Frank Lloyd Wright: Europe and Beyond [“Ahmanson Murphy fine arts imprint.”, Reprint 2020 ed.] 9780520341463

Citation preview

T H E

A H M A N S O N

F O U N D A T I O N

has endowed this imprint to honor the m e m o r y of F R A N K L I N

D.

M U R P H Y

who for half a century s e r v e d a r t s a n d letters, b e a u t y a n d l e a r n i n g , in equal measure by shaping with a brilliant devotion those institutions upon which they rely.

The publisher gratefully acknowledges the generous

contribution

toward the publication of this book provided by T h e G r a h a m F o u n d a t i o n f o r A d v a n c e d Studies in t h e Fine A r t s

and by T h e A r t B o o k E n d o w m e n t F u n d of t h e A s s o c i a t e s of t h e University of C a l i f o r n i a Press,

which is supported by a major gift from the Ahmanson

Foundation.

FRANK

LLOYD

WRIGHT

FRANK LLOYD

WRIGHT

EUROPE AND

Edited by

UNIVERSITY

OF

CALIFORNIA

PRESS

BERKELEY

LOS

ANGELES

LONDON

BEYOND

A n t h o n y Alofsin

University of California Press Berkeley and Los Angeles, California University of California Press, Ltd. London, England © 1999 by T h e Regents of the University of California Chapter 1 © 1999 by Anthony Alofsin Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Frank Lloyd Wright : Europe and beyond / edited by Anthony Alofsin. p.

cm.

"Ahmanson M u r p h y fine arts imprint." Includes bibliographical references and index. I S B N 0 - 5 2 0 - 2 1 1 1 6 - 2 (alk. paper) 1. Wright, Frank Lloyd, 1 X 6 7 - 1 9 5 9 — I n f l u e n c e . Architecture, Modern—20th century. NA737.W7F6785

2.

I. Alofsin, Anthony.

1999

720'.92—dc2i

99-10128 CIP

Printed in Singapore 9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

T h e paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standards for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, A N S I Z 3 9 . 4 8 - 1 9 8 4 .

To Bruno Zeui,

lifelong protagonist for an architecture of democracy

CONTENTS

Acknowledgments

ONE

W R I G H T , I N F L U E N C E , A N D T H E W O R L D AT L A R G E Anthony

TWO

Alofsin

i

WRIGHT AND JAPAN Margo Stipe

THREE

ix

24

KINDRED SPIRITS: H O L L A N D , W R I G H T , A N D 45

Mariette van Stralen

FOUR

W R I G H T A N D ITALY: A Bruno Zevi

FIVE

RECOLLECTION

66

W R I G H T A N D ITALY: T H E P R O M I S E OF O R G A N I C Maristella

Casciato

76

ARCHITECTURE

WIJDEVELD

SIX

USEFUL H O S T A G E : C O N S T R U C T I N G

WRIGHT

IN S O V I E T R U S S I A A N D F R A N C E Jean-Louis

SEVEN

Cohen

W R I G H T A N D G R E A T BRITAIN Andrew Saint

EIGHT

100

121

W R I G H T AND SOUTH A M E R I C A Alberto Sartori

NINE

147

T O W A R D S A N O R G A N I C A R C H I T E C T U R E IN M E X I C O Keith Eggener

TEN

WRIGHT'S

166

BAGHDAD

MinaMarefat

Notes

184

215

List of Contributors Photo Credits Index

269

267

265

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

T h e preparation of this book was made possible in part by a grant from the Graham Foundation for the Visual Arts. M y thanks to the Museum of Modern Art, N e w York, and the Society of A r chitectural Historians for sponsoring the symposium in April 1994 that led to this publication, and to the participants in the symposium. Numerous individuals were helpful in diverse ways during the preparation of the book. I would like to thank Dr. Christiane Crasemann Collins, Dr. Herman van Bergeijk, and Bart Lootsma. At the University of California Press, Deborah Kirshman, fine arts editor and director of development, Rose Vekony, senior editor, and Steve Renick, art director, helped realize this book. Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer, Margo Stipe, Oscar Muñoz, and Indira Berndtson of the Frank Lloyd Wright Archives, Elizabeth Dawsari of the Taliesin Associated Architects Archive, and other members of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation were particularly generous in their assistance. Angela Giral, Avery Librarian of Columbia University, and Micheline Nielsen of the University of Pennsylvania Fine Arts Library provided much-appreciated help. Thanks are also due to David Dibble, Anne Dibble, C. Jos Biviano, Mary Beth Mader, and Marcia Maria Workman. Kathryn E. Holliday, Research Intern in the Graduate School, University of Texas at Austin, deserves special appreciation: this was the first book she helped publish, which meant learning not only the challenges of editing, but also what is involved in bringing ideas into reality. A fellowship from the Graduate School of the University of Texas at Austin provided the financial support that allowed her to contribute so significantly to this project. Finally, the authors of these essays deserve the most thanks for their protracted efforts and literary labors.

ONE: AND

WRIGHT, THE

WORLD

INFLUENCE, AT

LARGE

Anthony

Alofsin

I rank Lloyd W r i g h t and his work are icons of m o d e r n American architecture. F e w Americans have not heard of the G u g g e n h e i m M u s e u m or Fallingwater. Wright's portrait has appeared on a U.S. postage stamp; his personal life reads like a novel and has been made into an opera. B u t despite his f a m e and his status as America's most celebrated architect, w e are only beginning to understand h o w his ideas were dispersed and the impact his architecture made throughout an active practice that spanned from 1896 to 1 9 5 9 . Although the culturally adept may k n o w of the revolution in domestic architecture associated with Wright's early w o r k around C h i c a g o and O a k Park in his Prairie period, they often overlook the use of Wright's design ideas in the housing b o o m and the expansion of the American suburb after World War II, to cite just one example of our incomplete grasp of his impact. D u r i n g the most productive period of his architectural practice, beginning in the m i d - i 940s, Wright's organic architecture infiltrated the ranch style house; his idiom informed the splitlevel houses of the 1950s and 1960s; and his ideas intertwined with those of other American architects w h o tried to define m o d e r n life through architecture. T h e popular press contributed to the powerful impact of Wright's architecture in the 1950s. Articles on Wright in Time and Life magazines and in the massmarket h o m e design magazines, such as House Beautiful and House and

Garden,

disseminated Wright's ideas to the very heart of the American public, far beyond the limits of the architectural press that had often featured his work. 1 As a child in the 1950s I saw my parents studying Wright's latest w o r k in House

Beautiful,

and I remember their search in our h o m e t o w n of M e m p h i s for the architects most sympathetic to Wright's ideas. His w o r k seemed to m e as natural and appropriate as the Eames furniture in our house seemed normal; the pioneering roles of these masters of modern design escaped m e until my college years. A f -

I 1

ter Wright's death in 1 9 5 9 his reputation took one of its cyclical dips, but by the mid 1980s, as postmodernism in architecture waned, W r i g h t became a subject of interest again, as evident not only in the scholarly reconsideration of his life and work but also in the virtual industry of picture books and artifacts ranging f r o m key rings to calendars. His furniture, art glass windows, and some four hundred buildings that remain have steadily increased in commercial value despite market fluctuations.2

This revival returns us to the problematic question of Wright's i m -

pact on American culture. Does the legacy of his work represent a new source of merchandising or a call back to the basic issues of architecture and democracy? If he was such a towering genius, w h y did he not make an even greater mark on American architecture? T h e penetration of Wright's ideas into American architecture constitutes what we casually consider to be his influence. Influence, however, normally entails three basic processes: imitation, transformation, and parallelism. Imitation implies some attempt to copy, usually relying on the external appearances of objects. Transformation suggests an effort to move beyond making copies to altering either appearance or the meanings underlying forms. Parallelism occurs w h e n objects that appear similar have independent origins. Although the processes of influence can be conscious, most often they are unconscious and open to misinterpretation. These three modes of influence played out through Wright's w o r k not only in his homeland but also around the globe. In some ways his work is so well k n o w n in the United States that familiarity blinds us to a deeper insight into his impact on American life; the effects are so broad that they have simply been ignored. Wright's role in American architecture is so large that decades of study may be required to fully grasp its complexity. Moreover, the impact of his apprentices and students w h o went on to set up their o w n practices remains incompletely explored. This collection of essays looks not at the United States—the context usually associated with W r i g h t — b u t around the globe, from Japan to Great Britain and from France to Chile, as well as to M e x i c o , Russia, and the Middle East. Interwoven in these essays are stories of champions and critics, of books and exhibitions, and of the transmission and transformation of ideas through which Wright's work came to the world.

Historians and critics have traditionally pointed to Wright's impact in G e r m a n y around 1 9 1 0 as a key factor in the evolution of the M o d e r n M o v e m e n t . T h e canonical v i e w used to be that Wright's famous publications of 1 9 1 0 — 1 9 1 1 , printed in Berlin by the Wasmuth Verlag, had an immediate and dramatic influence on G e r m a n architects and the rest of the European avant-garde. E v e r y standard architectural history credits these publications—the Ausgeführte Bauten und Entwürfe von Frank Lloyd Wright, a two-folio monograph of Wright's buildings and designs; and the similarly titled Frank Lloyd Wright: Ausgeführte Bauten, a small picture b o o k

8. Sonderheft der Architektur des XX. Jahrhunderts

Frank Lloyd Wright Chicago

Verlegt bei lirnst Wasmuth A.-CL, Berlin

1911

Diese deutsche Ausgabe ist nur in f:uropa verkäuflich.

Figure 1.1 Cover of Frank Lloyd Wright:

Figure 1.2 Ausgeführte

Bauten

(Berlin: Ernst Wasmuth, 1911), published for American distribution.

