Wright Chat

[JimM]

[SDR]

Ah -- I see. Indeed, the diagonal members couldn't occur in the outer third or so of the width of the building, because of the shape of that "wooden corbel." But the cantilever is thus an extreme example, extending at least twice as far beyond the fulcrum as the distance from fulcrum to anchor -- the reverse of the formula often put forward as a standard ?

SDR

[Roderick Grant]

JimM, I think your analysis of the structure is right on. The underside of the house is completely non-structural.

SDR, what that extra notch in the spindle is, I cannot fathom. There are no electrical devices of any kind in the upper regions, nor anything of metal. I just don't know what's going on there.

Tom, not only did the former owner paint the interior orange, when he sold, he kept a tiny bit of the lot at the base of the drive and threatened to sell it separately, in effect coercing Jack and Jim to pay a premium for that extra tidbit of ground.

Deke, the reason Sturges is never open for tours is because it did open once in 1976 when Mayor Bradley declared a Frank Lloyd Wright Week and talked private FLW houses (Freeman, Ennis, Sturges, Millard ... but not Storer, which was then owned by the primal scream therapist) into opening their doors for tours. Jack and Jim thought there would be a few curious persons on Saturday, a few on Sunday, and that would be it. However, there were lines down the driveway, around the bend and down the street. Thousands tromped through the house for two days. Their property doesn't have the kind of landscaping layout that would be damaged by such an onslaught, but La Min was trampled from one end to the other. All four houses stopped letting anyone in after that.
Jack is always very polite when asked to open his house, but he always has an excuse for not doing so. I got in because I had Katherine Jacobs with me, and she wanted to see it. Katherine was regarded as FLW Royalty.

[JimM]

[jim]

And in at least one other detail - the wall cabinets shown on the plans just inside the door were not built there - but rather on the other side of the living room against the bedroom wall. This shows in various published photos of the house...and in a visit to the house in the early '80s when the owner let me look in the front door. Magical to say the least.
_________________
Jim

[Rood]

Owners Jim Bridges and Jack Larson were good friends of author Christopher Isherwood, who wrote often of them in his Diaries, which are now published. These quotes are from The Sixties: 1960-1969.

21 October 1967: "This afternoon, Jack and Jim have just called in great excitement because they have bought a house; 449 Skyway, which was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. I am almost sure this is the house which (Architect) Jim Charlton took me to see in 1948 when I first met him. In those days the roof kept leaking, despite everything the owner did to stop it ... and Wright is supposed to have answered his complaints by saying "Why don't you just relax and enjoy the house?" The place is in bad repair, and Jack and Jim have got it for only $60,000 with all the furniture, including the furniture which Wright had made for it."

22 December 1967: "Jack Larson and Jim Bridges have moved into their Frank Lloyd Wright house on Skyewiay (sic) and it is a very sacred shrine of art -- at least to Jack. Jim is prepared to work in the cellar, at least for now. Later there may be a crisis about opening up another window, and thus vandalizing the shrine.

1 January 1968: "We spent midnight last night with Jack and Jim in their beautiful home. Looking into the living room from the deck, it was exactly like a stage set -- in the sort of play in which the lights go up slowly to reveal an empty stage. I said this, and Don (Bachardy) commented with his typical ambiguity, "It'd be the sort of play which ends exactly as it begins."

1 April 1968: "Rain, rain, rain coming down harder and harder. Jack and Jim have got Leslie Caron coming to stay with them, and now their roof will be leaking again, and they'll have to drive out to the airport in all this s..t, poor bastards."


Larson and Bridges kindly showed the house to me and a friend in the mid-70's. I remember being startled by the thinness of the wooden walls ... an opening in the bathroom wall looked as though a carpenter had sawed a square section out of one board, then put it back with a hinge tacked to one side.

The two of them were awfully kind, however, even offering to introduce us to Isherwood ... saying, "He loves meeting young people ... men ... couples."

[pharding]

I would not take the spindles out. One at a given location and point in time may not be loaded due to building settlement and/or wood beam deflection, but some of those are working as intended.
_________________
Paul Harding FAIA Owner and Restoration Architect for FLW's 1901 E. Arthur Davenport House, the First Prairie School House in Chicago | www.harding.com | LinkedIn

[Tom]

I want my money back from the guy who taught me statics. Until now I would have thought this was physically impossible.

[Reidy]

"Skyewiay" really is the correct spelling. It's not the only cutesy Scottish name in the neighborhood.

Bridges and Larson and their house also show up in Leslie Caron's autobiography. They were friendly with Greta Garbo, too, and I like to think she's been to the house.

[Tom]

So what about the the short cantilevered ends of the house? Anybody figured out how that's framed?

[SDR]

With all due respect, I am having trouble accepting that the cantilever works as Jim describes. The idea that the further reaches of the cantilevered portion are light in weight is challenged by the bulk of "decorative" wood suspended below the main floor -- isn't it ? It would be possible to calculate that weight -- hundreds and hundreds of feet of 1x12 and 1x8 lumber. . .






Further, the 4-inch-thick floor and roof decks would seem to calculate as heavier per sq ft than conventional floor construction -- assuming that the combined weight of joists spaced, say, 24" o.c., supporting two layers of 3/4" material, exhibits less mass than the same area of solid 4" lumber -- the price paid for such wide structural bays ?

If the main diagonal were terminated before it reached up to the 4x12, the three terminal points of the two diagonal elements could be conceived as hinges -- and the entire construction would then act to thrust the end of the main beam outward (away from the chimney mass) and upward ! (Thus, the elaborately pinned end of the cantilevered beam ?) But, as drawn, that possibility is eliminated, and the entire soffit structure (labeled "bracket") becomes dead weight -- although supported by the masonry fulcrum element to the extent that the "toe" of the main diagonal presses firmly against the concrete . . . ?

Troubling. Yet, there it stands . . .

SDR

[SDR]

Then, again -- the solution I imagine above would only operate on the central three bays -- four of the eight cantilevered beams -- an even more lopsided solution than the one Wright (ever with an eye to formal effect) drew . . . ?

[Tom]

The only thing I can figure is that on the ends the cantilevered 4x12 drops down to let that 2x12 cross over at 90 degrees. There is a note that says "this beam abutts against concrete" I'm assuming this beam is one in a series that carries the side terrace and the entry/livingroom on the opposite side.

[SDR]

Mmmm. Among other mysteries, why is a full 4x12 used as a perimeter joist at the outer edges of the deck ? Also, I can't decipher the dashed lines in the second section, above . . .

S

[Tom]

Do you mean the dashed line running down the center of the main diagonal nailer?