book, and I highly recommend it. Just about everything you would like to know is covered from inception, to remodels, to Eastmen's restoration. Detailed notations and numerous photos document literally everything….. information about the Coonley's, original plans & construction specifications, Jen Jensen's landscaping plans, and on and on-as well as the playhouse and two houses by Drummond which were part of the original estate.
This wonderfully informative softcover contains over 300 pages of what is arguably Wright's most appealing residence (Taliesin and Fallingwater occupy places of their own!).
In the unlikely event of a total restoration, the date of significance should definitely be to the early Coonley era, and most importantly, the living room facade and bedroom wing terminus returned as Wright originally intended. I've always felt the addition of the pergola and both levels of doors at the living room unit destroyed the entire composition.
A must have for only $32.00.
This wonderfully informative softcover contains over 300 pages of what is arguably Wright's most appealing residence (Taliesin and Fallingwater occupy places of their own!).
In the unlikely event of a total restoration, the date of significance should definitely be to the early Coonley era, and most importantly, the living room facade and bedroom wing terminus returned as Wright originally intended. I've always felt the addition of the pergola and both levels of doors at the living room unit destroyed the entire composition.
A must have for only $32.00.
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 11815
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
You do realize, JimM, that it was FLW who made the alteration to the living room façade? Repent! I would disagree that the alteration "destroyed the entire composition," but it transformed the original almost beyond recognition. I do agree that the original design was better, that the pergola didn't add much, and the skinny balcony off the living room that replaced the planter is the sort of thing that sounds like a good idea, but is rarely used. But total destruction? Hardly.
The addition of the block at the south end, which became necessary only as a result of the division into two houses should definitely go. It's a lumpen thing.
Also, how does one find this book? H&I has never carried it.
The addition of the block at the south end, which became necessary only as a result of the division into two houses should definitely go. It's a lumpen thing.
Also, how does one find this book? H&I has never carried it.
Last edited by Roderick Grant on Thu May 14, 2015 12:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Roderick, Eastman attributes the alterations done in 1928 to Harry Robinson. I suppose there may or may not be a path to Wright. Even if done by Wright, think Rosenbaum!
Certainly "destroyed" is an exaggeration in terms of the entirety, but I can only judge to my eye, and Coonley has been considered a masterpiece in large part due to this….
[/img]
To my eye, this….
[/img]
…in a sense did destroy (er, I mean alter) the repose and proportions utterly, no matter who "executed" it…. and of course, only in my opinion.
Here's the source I found for the book:
http://wrightbook.blogspot.com/p/book-description.html
Certainly "destroyed" is an exaggeration in terms of the entirety, but I can only judge to my eye, and Coonley has been considered a masterpiece in large part due to this….
[/img]To my eye, this….
[/img]…in a sense did destroy (er, I mean alter) the repose and proportions utterly, no matter who "executed" it…. and of course, only in my opinion.
Here's the source I found for the book:
http://wrightbook.blogspot.com/p/book-description.html
-
Roderick Grant
- Posts: 11815
- Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:48 am
The alterations to the main façade of the original living room were done by FLW before the Coonleys sold the house, as documented in the 1925 publication of Wendingen of FLW's 1908 essay "In the Cause of Architecture" (pp 14-24), and by Thomas Heinz photographs of the Coonley children at play in his Newsletter.
The new living room for the south unit may have been done by Robinson. Quote the Eastman book. If he says the façade pictured was by Robinson, he has made a mistake; if he says it was the new addition, you have misread.
I would equate the altered Coonley façade to the 'evolved' design of the Taliesin living room. The T-I design was lyrically beautiful, while the T-III version is more polished, but to some eyes, a bit rambunctious by comparison.
The new living room for the south unit may have been done by Robinson. Quote the Eastman book. If he says the façade pictured was by Robinson, he has made a mistake; if he says it was the new addition, you have misread.
I would equate the altered Coonley façade to the 'evolved' design of the Taliesin living room. The T-I design was lyrically beautiful, while the T-III version is more polished, but to some eyes, a bit rambunctious by comparison.
Last edited by Roderick Grant on Thu May 14, 2015 12:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Roderick, hope you find the interest and time to read the following tome!
Not trying to get too OCD here, but I surely find this as interesting as anything else that pops up on the board, so please bear with me as I run a few more things by you. I indeed misinterpreted (rather than misread) the attached text (third paragraph). It does specifically refer to the original living room, but "the rest of the story" needed for context is located elsewhere, which did cause some confusion-not unusual with things Wright! BTW, I think the "Addition of a large sunroom" mentioned refers to what became the "new" living room when the estate was later subdivided.