Cover of Frank Lloyd Wright, der Architektur

Chicago: 8.

des XX. Jahrhunderts

Sonderheft

[ 8 t h special

edition of architecture of t h e t w e n t i e t h century] (Berlin: Ernst W a s m u t h , 1911), published exclusively for European distribution.

o f executed w o r k — w i t h this seminal role, particularly vis-á-vis Walter Gropius and Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. 3 K u n o Francke, a professor at Harvard, is said to have been the impetus for these publications, and their impact was supposedly reinforced by an exhibition of Wright's work held in Berlin. These standard views nicely demonstrate the complexities of influence. Our notion of Wright's influence in Germany came about by one historian repeating the accounts of another without bothering to check if they had any factual basis. Indeed, archival and documentary research has shown them to be a series of myths. 4 The widespread impact of the Wasmuth publications, particularly the f o lios, is dubious in light of their limited distribution in Europe; they were a vanity printing, paid for by Wright, with only i oo copies of the folios and 3,900 copies of an inferior edition of the picture book (or Sonderheft, as Wright called it then) reserved for a European audience, while Wright retained another 900 and 5,100 copies respectively for his American audience (Figs. 1 . 1 and 1.2). M o r e -

F i g u r e 1.3 Studio of Frank Lloyd Wright, Oak Park, Illinois, 1898. From VolneSmery

4 ( 1 9 0 0 ) : 178.

over, K u n o Francke was not the key player in the Wasmuth affair; Wright's c o n nection appears to have been B r u n o M o h r i n g , the eminent architect, city planner, and Wasmuth editor w h o had visited Wright's office in 1904 but missed Wright. N o r is there any evidence of an exhibition open to the general public; M o h r i n g simply lectured on Wright's work and showed a small selection of drawings one evening in February 1 9 1 0 to an architectural club in Berlin. Decades later Mies and Gropius would recall an "exhibition," but this lecture is the only documented showing of Wright's work in G e r m a n y at that time. T h e realities of the Wasmuth affair do not contradict the v i e w that Wright's work began to be disseminated in E u r o p e after 1 9 1 0 . Otto Wagner showed a copy of the folio monograph to his students in Vienna in 1 9 1 1 and proclaimed W r i g h t a paragon worthy of study. Although Le Corbusier would deny that he k n e w of Wright at the time, he had obtained a copy of the Sonderheft for his mentor A u guste Perret during World War I. Others w h o saw the publications, including the young Austrians Rudolph Schindler and Richard Neutra, would work for W r i g h t in the late 1 9 1 0 s and 1920s. To understand the influence of the publications on these and other figures, however, w e need to look more closely at h o w the i m ages were transmitted, assimilated, and finally interpreted (or misinterpreted) in terms of both intellectual response and built works. Rather than looking closely, many historians have tended to rely on simple visual analogies that reduce the phenomenon of making architecture to a crude transitivity: if A looks like B , then B has influenced A .

Figure 1.4 Detail of stork relief and floor plan, studio of Frank Lloyd Wright, Oak Park, Illinois, 1898. From Volne Smery 4 (1900): 177.

Europeans learned about Wright by other means as well, and these also set the stage for his influence. O n e unexpected source is the avant-garde C z e c h journal Volne Smery, published in Prague, whose editors included Jan Kotera, a f o r m e r student of Wagner's and a young leader of the Czech modern movement. In 1900, the journal featured an article on architecture in America by a m e m b e r of the avant-garde Manes G r o u p w h o had traveled in the United States; he reported that Louis Sullivan was the emerging modernist, and although he did not m e n tion Wright, the article included two images of his studio in O a k Park (Figs. 1.3 and 1.4). 3 Reproduced from the Architectural Review

(Boston), these may be the

first images of Wright's work to appear anywhere in Europe. In 1 9 0 4 the noted Viennese critic M a x Dvorak referred to Volne Smery's illustrations of Wright's work, also pointing out that American architecture had been exhibited at the Prague M o d e r n Gallery/'

\

Far more significant than this early reference was the dissemination of Wright's ideas through Dutch architects in the 1 9 1 0 s . Hendrik Petrus Berlage was Wright's first and most important early champion. A major pioneer of the Dutch m o d e r n movement, Berlage visited America in 1 9 1 1 and saw several of Wright's buildings but missed meeting the architect. Returning to Europe, he gave three lectures in Z u r i c h on American architecture in w h i c h Wright's Larkin C o m p a n y Administration Building and the D a r w i n Martin House, both in Buffalo, figured prominently. T h e lectures, which immediately appeared in Dutch and in G e r m a n language Swiss publications, stimulated the interest of young Europeans, establishing a critically important " D u t c h C o n n e c t i o n " between W r i g h t and Holland and sensitizing Swiss architects and engineers to Wright's ideas. 7 Several y o u n g Dutch architects even studied Berlage's copy of Wright's Wasmuth folios; chief among them was Jan Wils, w h o learned presentation techniques by copying the folio's rendered trees and perspectives (Fig. 1.5). 8 While the Dutch initiated the critical discourse about Wright in the 1 9 1 0 s , his work and ideas were ignored in G e r m a n y until the 1920s, w h e n they would play an important role in G e r m a n debates about modernism. In the years leading up to these debates a series of young European architects sought W r i g h t out, and

Figure 1.5 (opposite) Design for a pavilion in the municipal park, Groningen, 1917. Jan Wils, architect. (NAI 012212) Figure 1.6

Kameki Tsuchiura (left), Richard Neutra (center), and Wright at Taliesin, 1924. From Heinrich de Fries, Frank Lloyd Wright: Aus dem Lebenswerke Architekten

eines

(Berlin: Ernst Pollak, 1926).

several came to work with him at Taliesin, in Wisconsin. T h e European invasion of Wright's office began with the arrival of the Czech Antonin Raymond, w h o went to work for Wright in 1 9 1 6 . H e had studied at the Technical College of Prague, where Kotera held a position similar to that of Otto Wagner in Vienna, training a generation of modern architects. Although Kotera had seen buildings by W r i g h t in 1 9 0 4 , w h e n he came to America for the St. Louis World's Fair, R a y m o n d appears to have learned of Wright's work only after arriving in the United States. In 1 9 1 9 he went with Wright to work on the Imperial Hotel in Tokyo and then remained in Japan to establish his o w n office in 1 9 2 0 . 9 T h e Austrian Rudolph Schindler worked for Wright from 1 9 1 8 through 1 9 2 1 . " ' In D e c e m b e r 1 9 1 9 , while in Japan, W r i g h t sent Schindler to California to oversee his practice there and to work on the Barnsdall House. After Schindler's departure from Wright's domestic office, his Austrian friend Richard Neutra arrived. Neutra had met Schindler in 1 9 1 2 and k n e w of Wright's w o r k through the Wasmuth folios, which he saw in Vienna (Fig. 1.6). In 1 9 2 3 Werner M . Moser, a m e m b e r of a famous family of Swiss architects, came to work for W r i g h t at Taliesin; upon his return to Switzerland five years later he became a founding m e m ber of the Congres Internationaux d'Architecture M o d e r n e ( C I A M ) .

At times Wright's Wisconsin atelier took on the air of an extended family of international architects and their spouses: in July 1 9 2 4 W r i g h t entertained Richard and D i o n e Neutra, Werner and Sylva Moser, and K a m e k i Tsuchiura and his wife, N o b u , from J a p a n . " This soirée preceded the Neutras' move toTaliesin that O c tober and the subsequent arrival of Erich Mendelsohn, for w h o m Neutra had worked in 1 9 2 1 - 2 2 . 1 2 Despite the prior arrival of all these young Europeans, W r i g h t w e l c o m e d Mendelsohn as "the first European to come and seek him out and truly find him." Indeed, Mendelsohn, w h o had learned of Wright from Neutra, was the first famous German architect to meet the master. 13 Mendelsohn had recently completed his Einstein Tower in Potsdam ( 1 9 1 7 - 2 1 ), and his office was one of the most successful in Berlin. Mendelsohn became Wright's most distinguished architectural connection to Europe in the m i d - i 9 2 0 s . T h e i r meeting reawakened interest about W r i g h t in Germany and made W r i g h t more aware of European developments. Mendelsohn published an early appraisal of W r i g h t in which he described the intimate angularity and abstraction of Wright's work as a synthesis of expressionist tendencies. 1 4 Subsequent articles stimulated a new round of publications and drew additional visitors.' 3 In another reawakening of G e r m a n interest in Wright, Wasmuth reissued a reduced edition of Wright's folio monograph in 1 9 2 4 , apparently without his permission. T h e original Wasmuth folios of 1 9 1 0 - 1 1 were out of date and out of print. Meanwhile, two books in preparation, one by the Dutch architect and editor Hendricus Theodorus Wijdeveld and the other by the G e r m a n architect and writer Heinrich de Fries, promised a more current treatment. W r i g h t played the authors against each other as a means of disseminating his work, and he used their interest in his architecture to get his designs published in Europe, often long before they appeared in the United States. (Indeed, several were never published there in his lifetime.) As a result, European modernists saw a new version of Wright's modernism, while Americans relied on memories from the Prairie period, if anything. Wijdeveld's major Dutch publication came out in 1 9 2 5 as The Life-Work of the American Architect Frank Lloyd Wright. It consisted of most of the articles that had appeared in seven consecutive special issues of the journal Wendingen, which Wijdeveld edited. T h e b o o k , which became k n o w n by the journal's title, marked a high point of interest in Wright; he later said it was his favorite publication of his work (Fig. 1.7)."' W r i g h t admired Wendingen despite the mildly critical contribution to the volume by J . J . P. O u d , a leading exponent of the N e w Objectivity—the hyperrational w i n g of the M o d e r n M o v e m e n t — w h o saw Wright's influence in Europe as "a less happy one." For all its " e x o t i c peculiarities," O u d wrote, the simplicity of motifs, expression of structure, and integration with its site made Wright's work immediately c o n v i n c i n g — t o the extent that it had become too influential on the modern developments in Europe. Architects seduced by Wright's w o r k were emulating f o r m — i n this case W r i g h t ' s — o v e r function. Wright's influence

was consequently weakening the role of Cubism, which had developed parallel with his work but in complete independence of him. 1 7 O u d had defined the central problem of Wright's influence on Europe: images of his architecture c o m mingled with distinct European developments, blurring the differences between them. W r i g h t ignored this assessment, as did historians w h o subsequently replicated the myth of Wright's influence in Europe without alluding to its problematic nature. O u d also identified another problem: W r i g h t had never absolutely rejected the past, as the most ardent European modernists did. Speaking of both W r i g h t and the Italian futurist Sant'Elia he noted, " I n architecture the old f o r m element was never annihilated, and the emerging products of modern design were always a change of image and an abstraction rather than the creation of shapes." 1 8 O u d was entirely correct in perceiving Wright's obsession with abstraction, w h i c h W r i g h t termed "conventionalization," with the " o l d f o r m element" emanating from nature and the primary forms of architecture, particularly those still to be found in the non-Western cultures of Japan and the Maya. H e saw no need to invent new shapes w h e n nature and " p u r e " cultures uncontaminated by E u r o pean values contained the raw material for an infinite variety of expressions. B y the m i d - i 9 2 0 s the Dutch painter T h e o van Doesburg, a protagonist of neoplasticism, identified W r i g h t exclusively with m o d e r n developments in the United States. His opinions summarized those of many critics. O n the one hand he consistently appreciated Wright's innovations from the turn of the century, noting that among leading European architects W r i g h t provided a "constructive conscience," that he helped create a new architecture based on contemporary materials, and that he was one of the first to use reinforced concrete appropriately. 19 O n the other hand, his influence on G e r m a n architects resulted in an " i m itation of the outer effect" that was fatal to innovation. Furthermore, summing up Wright's recent work, van Doesburg saw W r i g h t as completely ignorant of n e w developments in the plastic arts in central E u r o p e and as having returned to "rustic, decorative building." 2 0 H e observed that by 1 9 2 7 Wright's influence, so unmistakable ten years earlier, had not been seen for a long time; its complete absence at the Werkbund housing exhibition in Stuttgart was strong proof of its eclipse. 21 B u t in fact W r i g h t may have wanted to show the Germans his approach to low-cost housing on their o w n soil. That same year he designed five flat c o n crete roofs, presumably for houses to be built in Frankfurt am Main; w e k n o w little else about the project. 2 2 Nevertheless, by 1 9 2 9 , w h e n familiarity with Wright's w o r k of the 1 9 1 0 s and 1920s had g r o w n in Europe, van Doesburg caustically stated that W r i g h t "has fallen into the most barbaric decorativism (Midway Restaurant, Chicago; Maison Millard, Pasadena, California etc. etc.) and archaism, with no significance whatsoever for the elementaristic architecture of our time."

