- - The original note follows - -
Newsgroups: alt.architecture
Path:
psuvm!news.cac.psu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!csus.edu!netcom.com!randolp
h
From: randolph@xxxxxxxxxx (Randolph Fritz)
Subject: Re: Frank Lloyd Wright?
Message-ID: <randolphCDAABI.ABt@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <25ljon$7qq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <25nqh6INNir8@xxxxxxx>
<m7uu77INN6rg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 08:30:53 GMT
Lines: 40
In article <m7uu77INN6rg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> petrilli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Christopher G. Petrilli) writes:
>I am basically of the opinion that other than a few of the remaining
>deciples of FLlW, there are no architects in this country that practice
>in anything resembling the "style" that Wright expoused. Perhaps that
>is what he inteded. I don't believe he ever wanted clones of him
>practicing (..how could the "Greatest architect of the past, present and
>future ever be duplicated? he might say). If the current trend in
>architecture is any indication of whether Wright was a lone genius or
>the intiate of a new "style," I would have to say the former. I believe
>there is more "bad architecture" (at least from a Wrightian perspective)
>being built now than ever before.
>
From Hugh Downs television interview of Wright, 5/17/53:
Downs: Do you feel that American architecture has progressed
generally over--well--the past several years.
Wright: No, I'm afraid it has not. I think that the effects have
been sought and multiplied and the "why" of the effect, the real
cause at the center of the life of the thing seems to have
languished. If honest seekers once mastered the inner principle,
infinite variety would result. No one would have to copy anybody
else. My great dissapointment--it always is--is to find, instead of
emulation, what I see as a wave of imitation.
Wright's opinion notwithstanding, I think that his ideas and issues
are still very much alive today. A short, sloppy summary:
1. Making aesthetically pleasing buildings and household items
through machine production (it is fun to wonder what Wright would
have done with nanotechnology).
2. Making effective use of new materials.
3. Integrating the car.
4. Designing liveable cities.
5. "Democratic" architecture--of, by, and for the common man. (And
Wright definitely included what we would now call low-cost
housing in this.)
Randolph
Newsgroups: alt.architecture
Path:
psuvm!news.cac.psu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!wupost!csus.edu!netcom.com!randolp
h
From: randolph@xxxxxxxxxx (Randolph Fritz)
Subject: Re: Frank Lloyd Wright?
Message-ID: <randolphCDAABI.ABt@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <25ljon$7qq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <25nqh6INNir8@xxxxxxx>
<m7uu77INN6rg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 1993 08:30:53 GMT
Lines: 40
In article <m7uu77INN6rg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> petrilli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Christopher G. Petrilli) writes:
>I am basically of the opinion that other than a few of the remaining
>deciples of FLlW, there are no architects in this country that practice
>in anything resembling the "style" that Wright expoused. Perhaps that
>is what he inteded. I don't believe he ever wanted clones of him
>practicing (..how could the "Greatest architect of the past, present and
>future ever be duplicated? he might say). If the current trend in
>architecture is any indication of whether Wright was a lone genius or
>the intiate of a new "style," I would have to say the former. I believe
>there is more "bad architecture" (at least from a Wrightian perspective)
>being built now than ever before.
>
From Hugh Downs television interview of Wright, 5/17/53:
Downs: Do you feel that American architecture has progressed
generally over--well--the past several years.
Wright: No, I'm afraid it has not. I think that the effects have
been sought and multiplied and the "why" of the effect, the real
cause at the center of the life of the thing seems to have
languished. If honest seekers once mastered the inner principle,
infinite variety would result. No one would have to copy anybody
else. My great dissapointment--it always is--is to find, instead of
emulation, what I see as a wave of imitation.
Wright's opinion notwithstanding, I think that his ideas and issues
are still very much alive today. A short, sloppy summary:
1. Making aesthetically pleasing buildings and household items
through machine production (it is fun to wonder what Wright would
have done with nanotechnology).
2. Making effective use of new materials.
3. Integrating the car.
4. Designing liveable cities.
5. "Democratic" architecture--of, by, and for the common man. (And
Wright definitely included what we would now call low-cost
housing in this.)
Randolph