[Info-vax] Completely OT: Frank Lloyd Wright

[Dirk Munk]

Paul Sture wrote:
> In article <cc3b1$5071cd6d$5ed43c14$31550 at cache1.tilbu1.nb.home.nl>,
>   Dirk Munk <munk at home.nl> wrote:
>
>> David Froble wrote:
>>>
>>> Any decent Architect works for a living, doing many assignments,
>>> possibly more than one at a time.  I haven't bothered to research the
>>> specifics, but I can guess that FLW designed many structures.
>>
>> Yes he did, from industrially produced kit houses to factories, houses
>> for the very rich and the Guggenheim museum.
>>
>>> It's also
>>> a good guess that not all were of the caliber that earned him his
>>> recognition.  Some could even be rather sub-standard.
>>
>> No, not to my knowledge. He did not like to make compromises in his
>> designs. All of his work has been documented, so you can check for yourself.
>
> But the buildings do suffer from what the Fallingwater web site refers
> to as "the effects of weather and time."  There comes a point when it
> may not be economically feasible to save a site.

Economic feasibility is one of the less important arguments when you're 
dealing with monumental buildings. The number one priority is to 
preserve the building and restore it if necessary. Let me give you an 
example. There is a British TV series about people building or restoring 
houses. In one episode we saw a man who had bought the ruin of a manor 
house. And when I say ruin, I mean ruin. There was nothing left of the 
building than crumbling outside and inside walls. No roof, no ceilings, 
no windows or doors, just a one meter thick layer of rubble in the 
interior. But never the less, it was a listed building. Was it 
economically feasible to restore it? Absolutely not. From an economic 
point of view the bulldozer would have been the right solution. But he 
did restore the building. All his plans needed approval from British 
heritage. He spent a fortune on stone masons, enormous oak beams etc. 
For the roof construction he used steel beams. That may sound strange, 
but in modern restoration it is allowed to show where parts of the 
building were completely replaced because they were missing. In the end 
this man was the proud owner of a beautifully restored manor house.

>
> I note that the Fallingwater supporters' current fund raising drive is
> for new windows.  When I looked at the site several years ago they were
> addressing structural flaws in the cantilevered parts, and IIRC it was
> closed to the public while this work was carried out.
>
> http://www.fallingwater.org/113/window-legacy-fund
>
> And yes, I am a keen fan of FLW's work and have been since we were
> introduced to it in an optional architecture course at school.
>
>>> To now declare
>>> every design he did an important work of art is rather ridiculous.
>>>
>>
>> Only if you assume he made designs that are sub-standard or can not be
>> distinguished from those from other architects.
>>
>>> On the other hand, to a developer money isn't everything, it's the only
>>> thing.
>>
>> Indeed. Restoring this house to its former glory, making sympathetic
>> improvements to modernize it, and you might have a house that is very
>> attractive to buyers with a sense for architecture and culture, and who
>> are willing to pay a bonus for that.
>
> My father was an architect and they do make mistakes, especially where
> the use of new and untested materials is involved.  My theory is that
> architects sometimes get carried away and tend to look at the big
> picture.

That is absolutely true. Throughout the ages many architects 
experimented with new materials and new building techniques. In the 
middle ages many cathedrals collapsed during construction. It is always 
left to later generations to deal with the technical problems. The 
cathedral in Cologne for instance was built between 1248 and 1880(!!). 
It has a permanent workshop with stone masons so they can replace 
crumbling stonework because they used soft limestone for the 
construction. Modern European architects like Corbusier also built 
houses with technical flaws. It doesn't stop us from preserving those 
buildings.

>
> I am still wary of flat roof construction in countries with a high
> rainfall as I saw the pain my father had had with one he put on his own
> house :-)
>