23

Van Doesburg had pinioned Wright's weakness from the European perspective, condemning the persistent use of ornament. Ironically, the "archaism" that

FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT A U S DEM L E B E N S W E R K E E I N E S A R C H I T E K T E N

HERAUSQtGEntK VOK

H. DE F R I E S

1926 VERLAG ERNST POLLAK, BERLIN W15

Figure 1.7 (above left)

had fostered Wright's "barbaric decorativism" was stimulated by Wright's travels

Portion of title page, H. Th. Wijdeveld,

to Europe in 1909—10, when he encountered the primitivist forms of the late Se-

ed., The Life-Work of the

American

Architect Frank Lloyd Wright (Santpoort, Holland: C. A. Mees, 1925; repr. New

launched new explorations in his ornament. While Wright continued to inte-

York: Horizon Press, 1965).

grate ornament into his experiments in construction, the major currents of the

Figure 1.8 (above right)

tions heaped on Wright had long been leveled at the Viennese, as if ornament and

Title page, Heinrich de Fries, Frank Lloyd Wright: Aus dem Lebenswerke Architekten

cession in Vienna. 2 4 This contact confirmed his interest in archetypal forms and

eines

(Berlin: Ernst Pollak, 1926).

M o d e r n Movement in Europe saw ornament as absolute decadence; the castigaconstruction were antithetical. In Germany, meanwhile, Heinrich de Fries's Frank Lloyd

Wright: Aus

dan

Lebeuswerkc cines Arcliitcktcn (From the life work of an architect; Fig. 1.8) came out in 1 9 2 6 , the first new G e r m a n book on W r i g h t in sixteen years. In it de Fries attempted to show that Wright's opening of interior spaces made him modern. H e also assessed Wright's recent work, seeing in a speculative development for Lake Tahoe a "unity of landscape and water, of solid and moveable building, of air, earth, sun, plants, people and flowers" brought to poetic heights. H e defended this design and the grandiose project for D o h e n y Ranch, in Los Angeles, against accusations that they were fantasies, asserting that visionary schemes were a proper

10

|

ANTHONY

ALOFSIN

domain of all artists.2n At the same time de Fries pointed out what many critics considered a limitation of Wright's work: his designs were essentially for an elite class, to w h i c h Wright himself apparently belonged. This observation reflects the intense social consciousness that was part of the European debate on modernism. Ultimately, however, de Fries j u d g e d Wright to be not only a socially conscious architect, who, like the European modernists, was concerned with problems of minimum human requirements, but also an architect of nature, whose preoccupation with

space, plants, and water led to a higher spiritual goal. O n e of the reviews of de Fries's Aus dem Lebenswerke highlighted some of these issues. Another review appeared in the Frankfurter Zeitung in D e c e m b e r 1 9 2 6 , proof that the debate about Wright had expanded from the architectural press to the daily newspapers. W r i g h t kept a copy of that review in one of his scrapbooks; whether he was aware of its content is not known. Written by Grete Dexel, the w i f e of the art critic Walter Dexel, it reflected the social consciousness of European modernists. Dexel declared that Wright's open letter in Wendingen, " T o M y European C o - W o r k e r s , " said little, that de Fries was overenthusiastic, that t h e T a h o e and D o h e n y projects catered to the wealthy elite, and that W r i g h t was aligned with class interests that made his work strongly antisocial. " W e all k n o w that Frank Lloyd W r i g h t has decisively influenced the European building of today. S o m e of his country houses (villas) and ground plans are found in every b o o k on new architecture and shown to us in slides in every pertinent lecture. Nevertheless, Wright's work is also not by a long shot understood yet by the better informed." 2 6 It is not surprising that Europeans questioned Wright's commitment to a social program during the 1920s. W h e n they saw illustrations of his project for the hotel and resort San Marcos-in-the-Desert, they assumed W r i g h t was designing exclusively for a leisure class. Their critiques demonstrate h o w European m o d ernists understood and misunderstood Wright's architecture. Misunderstood were Wright's continuing efforts—even in projects for the wealthy elite, like the Barnsdall House and D o h e n y R a n c h — t o find solutions to economical middle-class housing. D e Fries published examples of the Textile B l o c k houses, including the Barnsdall House, but overlooked the system's potential uses in mass housing. H e also failed to grasp the extent to which Wright, an artist arguing for democratic principles in society, was a misfit in the middle-class mainstream of America. Finally, it was difficult for Europeans to realize that the provision of delight in architecture was in fact part of Wright's social program. O n the other hand, they could well understand Wright's vision of social transformation as not merely the expressed coordination of technology (the machine and the materials of c o n struction) and society but as a spiritual transformation. Wright's ideas about the future recalled the manifestoes of the avant-garde and the Bauhaus before 1 9 2 2 in particular; he called for a renovation of the soul, not merely of the building trades. Another v i e w of W r i g h t came from A d o l f Behne, a German art historian and commentator on the early M o d e r n Movement. In a study written in 1923 and published in 1 9 2 6 as Der moderne Zweckbau, B e h n e drew on Wright's essays and designs that appeared in the Architectural Record of 1908 and on contemporary perceptions of Wright. H e noted that Wright had made two particularly important contributions: a free plan of balanced spaces emanating from functional considerations of comfort, quiet, and clarity; and an emphasis on horizontality, which made houses appear a part of the streets on which they were situated. B e y o n d Berlage, Otto Wagner, and also Alfred Messel (whom Behne cited with reservation), Wright provided the first real breakthrough toward a sachlich, or objective, plan. B e h n e

F i g u r e 1.9 Exhibition installation, "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect," State Historical Library, Madison, Wisconsin, October 1930. Drawings and models of recent projects, including a sample textile block (center).

(FLWA 3 0 0 0 . 0 0 0 3 )

also noted the architects w h o m he perceived as influenced by Wright: in G e r many, Peter Behrens, Gropius, Mendelsohn, and Mies van der Rohe; in Holland, Oud, Wils, Robert v a n ' t Hoflf, and W. Greve; and in Switzerland, Le Corbusier. T h e influences affected the designs of elevations more than the floor plans, B e h n e remarked, because Wright's floor plans had only recently become understood. 2 7 At the same time, like most commentators, B e h n e saw in Wright what he wanted to see: flat roofs and no ornament. B u t W r i g h t mixed the use of flat roofs and pitched roots, and ornament remained essential to all his designs. B e h n e also read into Wright's plans, with their asymmetrical organization, a fluidity of lifestyle not borne out by the actual fixity of Wright's interiors, particularly in regard to his built-in furniture. 2 8 Perhaps most telling was Behne's inclusion of the skyscraper design for the San Francisco Call, redrawn from Wright's original. A trilingual French, G e r m a n , and English caption gives the project a date of 1 9 2 0 and identifies it in French as a project for a house in the f o r m of a tower but in G e r man as a design for a skyscraper. In fact the project for the newspaper's building dates from 1 9 1 3 and was one of Wright's most Secessionist designs, belonging to the early experimental phase of his work following his return from Europe. 2 9 Since the Secessionist idiom would have been anathema to Behne, he re-visioned the project as more objective and of a later date.

Figure 1.10 Exhibition installation, "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect," State Historical Library, Madison, Wisconsin, October 1930. Model for Richard Lloyd Jones House (center), relief detail for the Imperial Hotel (upper left), perspective drawings for the Doheny Ranch project (left), and perspective for the A. D. German Warehouse (right). (FLWA 3000.0002)

T h e critical debates about Wright in Germany and Holland moved into a broad European f o r u m in 193 1 with the first major retrospective of his work. Whereas the purported exhibition of Wright's work in G e r m a n y in 1 9 1 0 was actually a rather small event lasting only an evening, the 193 1 show provided an important reference point for his German audience and for architects and critics in other countries, although it had originated in the United States. T h e exhibition opened in 1 9 3 0 at the Wisconsin State Historical Library in Madison, only a few miles from Wright's home atTaliesin (Figs. 1.9 and 1.10). There it demonstrated Wright's accomplishments to his fellow citizens, many of w h o m had disapproved of the unorthodox architect. T h e exhibition then went to N e w York, Milwaukee, and Eugene, O r e g o n , before traveling to Europe, w h e r e it appeared in several c o u n tries and under variations of the title "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , Architect," from M a y to October 193 1 . T h e first European venue of Wright's 1 9 3 1 international exhibition was the Stedelijk M u s e u m in Amsterdam. Wijdeveld, the publisher of Wright's works in the journal

Wendiiigcn

and collator of his

Life-Work

monograph, organized the

exhibition, arranging all the details, from designing a striking poster to installing his daughter, Ruscha, as the ticket taker (Fig. 1 . 1 1 ) . This devotion arose from the immense bond Wijdeveld felt with Wright, w h o m he saw as a kindred spirit ca-

F i g u r e 1.11 Exhibition, "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect," Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam, May 1931. H.Th. Wijdeveld designed the installation; his daughter Ruscha Wijdeveld appears here at the ticket counter. (FLWA 3 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 2 )

F i g u r e 1.12

(opposite)

