John,
I would have replied sooner, but I had to look up "necrophagous." :)
It's an appropriate term, that's for sure! It just bugs me no end that
everyone, and worst of all the Taliesin Fellowship, is now trading on
Wright's name and plundering his vaults for cash, all done in the name
of---well, I'm not sure of what.
The wonderful _Town and Country_ magazine covers reinterpreted as neckties?
The red-square FLlW "chop" now a kitchen trivet?
And worst of all, selling off drawings (the Max Protech(?) sale) from the
vaults to raise operating cash, not to mention the thing Wright cherished
most of all (he was notoriously careless with his drawings, after all) his
land.
When Atelier started selling reproductions of Wright's furniture, I thought
it was a good thing, but after seeing the scandolous prices being commanded
for these pieces, I realized that people were making an awful lot of money
to satisfy some yuppie's no-nothing desire to have the "latest and greatest."
The fact that these pieces represented a particular man's life at a particular
time of his career, in a particular period in history, means nothing to these
over-compensated/under-educated boobs.
OK, enough yuppie-bashing...
There's more than enough blame to go around, starting with Olgivanna Wright
and the Fellowship. Their desire to maintain Wright's mythical status, while
all the while trading on his corpse, has only served to cheapen Wright's
contributions to design. I think much of this has to do with the fact that
almost no one in the Fellowship has been able to pay Wright the only fitting
tribute---CARRY ON HIS WORK. Of course, that's Wright's fault, as he could
never tolerate an equally-talented designer anywhere near himself.
Those talented enough to carry on knew enough to bail out before they, too,
became sycophantic disciples. Fay Jones, Alden Dow, and Laurie Virr (Melbourne)
are the only ones I can honestly name---there are surely others, but they are
few and far between.
John, as an apparent New Yorker, do you know Edgar Tafel? He seems to be one
of the few Taliesin Fellows who managed to maintain some sembelence of
objectivity about Wright. I've never seen his architecture, though, so I have
no idea if he has followed in Wright's path or not.
I'd really appreciate hearing anyone else's feelings on this topic of the
"adaptive reuse" of designs in commercial products.
Mark
I would have replied sooner, but I had to look up "necrophagous." :)
It's an appropriate term, that's for sure! It just bugs me no end that
everyone, and worst of all the Taliesin Fellowship, is now trading on
Wright's name and plundering his vaults for cash, all done in the name
of---well, I'm not sure of what.
The wonderful _Town and Country_ magazine covers reinterpreted as neckties?
The red-square FLlW "chop" now a kitchen trivet?
And worst of all, selling off drawings (the Max Protech(?) sale) from the
vaults to raise operating cash, not to mention the thing Wright cherished
most of all (he was notoriously careless with his drawings, after all) his
land.
When Atelier started selling reproductions of Wright's furniture, I thought
it was a good thing, but after seeing the scandolous prices being commanded
for these pieces, I realized that people were making an awful lot of money
to satisfy some yuppie's no-nothing desire to have the "latest and greatest."
The fact that these pieces represented a particular man's life at a particular
time of his career, in a particular period in history, means nothing to these
over-compensated/under-educated boobs.
OK, enough yuppie-bashing...
There's more than enough blame to go around, starting with Olgivanna Wright
and the Fellowship. Their desire to maintain Wright's mythical status, while
all the while trading on his corpse, has only served to cheapen Wright's
contributions to design. I think much of this has to do with the fact that
almost no one in the Fellowship has been able to pay Wright the only fitting
tribute---CARRY ON HIS WORK. Of course, that's Wright's fault, as he could
never tolerate an equally-talented designer anywhere near himself.
Those talented enough to carry on knew enough to bail out before they, too,
became sycophantic disciples. Fay Jones, Alden Dow, and Laurie Virr (Melbourne)
are the only ones I can honestly name---there are surely others, but they are
few and far between.
John, as an apparent New Yorker, do you know Edgar Tafel? He seems to be one
of the few Taliesin Fellows who managed to maintain some sembelence of
objectivity about Wright. I've never seen his architecture, though, so I have
no idea if he has followed in Wright's path or not.
I'd really appreciate hearing anyone else's feelings on this topic of the
"adaptive reuse" of designs in commercial products.
Mark