There are photos taken in 1913 clearly showing lower level changes-but only the lower level, since the living room windows are still intact. Both level changes appear not to have been done at the same time. Photo evidence corroborates other text indicating Drummond made this change in 1912 along with the pergola across the terrace. There is also a perspective drawing by Drummond showing the pergola and lower doors, again, with the living room windows intact as shown in the 1913 photo. Interestingly, the perspective states "William Drummond, Architect", with no mention of Wright.
All that said…. I think Eastman must have it mostly correct if my take on it is right (photos pre-PhotoShop do not lie!). As told, the Coonley's originally commissioned Drummond for the lower doors and pergola and a later owner commissioned Robinson for the upper balcony, doors, south wing bedroom alterations, and "sun room" (later living room?). Wright is not mentioned in any of this. There's no reason to doubt the Coonley's would have contacted Wright, and your references might imply he gave the 1911-1912 revisions to Drummond for execution (Wright was quite busy about that time!). However, that does make the perspective interesting, perhaps he actually referred the Coonley's to Drummond?
I've always respected your insights and knowledge, and hope you get an opportunity to take a look at the book. Regardless, nothing about this issue detracts from the appreciation for Eastman compiling this documentary.
Re: Taliesin…to my mind, the appeal of T3 (more than T2) has always been tempered by the fact that it came to look exactly like what it essentially was, a laboratory rather than the cohesive conception of, say T1 (as cohesive as it was for a very brief time!). Yes, Wright never left any of his houses alone, they were buildings to be lived, evolve, etc, etc, and not usually considered "art" in a strict sense. As a hopeless purist beyond redemption, I tend to be drawn to that which has made Wright's masterpieces art in a strict sense.
Never been to Coonley, but to Taliesin more than a few times. The Taliesin is living room is obviously one of the most beautiful of interiors. But with almost all of Wright, in person it actually loses much of the exaggeration of scale found in photos. It's success is due in part to the fact it shares essentially what came before it in T1. I look at Coonley and Taliesin similarly, which prompted me to spend (way too much) time doing T1 in a SketchUp model. I've always wanted to view its totality in context rather than individual snapshots and as it appears today. Maybe Coonley's next!
[/img]
Not trying to get too OCD here, but I surely find this as interesting as anything else that pops up on the board, so please bear with me as I run a few more things by you. I indeed misinterpreted (rather than misread) the attached text (third paragraph). It does specifically refer to the original living room, but "the rest of the story" needed for context is located elsewhere, which did cause some confusion-not unusual with things Wright! BTW, I think the "Addition of a large sunroom" mentioned refers to what became the "new" living room when the estate was later subdivided.
There are photos taken in 1913 clearly showing lower level changes-but only the lower level, since the living room windows are still intact. Both level changes appear not to have been done at the same time. Photo evidence corroborates other text indicating Drummond made this change in 1912 along with the pergola across the terrace. There is also a perspective drawing by Drummond showing the pergola and lower doors, again, with the living room windows intact as shown in the 1913 photo. Interestingly, the perspective states "William Drummond, Architect", with no mention of Wright.
All that said…. I think Eastman must have it mostly correct if my take on it is right (photos pre-PhotoShop do not lie!). As told, the Coonley's originally commissioned Drummond for the lower doors and pergola and a later owner commissioned Robinson for the upper balcony, doors, south wing bedroom alterations, and "sun room" (later living room?). Wright is not mentioned in any of this. There's no reason to doubt the Coonley's would have contacted Wright, and your references might imply he gave the 1911-1912 revisions to Drummond for execution (Wright was quite busy about that time!). However, that does make the perspective interesting, perhaps he actually referred the Coonley's to Drummond?
I've always respected your insights and knowledge, and hope you get an opportunity to take a look at the book. Regardless, nothing about this issue detracts from the appreciation for Eastman compiling this documentary.
Re: Taliesin…to my mind, the appeal of T3 (more than T2) has always been tempered by the fact that it came to look exactly like what it essentially was, a laboratory rather than the cohesive conception of, say T1 (as cohesive as it was for a very brief time!). Yes, Wright never left any of his houses alone, they were buildings to be lived, evolve, etc, etc, and not usually considered "art" in a strict sense. As a hopeless purist beyond redemption, I tend to be drawn to that which has made Wright's masterpieces art in a strict sense.
Never been to Coonley, but to Taliesin more than a few times. The Taliesin is living room is obviously one of the most beautiful of interiors. But with almost all of Wright, in person it actually loses much of the exaggeration of scale found in photos. It's success is due in part to the fact it shares essentially what came before it in T1. I look at Coonley and Taliesin similarly, which prompted me to spend (way too much) time doing T1 in a SketchUp model. I've always wanted to view its totality in context rather than individual snapshots and as it appears today. Maybe Coonley's next!
[/img]