Exhibition installation, "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , Architect," Prussian Academy of Fine Art, Berlin, 1931. Model of St. Mark's-in-the-Bouwerie (center) flanked by images including the Larkin Building, Yahara Boat Club, and Robie H o u s e — a l l newly redrawn t o compete w i t h the abstract formalism of the International Style. (FLWA 3 1 0 0 . 0 0 3 2 )

pable of bringing a new social consciousness to the world through architecture. Wijdeveld documented the critical reactions to the exhibition, in Holland and subsequent European venues, by making a beautiful scrapbook for Wright. 3 " After Amsterdam the exhibition headed for the Prussian Academy of Fine Arts in Berlin (Fig. i .12). In contrast to Wright's first visit to Berlin in the fall of 1 9 0 9 , w h e n he arrived virtually u n k n o w n in Germany, the exhibition marked a triumphant return, with Wright's architecture receiving both public recognition and critical notice. In January 1 9 3 2 the Prussian Academy of Arts honored Wright in absentia by naming him an Outstanding Member. 3 1 T h e critical reactions placed Wright more squarely in the discourse about modernism in G e r m a n y than at any other time in his career. T h e big debates centered on whether W r i g h t was too much of a romantic and an individualist to allow him a central role in a m o d ernism that privileged rationality and collective action. Ornament, long identified by the avant-garde as decadent, was still considered a sign of reactionary architecture. Yet it was the soul of Wright's architecture, embodying his design c o n cepts at every level of detail, from a floor tile to the plans, sections, and elevations of his buildings. Struggling with w h e r e to fit W r i g h t into the M o d e r n M o v e ment, some writers saw his work as expressionist. O n e journalist called him "the American Poelzig," comparing him to the leading expressionist architect in Ger-

many, Hans Poelzig. 32 While attacked by modernist critics, Wright was also defended by his proponents, including Erich Mendelsohn. The exhibition moved on to Frankfurt, Stuttgart, Antwerp, and Brussels before returning to the United States. From this point forward Wright's work occupied an international stage, but his problematic role vis-a-vis European modernists was only underscored by the reluctant inclusion of his work in " M o d e r n Architecture: International Exhibition," the Museum of Modern Art's famous introduction to America of the International Style. 33 Nevertheless, architects from around the world continued to seek out Wright. The German Ernst Neufert made the journey toTaliesin in 1936, followed by Mies van d e r R o h e in 1937; Wright felt a special empathy for the latter's work until late in their relationship.34 Walter Gropius was less fortunate; though he admired Wright's early work, Wright received him rudely after he moved to America. 33 Postwar Germany saw Wright's work suspended between two positions, one increasingly propping up rationalistic ideals, the other embracing an organic aesthetic. Both positions were part of a complex situation and often in conflict with each other. Apart from the pioneering work of Heidi Kief-Niederwohrmeier, who considers Wright's influence in Germany up to the early 1980s within the context of architectural pluralism, postwar study of Wright's work has been lim-

ited.3i' As Nina Nedeljkov, one of the few Wright scholars in Germany, has pointed out, Wright's ideas were often not part of any critical dialogue, and his writings and books in translation were generally unavailable.37 Consequently, German scholars still apply the perceptual framework of the 1920s and 1930s, with little updating or revision, in their views of Wright.

Other German-speaking countries have their own histories in regard to Wright. Wright's impact in Switzerland presents a situation almost as complex as the one in Germany. The obvious starting point is Berlage's introduction of Wright to the Swiss in 1 9 1 2 . However, it was Werner Moser, a graduate of the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule (ETH) in Zurich and assistant to Wright in the mid-i920s, who most actively propagated Wright's ideas in that country from 1926, when he returned to Switzerland, through the 1960s. Moser's own architecture displays Wright's idiom, as seen in his competition entry for a primary school with gymnasium and parish house in Rapperswil-Jona (1954), whose plan consists of a pair of pinwheels of squares (Fig. 1 . 1 3 ). Kief-Niederwöhrmeier has suggested that images of Wright's work found their way into the work of other Swiss architects, including Otto R. Salvisberg, Alfred Roth, Tita Carloni, Franco Ponti, Ernest E. Ansderegg, Peppo Brivio, André M . Studer, Peter Steiger, and Justus Dahinden. 3fi But other developments in the evolution of the Modern Movement often overshadowed Wright's architecture. Detailed study will be needed to sort out his influence—whether imitation, transformation, or parallel development—in the work of Swiss architects and to determine the vehicles by which it was transmitted. In Austria and the successor states of the former Austro-Hungarian Empire Wright's influence is more limited. Schindler and Neutra remained in the United States after their contact with Wright and did not return to live in Austria. Wright did meet Josef Hoffmann, cofounder of the Wiener Werkstätte and a leading figure in the Vienna Secession, when Wright returned from his trip to Russia in 1937. 3 9 And Wright's work emerged, if obliquely, in the studio of the German Peter Behrens, who, in the lineage of Otto Wagner's successors, taught the master class at the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna. Wright's Wasmuth folios appear to have been required reading in the Behrens class in the mid-i920s for future modernists like Ernst Plischke; these folios may well have been the same ones Wagner had shown to his students some fifteen years earlier.4" Wright's work apparently made an impact on the emerging generation of Czech modernists working in the early 1920s. In discussing Wright's impact, Adolf Behne cited, in addition to other European architects, almost the whole range of sachlich modernists among Czech architects: Vit Obrtel, Jaromir Krejcar, OldrichTyl, Frantisek Cerny, Jan Visek, Jaroslav Fragner, and Bedrich Feuerstein. 41 Precisely how they were influenced by Wright requires more careful scrutiny than Behne provided. So many currents intersected their work that such assertions require

Figure 1.13 Competition entry, plan for a primary school with gymnasium and parish house, Rapperswil-Jona, Switzerland, 1954. Werner Moser, architect. (Schweizerische

Bauzeitung,

5 March 1959, 141)

WRIGHT,

caution. Nevertheless, the quick appearance in 193 1 of a translation of Wright's lecture " T h e City of the Future," which had been part of his Princeton series on modern architecture that same year, attests to Czech interest in Wright's work. 42 On the whole, however, after the dissolution of the Empire, Austria, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and the countries that would become Yugoslavia were engaged in an immense struggle for both survival and identity. In the midst of this polit-

THE

INFLUENCE, WORLD

AT

AND LARGE

|

1 7

ical and economic turmoil, the M o d e r n M o v e m e n t was undergoing dramatic changes. O u r historical understanding of these developments, and Wright's role in them, if any, has barely begun.

Wright's influence in Europe and around the globe ebbs and flows in cycles. T h e end of World War II marked not only the beginning of his most productive p e riod, in terms of numbers of commissions and projects, but also the emergence of his ideas in several countries w h e r e he had had little impact earlier. Exhibitions continued to play a significant role in bringing his work to large audiences. "Sixty Years of Living Architecture," which opened at Gimbel's D e partment Store in Philadelphia in April 1 9 5 1 , was the last great international e x hibition during Wright's lifetime and the largest exhibition of his career; it disseminated his ideas widely, as w e will see in these collected essays. 43 T h e chief organizer for the event was Oskar Stonorov, a G e r m a n - b o r n architect c o m m i t ted to a socially responsible architecture w h o lived in Philadelphia. 44 T h e exhibition then began a long international odyssey, heading first to the Palazzo Strozzi in Florence. When it next traveled to Zurich, the natural contact person was Werner Moser, w h o not only mounted the exhibition but also produced a G e r m a n English catalog. 43 Subsequently the exhibition traveled to Paris, M u n i c h , and R o t terdam (Fig. 1 . 1 4 ) . In 1 9 5 3 it returned to the United States, w h e r e it opened in N e w York City on the proposed site of the G u g g e n h e i m M u s e u m , and then c o n tinued to M e x i c o City. In 1 9 5 4 it was shown in the Barnsdall House in Los A n geles, and returned finally to Taliesin. T h e exhibition was reprised on a smaller scale in 1 9 5 6 in C h i c a g o in conjunction with the city's proclamation of 16 O c tober as Frank Lloyd W r i g h t Day. C o m b i n e d with his last comments on organic architecture and his final b o o k , A Testament, this global demonstration of a lifetime devoted to architecture provides the background for seeing h o w the themes of Wright's modernism played out. 46 Exhibitions in the United States and around the world after Wright's death in 1 9 5 9 bring the question of Wright's impact up to the present. Although often informative, for the most part these exhibitions have focused on a certain time period or location, a narrow group of projects, or specific genres like decorative arts or facsimiles of original materials. T h e lone exception, remotely analogous to " S i x t y Years of Living Architecture," was "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect," held at the M u s e u m of M o d e r n Art in N e w York from February through M a y 1994. T h e exhibition did not travel, and it is too early to assess its impact, alongside the current resurgence of interest in Wright, on the production of architecture around the globe. 47 M a n y of the essays that follow were originally given as lectures by an international group of scholars in a symposium held at the m u seum in conjunction with that exhibition and cosponsored by the Society of A r chitectural Historians. These have been revised for this volume, w h i c h also includes new contributions. Together the essays represent a first look at the impact

Figure 1.14 W r i g h t (third from the right)

with

exhibition-goers v i e w i n g the Broadacre City m o d e l at "Sixty Years of Living Architecture" in Paris, April 1952. (FLWA 6 8 0 8 . 0 0 3 5 )

o f W r i g h t ' s ideas abroad, s o m e f r o m the perspective o f natives o f the countries u n d e r discussion and others f r o m that o f an i n f o r m e d outsider. M a r g o Stipe brings the latter perspective to bear o n h e r analysis o f the relation b e t w e e n W r i g h t and J a p a n . T h e J a p a n e s e i n f l u e n c e on W r i g h t has b e e n a subject o f considerable debate since 1 9 1 0 . Stipe n o t o n l y s u m m a r i z e s the traditional v i e w o f h o w W r i g h t set out to absorb J a p a n e s e aesthetics and t r a n s f o r m t h e m in his o w n w o r k , but she also reverses the issue by e x p l o r i n g the differences b e t w e e n W r i g h t ' s concepts and those that underlie J a p a n e s e architecture and b y discussing the reception o f his ideas in J a p a n up to the present. B r u n o Z e v i was a m a j o r participant in b r i n g i n g W r i g h t ' s ideas to Italy. A f t e r s t u d y i n g at H a r v a r d in the early 1 9 4 0 s , he r e t u r n e d to Italy to help launch the m o v e m e n t f o r organic architecture. W r i g h t ' s p h i l o s o p h y o f a d e m o c r a t i c a r c h i tecture, expressed in a fresh language o f f o r m , a c q u i r e d political significance in p o s t w a r Italy. Z e v i tells us h o w W r i g h t ' s ideas t o o k h o l d and relates his personal e x p e r i e n c e a c c o m p a n y i n g W r i g h t d u r i n g his 1 9 5 1 visit to Italy. In her essay Maristella Casciato amplifies the story o f W r i g h t ' s i m p a c t in Italy, revealing the role he and o t h e r s — i n c l u d i n g the m a g a z i n e Metron and the A s s o ciation f o r O r g a n i c A r c h i t e c t u r e , in w h i c h B r u n o Z e v i was actively i n v o l v e d — played in the e v o l u t i o n o f the M o d e r n M o v e m e n t . S h e also provides an a c c o u n t o f W r i g h t ' s critical reception in Italy and discusses the i m p a c t he had on Italian architects after W o r l d W a r II.

