Wright Chat

[Roderick Grant]

Sculpture and painting were begat by architecture because initially they were not stand-alone art forms, but enhancements to buildings. Painting didn't become separated from architecture until the Renaissance, sculpture much earlier.

[PrairieMod]

Aren't cave paintings some of the earliest examples of human-created art we have?

Caves were obviously shelter, but there was no human-made "architecture" involved.

Would not the small effigies and fertility figures carved by neolithic humans qualify as sculpture--also possibly done while residing in a cave or other naturally occurring shelter?

I'm not so sure architecture came first...

Seems more like a statement an architect would make to puff the importance of their chosen vocation up a bit...
_________________
PrairieMod
www.prairiemod.com

[Rood]

[Rood]

[PrairieMod]

Rood--very good points--but the cave paintings were still ancient forms of artistic expression that in all likelihood pre-dated architecture...that was my thought when reading the "architecture begat" statements.
_________________
PrairieMod
www.prairiemod.com

[peterm]

http://www.visual-arts-cork.com/earliest-art.htm

"The first and oldest form of prehistoric creativity is rock art (cupule petroglyphs), which occurred throughout the world during the Lower Paleolithic. Chronologically, this was followed by engravings, sculpture (in stone, ivory, bone and wood), cave painting, relief sculpture, ceramic pottery and architecture. By the end of the Upper Paleolithic, only bronze and gold sculpture, along with other metallurgical crafts, remained to be developed during the Mesolithic and Neolithic periods. See also: 50 Oldest Works of Art."

Continuing:

"When Was Art First Created?

According to the latest paleo-archeological information, the oldest art was created by humans during the prehistoric Stone Age, between 300,000 and 700,000 years ago. The Stone Age epoch of ancient history is divided into three main eras, Paleolithic, Mesolithic and Neolithic. The Paleolithic period covers 98 percent of the period, and is therefore sub-divided into Lower, Middle and Upper. Here is a brief chronological timeline:

• Paleolithic Era (2,500,000 - 10,000 BCE)
A Hunter-Gatherer Culture
- Lower Paleolithic (2,500,000 - 200,000 BCE)
- Middle Paleolithic (200,000 - 40,000 BCE)
- Upper Paleolithic (40,000 - 10,000 BCE)"

So... What is the "mother art?" and I'm guessing that through all of this early humans were organizing sound and creating some sort of music...

Isn't it a chicken or egg conundrum?

[SDR]

Why does there have to be a "mother art" ? By not naming one, do we solve (or avoid) the chicken/egg problem ?


SDR

[peterm]

Because Frank Lloyd Wright said it was so?

[SDR]

Heh-heh. Well, the Old Man said a lot of things . . .

Architecture creates our largest works of art, yet the practitioner makes relatively little from the work. Architecture requires much in the way of patience, and delayed gratification, from its servants. Perhaps that's why some of them display their pent-up energies in words ?

But, as Mr Wright himself said, in the end "what a man does -- that, he has." I'd ignore about 75 per cent of the verbiage, and concentrate on the drawings and the structures.

SDR

[Laurie Virr]

Stephen:

I suggest the following as a possible interpretation of events:-

When Frank Lloyd Wright returned from Fiesole, he had in mind a dwelling for he and Mamah Borthwick that both internally and externally fused all he had learned from his time in Italy, and his journeys to Japan.

Taliesin I was a prodigious achievement, totally unlike anything he had essayed previously, so by its very nature it was an experiment. The stone masonry is impressive, but raw, and the coursing stereotyped.

The elaborate finials, miniature pagodas, were also experiments, and inappropriate, as FLLW acknowledged when he opted for a ‘cleaner’ roof over the kitchen area with Taliesin III. He saw it with fresh eyes. [I understand that the actual kitchen was moved to another part of the complex at that time, and the original space became the haunt of those more interested in the Gurdjieff movements than Architecture]. Such an event would have made it easier to dispense with the superstructure.

At this time also - 1925 - sculpture and ceramics were located at lower levels, so that rather than being viewed entirely against the skyscape, as were the finials, it was viewed with both the sky and the landscape as the backdrop.

The finials were removed from the rooftop, but their form was repeated in the trellises that run from the drafting room towards the carports. Yet again, these are at a lower level.

Study of the different stages of masonry construction embodied during the period 1911 thru 1925 suggests that the size of the individual stones for the later work are smaller than those employed earlier, and that the projections mirroring the quarry face are less pronounced.

What we refer to as experience is actually the act of making mistakes. The whole history of Taliesin, as you are well aware, was one of ceaseless experimentation. Without such mistakes it is arguable that such experimentation would not have been necessary.

I would suggest that one of the lessons Frank Lloyd Wright learned from all his experimentation was that sculpture could enhance his Architecture, but did he consider it any more than an adjunct?

[SDR]

Laurie:

Thank you for your cogent thoughts on these matters.

I maintain that form-making and sculpture are difficult to distinguish; as architects choose forms which are anything beyond what is strictly necessary to fulfill the functions dictated by the program, they are "making form" for its own sake -- are they not ?

As I have written previously, to me Taliesin represents an interesting contrast to his work up to that time -- if a curiously retrograde one, as I see it. The Coonley residence seems to me the nearest pertinent precedent, both as to scale and to form. I accept what many have written, that the ensemble, and perhaps the forms and details, at Taliesin may have been influenced by what Wright experienced in Italy. It would be interesting to see a collection of photos taken during the period that he was there, to support that contention.

I have to say I find the earliest iteration of Taliesin to be the purest and most cohesive of any -- judging by plans and photos only, of course. The comparison of roofscapes shown below will illustrate what I mean. The last photo before the two aerial shots is just one example of the ad-hoc reworking of that roofscape, brought on by one necessity or another -- and by Mr Wright's endless and restless enthusiasm for change and growth.

I cannot say I see an improvement in the later roofscape. The residence seems to have suffered the most, in fact. Maybe there was more than one lesson to be learned, as a result of almost fifty years of development ? Again and again we find that the reworking of a fresh and strong idea -- whether it be in auto design, furniture, apparel, movies, or architecture -- results in a less satisfying product than the original -- even when the re-dos are made by the same hand as the first !

I am more than glad that your first visit to Taliesin meant so much to you. Imagine how it might have felt to have seen it in its initial glory . . . ?

[Roderick Grant]

When PEG first approached FLW, without any resume at all, FLW told him that he designed his buildings to be experienced from a standing or sitting position; aerial views were of no interest to him. And by 'standing', I dare say he meant standing at 5'8" tall. What a roof looked like from a helicopter was of no importance to FLW. As for the alteration of Io's bedroom, judging it at that stage seems a bit hasty.

If you look at the bottom aerial, the roof over the loggia and adjacent part of the gallery is the one that was built, then rebuilt immediately afterward, because the first roof was in error: It could not be seen from the ground. The first roof is probably still under the existing one.