As w e become more familiar with the important role of Dutch architects in disseminating Wright's ideas, w e appreciate even more the efforts of H . T h . W i j develd. In 1 9 3 1 Wright invited Wijdeveld to come to the United States and direct the School of Art that Wright and his w i f e were planning at the former Hillside H o m e School. Wijdeveld was delighted; in his v i e w the n e w school paralleled his own ongoing efforts to create an International Guild that would promote g o o d will through the arts. Willing to uproot himself and his family and to invest his modest financial resources, he announced his acceptance in a charming and e m o tional letter loaded with Utopian idealism. 4X Alas, this noble gesture did not succeed. Wijdeveld arrived atTaliesin in October 193 1 but returned to Holland in early 1 9 3 2 . Mariette van Stralen further scrutinizes the Dutch Connection, examining the reception of Wright's ideas among the architects and artists of the various Dutch schools of modernism: D e Stijl, the Amsterdam School, and the Hague School. She then concentrates on the vital relationship between Wijdeveld and Wright, revealing the spiritual connection between the two artists that made Wijdeveld one of Wright's greatest proponents. T h e enthusiasm that Wright's ideas and work found in Holland was not universal, as these essays also demonstrate. France had powerful traditions and its o w n champions, and Wright's work was either at odds with French developments or critiqued as if it were. Jean-Louis C o h e n ' s study of the late consideration of Wright's ideas in France, Wright's reception in Russia, and Wright's perceptions of Soviet architecture shows how both countries used W r i g h t for their o w n purposes, taking turns portraying him as an opponent of capitalism, an innovator in the use of concrete, and a traditionalist—interpretations that prevented a deeper understanding of his architecture. T h e context for these vacillating presentations of Wright, as C o h e n emphasizes, was the notion of Americanism, a powerful force of attraction and repulsion throughout Europe. Another contextual factor in the perception of W r i g h t was his position in relationship to Le Corbusier. Although an issue in France, this relationship was also a recurrent theme on the international front. Grappling with the modernist equivalent of the old question of "in what style should w e build?," architects in many countries often looked to one or the other of the great masters for inspiration. Thus, the battle was launched between two visions of modernity: Wright's based on the individual, Le Corbusier's on the establishment of a collective identity found in an international style. T h e reasons for one's momentary success over the other require a more extensive study than is intended here, taking into account the personality and charisma of each architect, as well as the effectiveness of their rhetoric, particularly as published in their various manifestoes and theories. 49 Great Britain presents another case of conflicting views on roles of architecture and a sluggish resistance to Wright's ideas. A n d r e w Saint charts the mutual overlaps and misunderstandings between W r i g h t and British architects and critics. Charles Robert Ashbee, a preeminent arts and crafts ideologue and Wright's

first British promoter and friend, advocated that architecture represent the collective, while Wright argued for the individual. T h e i r differences strained their friendship even in 1 9 1 0 , w h e n Wright, virtually unknown in Great Britain, briefly visited that country for the first time. B y the time of his next visit, in 1 9 3 9 , he was a distinguished figure, and his Prairie period designs, at least, had become c o m m o n currency. Yet by the early 1940s Le Corbusier would win over the modernist avant-garde. Saint describes with wit and charm the sometimes heated and sometimes cool reception to Wright's widely attended public lectures. T h e figurative brickbats tossed between Wright and his critics in the debates that followed clearly show that both had limited understanding of the other's values and positions. Even South America bears traces of the opposition between Wright and L e Corbusier. Le Corbusier had been asked to propose a city plan for R i o de Janeiro in 1 9 2 9 ; W r i g h t was invited to Brazil as a j u d g e representing N o r t h America in the design competition for a Christopher Columbus M e m o r i a l Lighthouse in 1 9 3 1 . 5 " Wright gained further recognition in Latin America in 1 9 4 0 , w h e n Uruguay awarded him a diploma and a silver medal at the fifth Congreso Panamericano de Arquitectos. In this collection the architect Alberto Sartori offers a personal and impassioned v i e w of h o w Wright's ideas took root in South America, particularly in Chile after 1940. Like Z e v i , Sartori discovered Wright's ideas while still a student. In the 1950s an entire generation of young Chilean architecture students was inspired by Wright's ideas, and their impact has endured for decades. Discussing some of the buildings he and his fellow architects conceived, Sartori reminds us of the cultural and geographical diversity of a continent w e too often forget. H e c o n cludes by showing h o w a professional life devoted to Wright's organic principles can interweave with the rich and varied cultures of Latin America. Farther north, Wright's efforts were recognized in 1943 w h e n the Sociedad de Arquitectos Mexicanos named him an honorary member, an indication that Wright's ideas were part of the evolving M e x i c a n discourse on modernism. A l though here too, as Keith Eggener points out in his essay, Le Corbusier became the major figure of emulation, Wright had an important influence on architects and painters like Juan O ' G o r m a n , M a x Cetto, D i e g o Rivera, and Luis Barragán. Architects elsewhere often copied Wright's forms; in M e x i c o , however, Wright's ideas had more impact than his formal language. Wright's formal language did have broad adaptability in his o w n hands, as his little-known impact in the Middle East attests. In 1 9 5 7 , W r i g h t and other Western architects were each invited to design one building for the modern capital of Iraq. Although commissioned for an opera house, after traveling to Baghdad W r i g h t apparently secured permission to proceed with the design of an entire cultural center, which would include the opera house and a civic auditorium, as well as a n e w post office. H e then added designs for an art gallery, a museum of archeological antiquities, and a campus for Baghdad University. T h e immense scope and the exoticism of these projects appealed to Wright, w h o quickly pro-

L

I

O F

M R

A

N

I

L

i L

O L

O

Y

D

F

A W

H R.

M I

E i

D H

A

A

T

A

I

D P.

C

H

N I

F i g u r e 1.15 Perspective v i e w of t h e Sarabhai Calico Mills Store, project, A h m e d a b a d , India, 1945. FLW, designer. (FLWA 4 5 0 8 . 0 0 1 )

22

|

ANTHONY ALOFSIN

A

D T

E

C

T

duced numerous designs. N o n e were realized; the royal clients, K i n g Faisal II and C r o w n Prince Abdul Ilah, were assassinated in J u l y 1 9 5 8 . M i n a Marefat shows, for the first time, that after the G u g g e n h e i m , the B a g h dad projects were Wright's principal focus in his last decade. In them he brought together concepts from many projects, including, for example, Broadacre C i t y and Crystal Heights. Marefat also considers the project as Wright's tribute to the Orient. Excited to be working in the cradle of civilization, between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers, and stimulated by the long-remembered tales of the Arabian Nights, Wright created a grand entertainment, a sort of Disneyland for adults. B u t instead of indulging in a simple kitsch fantasy, W r i g h t was far ahead of his time in imagining the city's historic center as a tourist attraction, using many of the techniques that would make theme parks a global phenomenon. As Marefat persuasively shows, had his scheme been built, it w o u l d have been the c r o w n ing project of his career. In addition to the Baghdad project, Marefat discusses Wright's connections to Iran, where he designed a house for a friend and w h e r e Taliesin Associated Architects, his successor firm, continued to participate in projects after Wright's death. T h e topics covered in these essays are not exhaustive—we offer only an introduction to Wright's impact around the globe, searching out the little k n o w n instead of reexamining the well established. O u r look is open-ended, subject to further refinement and revision, with a variety of topics yet to be explored. F u ture studies may consider what impact W r i g h t had on the Scandinavian modern movement, or h o w his ideas were used in Spain and Africa. T h e repercussion of Wright's designs for India is a potentially rich topic. A m o n g the several y o u n g Indians w h o came to study with Wright after World War II were Gira and G a u tam Sarabhai, a sister and brother for whose family W r i g h t designed the Sarabhai Calico Mills Store in 1 9 4 $ (Fig. 1 . 1 5 ) . Intended for the city of Ahmedabad, the design required construction technology beyond the grasp of Indian engineers and builders of the day, and the project was abandoned.'' 1 These unexplored histories only hint at the further relationships that await unraveling. I hope the reader derives as much pleasure as I do f r o m realizing that the most American of architects was also one of the most international. T h e dispersal of Wright's vision of organic architecture around the globe, however it was understood, provided alternatives to a solitary modernism, ones that w e are only n o w beginning to appreciate and critique.

TWO:

WRIGHT

AND

JAPAN

Margo Stipe

I rank Lloyd Wright's interest in and appreciation of Japanese art and culture are both well k n o w n and well documented. H e was a major collector of Japanese art, especially woodblock prints, an admirer of traditional Japanese architecture, and the architect of the second Imperial Hotel in Tokyo (demolished in 1968). H e made eight trips to Japan beginning in 1 9 0 5 , spending nearly three full years there between 1 9 1 6 and his final departure in 1 9 2 2 . Such involvement with another country by one of the century's most brilliant architects leads inevitably to the question of possible influence, both that of Japanese aesthetics and philosophy on Wright's work and of Wright's work and philosophy on the development of twentieth-century Japanese architecture. W r i g h t outspokenly admired Japan and acknowledged its inspiration but denied its overt influence. Just w h e n and h o w this admiration began, however, are matters of speculation. Although there are arguments for an earlier date, the latest date generally accepted for Wright's introduction to Japan is 1 8 9 3 , the year the World's Columbian Exposition opened in Chicago. 1 T h e Japanese buildings there were widely published, and it is unlikely that Wright, at that time the chief draftsman in the office of Louis Sullivan, w h o designed the fair's Transportation Building, would not have seen them. 2 Photographs of the interior of Wright's Oak Park h o m e show that he had begun to acquire, if not actively collect, oriental scrolls and Japanese woodblock prints by at least 1 8 9 5 . B y 1905, Wright's interest in Japan and its art was so keen that he decided to make his first trip abroad (Fig. 2 . 1 ) . 3 Given his tendency in early writings to mention authors or ideas that captured his attention or influenced his thought, it is curious that he did not m e n tion Japan in any of his existing manuscripts or lectures before this 1905 journey. From 1906 forward, however, Japan was mentioned in some context in virtually everything he wrote for the rest of his life. 4

In 1 9 0 5 , Japan was still undergoing critical political, economic, and social change, the result of contact with an aggressive West in the 1850s after 2 5 0 years of almost total isolation. T h e demise of the shogunal government, the restoration of imperial authority, and the landmark shift of the capital from Kyoto to E d o (later Tokyo) in the late 1860s marked the beginning of Japan's modern era.n Modernization meant westernization. Westerners pointedly inferred that the Japanese were culturally, technologically, and materially inferior. T h e Japanese apparently accepted this verdict, and from the beginning of the M e i j i period they sought and w e l c o m e d Western expertise and systems of thought while they dismissed and dismantled their own. Imperial commissions were sent to Europe to study, and Western scholars, architects, engineers, and business professionals were invited to teach and work in Japan/' W r i g h t seemed to be one of the few, among foreigners and Japanese, to realize the devastating toll modernization was taking on Japan. H e was dismayed by the modern culture that he saw in 1 9 0 5 and later, especially as it was expressed in architecture, noting the prevalence of "bad copies, in bad technique, of bad originals." 7 Despite the West's presumption of their cultural inferiority, the Japanese proved to be a remarkable international presence. After claiming victories over both China in 1 8 9 5 and Russia by 1 9 0 5 , the country had emerged as a formidable world military power, by far the strongest in Asia. Arriving early in 1 9 0 5 , even before the Russo-Japanese peace treaty was signed, Wright chose largely to ignore the " m o d Figure 2.1 Sutra Library, Chion-ln, Kyoto. Photograph taken by Wright on his 1905 trip to Japan. (FLWA 7121.0007)

e r n " state of Japan. Like many travelers today, Wright was enamored of the charms of old Japan as seen through the views captured in w o o d b l o c k prints: he looked for o l d E d o , not n e w T o k y o . In his autobiography he issues this invitation: " C o m e with me on a j o u r n e y within this j o u r n e y in search of the print. Let us see Yedo as the prints saw it and as Yedo saw the prints." 8 W r i g h t had come to Japan in March 1905 to buy prints and to pursue the romantic legacy prints represented. B y the time he returned to the United States two months later, he had been seduced and conquered by the traditional arts of this oriental civilization. He would remain their champion for the rest of his life. In 1906, almost as a protest against the toll extracted by Japan's modernization, Wright staged the world's first exhibition of prints by the landscape artist A n d o Hiroshige. Held at the Art Institute of Chicago, the exhibition proposed that properly considered [the w o r k displayed] is the art not o f a Hiroshige merely but of a people. T h e appeal that it makes is a spiritual one unlikely to be heard by Western materialism w i t h m o r e than amused tolerance. It is too restrained, too chaste, for our immediate comprehension. . . . It is no longer the sequestered art o f an isolated people but one o f the most valuable contributions ever made to the art o f the world.''

T w o years later, in 1908, W r i g h t lectured at the Art Institute and j o i n e d other collectors in producing a larger and more widely representative exhibition. In 1 9 1 2 he published The Japanese Print: An Interpretation, a b o o k on Japanese aesthetics and the woodblock print. 1 " In 1 9 1 3 , almost accidentally, he became a print dealer as well as a collector w h e n he agreed to purchase prints for William and J o h n Spaulding, important Boston art collectors, during his second trip to Japan, 1 ' undertaken to secure the commission for the new Imperial Hotel in Tokyo. 1 2 Wright was successful in both ventures: effectively promised the commission during this visit, he was officially awarded the contract for the hotel in 1 9 1 6 , 1 3 and while in Japan he continued actively to collect and sell w o o d b l o c k prints until his final return in 1 9 2 2 . His collection still contained more than six thousand prints at the time of his death in 1 9 5 9 . 1 4 W r i g h t admitted quite freely the role that the Japanese print played in his work, and he also openly admired traditional Japanese architecture. 1 "' In An Autobiography he writes that he found the "native h o m e in Japan a supreme study in [the] elimination . . . of the insignificant" and "a perfect example of the modern standardizing" that he had been developing. 1 6 H e added that the search for a m o d ern architecture seemed to have more affinity with Japanese architecture in principle than with any other because of the great honesty of its traditional structure. 17 T h e question of Japan's influence on Frank Lloyd Wright's work was posed early. In his introduction to the 1 9 1 1 G e r m a n monograph Frank Lloyd

Wright:

Ausgeführte Bauten, the English architect Charles Robert Ashbee wrote: " W e can often trace the influence of Japan, or the effort to adapt Japanese forms to A m e r -

ican conditions, though I k n o w the artist himself disavows this; doubtless the touch of the East is an unconscious one, but I notice it most in his architectural drawings." 1 8 Although admitting "their debt to Japanese ideals, [which] these renderings themselves sufficiently acknowledge," W r i g h t responded strongly to what he considered the unjustness of Ashbee's statement: " D o not say that I deny that my love for Japanese art has influenced m e — I admit that it has but claim to have digested i t — D o not accuse m e of trying to 'adapt Japanese forms' however, that is a false accusation and against my very religion." 1 9 Later, though, perhaps tired of scholars' attempts to discover influences in his work, W r i g h t insisted: To cut ambiguity short: there never was exterior influence upon my work either foreign or native, other than that of Lieber Meister, Dankmar Adler and John Roebling, Whitman and Emerson, and the great poets worldwide. My work is original not only in fact but in spiritual fiber. N o practice by any European architect to this day has influenced mine in the least. As for the Incas, the Mayans, even the Japanese—all were to me but splendid confirmation. 2 " C o n f i r m a t i o n implied Wright's belief in order in the universe that could be discerned in its purest artistic and architectural expressions. 21 A n astute and perceptive observer, he no doubt recognized the time-honored principle of order, with its resulting tranquillity and beauty, and appreciated the visible characteristics of simplicity, use of natural materials, and structural honesty that all underlie traditional Japanese architecture. 22 Furthermore, he was particularly struck by the inherent spiritual quality in Japanese life and art, a spirituality of everyday life that would have been in keeping with Wright's romantic ideals. It is easy to recognize in Wright's architecture, especially that of the early 1900s, elements derived from the vocabulary of traditional Japanese architecture: the hipped roofs, overall proportional relationships, strong horizontals, and masterful manipulation of light and shadow. This visual congruence is perfectly e x e m plified in the seventeenth-century imperial villa of Katsura and Wright's 1 9 0 2 residence for Ward Willits (Figs. 2.2 and 2.3). Nevertheless, one would hardly mistake a W r i g h t h o m e for a Japanese one. While they may display similar architectural principles and characteristics, Katsura and Wright's house are quite distinctively different, not only visually, but in intent. Japanese residential architecture, of w h i c h Katsura is often considered the quintessential example, represents the strictly hierarchical society that created it, both in design and in d e c o rative programs. Wright's architecture was diametrically opposed: it was an attempt to create an architecture that would r e f o r m society and create for the American citizen a democratic environment largely devoid of social distinctions. 23 This outward resemblance of Wright's early domestic architecture to Japanese prototypes only scratches the surface of the connection W r i g h t forged with J a p a -

Figure 2.2 Katsura Rikyu Imperial Residence, Kyoto, seventeenth century. (Photograph by author)

Figure 2.3

(opposite)

W a r d W . Willits House, Highland Park, Illinois, 1902. FLW, architect. (FLWA 0208.0001)

nese culture and aesthetics. His repeated visits to Japan and the large number of projects he designed for the country created a complex and intense relationship. O f the eleven projects he designed for Japan, the Imperial Hotel was, without question, his greatest Japanese project and, many would argue, one of his greatest buildings (Fig. 2.4). 24 It is probably as legendary today, despite its demolition in 1968, as it was controversial at the time of its construction in the early 1920s. T h e hotel provides a key to understanding Wright's admiration for Japanese aesthetics as well as his interpretation of the Japanese sense of space. T h e eleven-million-dollar dismantling, move and reconstruction of the entrance hall and reflecting pool ot the Imperial Hotel at Meiji Mura, a huge outdoor architectural museum north of Nagoya, can only hint at what must have been, regardless of criticism, a glorious structure whose demolition was a great cultural loss.2:1 Japan's first modern hotel, it was a national symbol and the social center of the capital city. Wright himself described the hotel as a "social clearing house" for East and West for a country " m a k i n g the transition from w o o d to masonry and her knees to her feet." 2 6 T h e captivating visual and social mystique of the building was matched by its engineering technology, which was revolutionary by Japanese standards, even if later questioned by Western engineers. In an effort to create an earthquakeresistant structure, Wright floated the foundations on concrete piles as flexible sections so that they could move and settle back in place without breaking up in a quake. W r i g h t also kept the building's center of gravity low by focusing its mass

Figure 2.4 Perspective v i e w of Imperial Hotel, Tokyo, 1 9 0 9 - 2 2 . FLW, architect. From Wendingen,

106.

near the ground: the walls were two brick shells with a concrete center, tapering as they rose, and lighter copper replaced the traditional heavy roof tiles. O r n a ment was not attached to the building but was made integral by the carving of structural elements, made from native oya stone. To help " f i r e p r o o f " the structure, pools were created throughout the gardens to provide immediately available water sources. Skepticism about this new design was silenced upon the news that the building had survived, almost unscathed, the worst earthquake in Japan's recorded history, the great Kanto quake of i September 1 9 2 3 . 2 7 Its survival alone earned the new Imperial Hotel a place in architectural history almost before its own history had begun. U p o n its completion, Western and Japanese scholars and critics expressed a variety of opinions about the Imperial Hotel. T h e Japan Advertiser declared shortly after its partial opening in J u l y 1 9 2 2 : " T h e r e will be none w h o will deny the originality of the design, the boldness of the conception, artistic unity and beauty of the w h o l e . " B u t the article also correctly predicted that the design of the h o tel would " g i v e rise to much criticism and cause many controversies because the building is a bold challenge to old habit of thought. T h e n e w always lacks authority." 28 A t about the same time, the Christian Science Monitor reported: One would be safe in saying that there is not another structure in the world that could be compared to the new hotel, for the architect has worked both ancient and modern types of expression into the great mass of brick, stone and steel. . . . Mr. Wright has tried to create a building that would typify the Far East, yet would be conveniently and practically modern. He has worked Western, Japanese and even a bit of old Egyptian architecture in one mass, and the surprise of all is its uncommon unity.29 Wright himself claimed that the hotel was not intended to be a specifically J a p a nese building, but one that paid tribute to Japanese traditions. 30 T h e r e were also negative reviews. American architect Louis Christian M u l l gardt immediately despised the hotel, calling it a " f r e a k " and a monument of disgrace to American architecture, "fantastic and prehistoric." 3 1 In its defense, Louis Sullivan wrote in 1 9 2 3 : " I n this structure is not to be f o u n d a single f o r m distinctly Japanese; nor that of any country; yet in its o w n individual f o r m , its mass, and subsidiaries, its evolution of plan and development of thesis; in its sedulous care for niceties of administration and for the human sense of joy, it has expressed, 30

|

M A R G O

STIPE

i n s p i r i N G form as an epic poem, addressed to the Japanese people, their inmost

thought." 3 2 Despite this eloquent rejoinder, Wright's onetime assistant on the h o tel, C z e c h architect Antonin R a y m o n d , one of the f e w foreign architects to establish a practice in Japan, later reflected that the "design had nothing in c o m mon with Japan, its climate, its traditions, its people or its culture." 3 3 T h e American manager of the hotel during the postwar Occupation also found the building to be challenging:

It splatters out from the focal point of the lobby in all directions. The corridor system is so winding and complicated that when you try to retrace a path you have followed, the patterns seem to have changed while your back was turned. The ceiling of the entrance lobby is so low that a normal-sized person instinctively ducks his head as he enters . . . but after walking up the six steps to the main lobby a person suddenly finds that the ceiling is three stories high and he is standing in the middle of a huge space. H e admitted, however, that at the end of his tenure, despite the building's many practical difficulties, it still intrigued and pleased him.-14 From the Japanese perspective the building was always a bit fantastic. T h e rich ornamentation traditionally present in Japanese architecture, though familiar to Wright, provided no precedent for the elaborate schemes he executed at the I m perial Hotel. 3 3 S o m e have called the building Wright's "first faintly M a y a n " structure, 36 an impression that has led to a fairly popular but erroneous assertion among the Japanese that the building was originally designed for a site in M e x i c o . A l though the building's geometric grammar was indeed reminiscent of Maya architecture, the forms employed were, in fact, universal. 37 Anthony Alofsin has suggested that in his search for an archetypal American architecture, Wright, through the use of these universal forms, was " h o n o r i n g Japan with a gift of what he perceived as the noblest forms of the architecture of the Americas." 3 8 Despite these peculiarities, the hotel was not totally alien to Japan. In plan and character it emulated the symmetry, structural detailing, and integration of the buildings and gardens of ancient Japanese governmental, residential, and religious compounds. From the seventh century on, Japanese architecture drew heavily on Chinese precedent. Although organic materials soon replaced the stone and tile in residential buildings, the floor plans and symmetry were often retained in both public and private Japanese buildings. M o s t compounds, therefore, had a central hall, oriented to the south, connected to subsidiary halls by a series of corridors and galleries. T h e main facade was fronted by a courtyard (in the case of temples and government buildings) or a pond-garden (in the mansions of the aristocracy). Courtyard gardens filled open spaces throughout, and long corridors ran forward on either side terminating in pavilions. T h e overall symmetry of a plan arranged around a central court, as seen in the Kyoto imperial residence, depended on C h i nese models, and is also reflected in the plan W r i g h t developed for the Imperial Hotel (Figs. 2.4 and 2.$). In basic plan, the hotel, although oriented to the west, followed this standard. Furthermore, the canted walls of the hotel are suggestive of castle walls, and the interior structural supports, especially in the dining room, recall the bracketing system of the twelfth-century Todai-ji temple in Nara. T h e Imperial Hotel reflected Wright's new sense of space, something he had developed in the first decade of the century. T h r o u g h simplification of f o r m , line, and color, lessons he claimed were learned from the study of the Japanese print,

Figure 2.5 Plan, Imperial Palace, Kyoto,

1855

W r i g h t created plastic, fluent, and c o h e r e n t spaces that c o m p l e m e n t e d the c h a n g i n g physical and spiritual life o f m o d e r n J a p a n . W r i g h t e x p l a i n e d his c o n c e p t o f space through a paraphrase o f the w o r d s o f L a o - t z u illustrating the m e t a p h o r o f the v a c u u m : " T h e reality o f the b u i l d i n g does not consist in the r o o f and walls, but in the space w i t h i n , to be lived i n . " 3 J F o r W r i g h t , these w o r d s suggested that his spaces w e r e spiritual, n o t material; in this w a y he aligned his ideas w i t h o r i ental p h i l o s o p h y in general. B u t in fact, W r i g h t m i s u n d e r s t o o d the c o n c e p t o f the oriental v o i d . W r i g h t ' s spaces are not voids; they are z o n e d , f u n c t i o n a l l y d e h n e d areas, and, o p e n and flexible

t h o u g h they m i g h t be, o n c e created they exist in and o f themselves, r e -

gardless o f the use to w h i c h they are put. J a p a n e s e space, at least traditionally, was not so f o r m a l i z e d . A l t h o u g h p r o p e r spatial relationships w e r e critical to the m a i n tenance o f a h a r m o n i o u s balance w i t h i n the social g r o u p — b e t w e e n the h u m a n and natural worlds, b e t w e e n inside and o u t s i d e — t h e w o r d " s p a c e " in the W e s t ern sense (kukaii) did not even exist in |apanese until the t w e n t i e t h century. T h e key to u n d e r s t a n d i n g the J a p a n e s e c o n c e p t o f space, rather, is the w o r d ma, w h i c h m i g h t be translated as " p l a c e , " " p a u s e , " " i n t e r v a l , " or " v o i d . " It always implies relationship—as in the " d i s t a n c e " b e t w e e n t w o c o l u m n s in a b u i l d i n g , the " i n -

terval" between two notes in a musical composition, the "space" between two rocks in a garden or between two people in a r o o m — a n d it is highly subjective. T h e Japanese notion o f having " t o o m u c h " or " t o o little ma" (overdone or weak, out o f balance) or " g o o d ma" (skillful, well done) clearly demonstrates the qualitative, emotional nature o f this word. Ma underlies all feelings o f order, harmony, and beauty. 4 " Japanese "space" was a void in which all things were inherent; it had no identity until required for some use. Japanese architectural space, then, was one o f total flexibility. T h e ceiling, columns, and floor were the only fixed structural m e m bers o f a building; furniture was easily movable. Except for the kitchen, rooms could be completely changed by the addition or removal o f screens and doors and the temporary placement o f appropriate objects as the occasion demanded. T h e same room might easily fulfill the functions o f reception, dining, and sleeping by a simple change o f furnishings. Architect Fumihiko Maki summarized this condition thus: "Space gains its quality depending on the things, events, or phenomena that it helps define, among which it establishes relationships and, in turn, by which it is also evoked." 41 In an essay on Wrightian space, architect Arata Isozaki further clarified the Japanese perceptions o f space and time: they begin, he said, " t h e instant at which a human being enters and perceives a space in relation to himself." Isozaki noted that although W r i g h t was "impressed" by his encounter with Japan and Japanese art, he manipulated his understanding o f the experience in a very personal way, to create "solid space, textured with stone and brick, that could by no means be identified as 'Oriental.'" But if Wright's space was not oriental, it was also not particularly Western. Wright, in fact, created an entirely new sense o f space, according to Isozaki: "a space to which no civilization can lay claim." 4 2 T h e Imperial Hotel's objective o f creating a "transition building" for East and West, a place where Japan could easily make an entrance into the modern world, illustrates this transcultural quality o f Wright's architecture. While relying on "Western style," Wright tried to incorporate elements and create spaces that would make the oriental hosts as comfortable as the visiting foreigners they were hoping to attract. And although the hotel incorporated a vast complex o f rooms, corridors, and balconies, the human proportions to which the building was scaled created an intimacy more c o m m o n to residential than public spaces, inviting restful occupancy. T h e use o f oya stone, brick, and terra cotta, the low ceilings, and the placement o f narrow windows in many areas created an interior o f shadowy spaces, enhancing this feeling o f shelter and repose. T h e winding corridors led the guests through constantly varying visual and spatial experiences, not unlike the gardens for which the Japanese were famous. Wrightian space, therefore, shares with traditional Japanese architecture the idea o f creating spaces o f movement and change, o f repose and activity. But in a Wrightian space, these effects come as much from the shifting lines, planes, and textures o f fixed architectural elements as from the changing human activity that those el-

Figure 2.6 Peacock R o o m b a n q u e t hall, Imperial Hotel, Tokyo, 1 9 0 9 - 2 2 . FLW, architect. From Wendingen,

122.

ements frame. Thus, although the elaborately designed Peacock R o o m (banquet hall) of the Imperial Hotel might be arranged to serve a variety of functions, the fundamental character of the room did not change (Fig. 2.6). In such a space, the "stage set" created by the room remains intrinsically the same whether anything happens or not; in Japanese space, by contrast, there is no stage set until some h u man event calls it into being.

While scholars have extensively addressed the question of Japan's influence on Wright, they have less frequently discussed Wright's role in the development of architecture in Japan. Twentieth-century Japanese architects have been very much concerned with incorporating a modern, Western-style sense of space into their designs. T h e y also admit that Wright, as one of the giants of twentieth-century architecture, is a potent figure for anyone involved in architecture, and they acknowledge familiarity with, and often admiration for, Wright's work. B u t Japanese architects and architectural historians alike suggest that Wright's direct influence in Japan has been minimal at best. 43 KenzoTange, perhaps the best known of the Japanese modernists, was outspoken in his assertion that Wright's stylistic individuality was irrational and that " f r o m an objective v i e w p o i n t " his designs were too arbitrary to be influential, 44 and some Western scholars have come to a similar conclusion, stating that Wright's impact was brief and limited.4"' These views are not unanimous, however. Dennis Sharp, for example, has observed that

"notwithstanding the accumulation of interest in the work of Le Corbusier in Japan in the period after World War II and also in the growing regard for Louis Kahn's buildings, the legacy of Frank Lloyd W r i g h t has remained clear. . . . His w o r k was received as a way to a n e w architecture and as a means of architectural expression." 4 6 B u t the lessons that Wright hoped to demonstrate of an "organic" architecture— an architecture appropriate to time, place, and h u m a n k i n d — w e n t largely unheeded as Japan struggled toward modernization in the 1920s and 1930s. D r a w n by the International Style, progressive Japanese architects turned not to the United States but to Europe for inspiration. A number of young Japanese designers, including K u n i o Maekawa and J u n z o Sakakura, studied with the European champions, Le Corbusier and Walter Gropius, in the 1930s; unfortunately, their efforts w o u l d have little impact until after World War II, w h e n modernism finally began to move forward with considerable m o m e n t u m . E v e n today, Japanese architects usually cite Le Corbusier as their inspiration. O n l y a f e w architects, such as A r a t a E n d o , Wright's assistant on the Imperial Hotel, persevered in the "cause of organic architecture." 47 His Koshien Hotel in K o b e (1930), commissioned by f o r mer Imperial Hotel manager Aisaku Hayashi, exhibits a striking resemblance to Wright's M i d w a y Gardens (1913—14), 4 8 and his auditorium building at the J i y u Gakuen in Tokyo ( 1 9 2 1 ) reflects the influence of Taliesin itself (Figs. 2.7 and 2.8). Perhaps W r i g h t failed to have a major impact on twentieth-century Japanese architecture because his approach had so much in c o m m o n with the building traditions the Japanese were largely rejecting in their efforts to modernize and industrialize, both in the early 1900s and following their devastating defeat in World War II. However, historical circumstances also need to be considered. T h e w i d e spread destruction of Tokyo and Yokohama in the 1 9 2 3 earthquake necessitated the immediate reconstruction of thousands of buildings. Such activity was familiar to the Japanese, whose cities were frequently destroyed by fires, earthquakes, typhoons, and civil wars. Shelter was the issue, meaning rapid reconstruction of the same kind of buildings that had stood previously on the same sites. Wright's advice that Tokyo be rebuilt on a more permanent and rational plan, with wires underground, widened and shaded streets, and the principal residence and business areas restricted to two or three stories, was simply ignored. 49 T h e 1930s, moreover, saw stepped-up militarization and the development of imperial aspirations in Asia. Competitions for major building projects during this period of rising nationalism stipulated "Japanese-style" designs, though this did not preclude the use of modern materials. Traditional facades n o w often concealed m o d e r n concrete and steel cores, as exemplified by J i n Watanabe's Imperial M u s e u m in Tokyo ( 1 9 3 7 ; Fig. 2.9), while neither Wright-like designs nor those inspired by L e Corbusier's internationalism found favor. 30 World War II and the resulting physical and spiritual devastation of the c o u n try again made shelter a critically important issue. Entire cities had to be rebuilt. This time arguments for creative urban and architectural design began to be heard,

Figure 2.7 Koshien Hotel, Kobe, 1930. Arata Endo, architect. (Raku Endo, photographer)

but Wright's voice seems not to have been among them. T h e practical realities of postwar Japan made many of Wright's ideas unsuitable. Broadacre City, his forceful argument for American decentralization and the primacy of the individual, would have been incompatible with the traditional Japanese values of c o m m u nity and conformity, despite the country's conversion to democracy. B u t beyond the question of sovereignty of the individual, Wright's antiurban posture and arguments for decentralization could have little application in a country w h e r e over 60 percent (67 percent today) of the population lived in densely settled urban areas. T h e urbanist theories of modernists such as Le Corbusier and Walter Gropius, w h o believed strongly in the necessity of cities, had broader appeal in Japan. In commercial and civic design, too, the allegedly rational International Style, with its easily grasped abstract forms, proved more suitable than Wright's architecture for fulfilling the industrial and functional requirements of postwar urban

F i g u r e 2.8 Midway Gardens, Chicago, 1913-14. FLW, architect. (FLWA 1401.0032)

Figure 2.9 Tokyo Imperial Museum, Tokyo, 1937. Jin Watanabe, architect. (Photograph by author)

WRIGHT

AND

JAPAN

|

3

7

Figure 2 . 1 0 Kurashiki City Hall, Kurashiki, 1960 ( n o w a museum). K e n z o T a n g e , architect. (Photograph by author)

design. Le Corbusier's "machine for living" and Gropius's collaborative design approach, typified by K e n z o T a n g e ' s Kurashiki City Hall (i960, n o w home to a museum; Fig. 2.10), thus provided the architectural foundation for Japanese efforts to rejoin the world community after the war. T h e pioneers of Japanese architecture in the M e i j i period (1868—1912) left a legacy of Western emulation, which continued through theTaisho era (1912—26) and into the Showa period (1926—89). T h e third generation of architects (Sakakura, Maekawa, Tange) largely followed the dictates of the International Style, introduced in the 1930s and pursued again after World War II. While they did not abandon national traditions altogether (Tange's buildings, in particular, made specific historic references), the strong influence of Le Corbusier on their work was unmistakable. T h e next generation began a retreat, which continues today, from the cold objectivity of science to a more subjective approach: they chose to revisit the premise that human beings need more than merely shelter; they need environments that nourish the body and the spirit. Kisho Kurokawa, a founder in i 9 6 0 of the Metabolist movement, explains that this movement sought to use Japanese cultural traditions to reconstitute the Western-derived rules for m o d e r n architecture and to replace the mechanical model of design with a biological one. T h e Metabolist philosophy had its roots in the Buddhist concept of "mutability"; their model, consequently, was one "in w h i c h the parts, like living cells, could [quite literally] c o m e to life, develop and die out while the w h o l e b o d y — t h e building, the city or the entire built environment—went on living . . . where all the elements are interchangeable.""'' This was a different kind of "organic architecture" from Wright's, based as it was on technology but given a biological analogy. In attempting to achieve this sym-

biosis, one of past and future, of East and West, the Metabolists were also seeking to reaffirm the value of history and the vernacular. While acknowledging the significance of modernism and modern architecture, and the validity of their underlying rationalism and functionalism, the Metabolists wanted some "allowances for vagueness [which] the functionalists cast away." 32 Contemporary designers are increasingly reincorporating traditional qualities into their work—in principle at least, if not necessarily in form. For example, Tadao Ando's inward-turning, polished concrete spaces have been observed to be connected by a common thread to traditional teahouse architecture, though not by any particular resemblance in style or form.'' 3 Although both are enclosed and focused, simple in appearance, calm, and quiet, Ando's buildings are a stunning combination of solid Western technology and the more intangible presence of nature. This shift toward traditional aesthetics has been accompanied by renewed attention to architects like Frank Lloyd Wright and Alvar Aalto. Indeed, Kurokawa asserts that today these architects have "far more supporters in Japan than Le C o r busier," saying the reason can be traced back to the tradition of "living in symbiosis with nature." 34 He also states that the pattern of Western-oriented thinking long prevalent in Japanese architecture is at an end and that younger designers "have begun to explore the Japanese tradition and the many different cultures in the world." 53 Whether this return to traditional principles can be attributed to Wright's lingering influence or to the inevitable rejection of rigid functionalist manifestos underlying the International Style may be impossible to determine. However far-reaching the influence of the International Style may have been on Japanese architecture, Shozo Uchii, a contemporary champion of Wright, believes that the lessons of Wright's Imperial Hotel were important to Japanese architects. Despite losing sight of their own roots in the outward search for a model of modernization, he says, the Japanese were able to understand Wright's architecture, recognizing in it "oriental ideas and views of nature." Uchii personally appreciated Wright's work because it "was tied to the earth," and he believes Wright was the only architect to construct an alternative to a modernism that espoused technological progress first and foremost. The integration of all parts into the whole, the use of local materials, and emphasis on the integrity of materials might eventually, Uchii argues, exert a great influence on the direction architecture takes in Japan. 36 Uchii's own work reflects a respect for materials and an awareness of textures and patterns reminiscent of Wright's work. In the Shimamura residence in Omiya (1985; Figs. 2.11 and2.i3), the low, hipped roof rising from the broad overhanging eaves (narrow by traditional Japanese standards), strong horizontal orientation, and discrete treatment of lower and upper stories on the exterior recall Wright's Winslow House in River Forest (1893; Fig. 2.12). The use of plaster and the interior wooden beams are suggestive of the Prairie Style, in general, and of the Thomas House in Oak Park (1901) and the Tomek House in Riverside (1906; Fig. 2.14) in particular.57

F i g u r e 2.11 Shimamura residence, Omiya, 1985. Shozo Uchii, architect. (Koji Horiuchi, photographer)

F i g u r e 2.12 W. H. W i n s i o w House, River Forest, Illinois, 1893. FLW, architect. (FLWA 9305.0039)

Figure 2 . 1 3 Dining r o o m , S h i m a m u r a residence, Omiya, 1985. Shozo Uchii, architect. (Koji Horiuchi, p h o t o g r a p h e r )

Figure 2 . 1 4 Dining r o o m ( w i t h o u t original furnishing), Tomek House, Riverside, Illinois, 1907. FLW, architect. (FLWA 0 7 1 1 . 0 0 3 6 )

F i g u r e 2.15 Setagaya M u s e u m of Art, Setagaya, Tokyo, 1985. Shozo Uchii, architect. (Koji Horiuchi, photographer)

F i g u r e 2.16

(opposite)

From a brochure for 1200 series of "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t Residential Style" homes, Mitsui Norin Homes, 1990s. (Courtesy Mitsui Norin)

T h e Setagaya M u s e u m o f A r t in T o k y o ( 1 9 8 5 ; Fig. 2 . 1 5 ) evokes in spirit, if less distinctively in f o r m , W r i g h t i a n ideas o f public place as h u m a n space. H e r e U c h i i has attempted to b r i n g the scale o f a traditionally m o n u m e n t a l b u i l d i n g t y p e to a m o r e h u m a n level by l o w e r i n g overall heights and e m p h a s i z i n g strong h o r i zontal lines. H e has also skillfully integrated the b u i l d i n g into the s u r r o u n d i n g park b y s o f t e n i n g the e x t e r i o r wall surfaces, a l l o w i n g t h e m to absorb rather than reflect light, and b y c o v e r i n g the b u i l d i n g w i t h a g r e e n c o p p e r r o o f , w h i c h blends in w i t h the s u r r o u n d i n g g r e e n e r y ; a front pergola, h u n g w i t h plants, creates a s m o o t h transitional space b e t w e e n park and building. 3 * T h e Setagaya M u s e u m does n o t h o l d its visitors at a r m ' s length, but rather invites t h e m to participate in the e x p e r i e n c e o f m a n y d i f f e r e n t art f o r m s . It is a m u s e u m that is t r y i n g to b r i n g art b o t h back into life and b a c k to life. D e s p i t e W r i g h t ' s clear i n f l u e n c e o n K u r o k a w a and U c h i i ' s skillful h o m a g e to h i m , there is little e v i d e n c e to suggest that J a p a n ' s p r e m i e r architects e m b r a c e d his philosophy. H o w e v e r , there is o n e m a j o r area w h e r e W r i g h t ' s i n f l u e n c e is o p e n l y i m p l i e d , and that is the h o u s i n g industry. In a c o u n t r y so densely p o p u lated that o n e ' s " h o m e " is m o s t o f t e n a small a p a r t m e n t p r o v i d i n g c r a m p e d shelter w i t h f e w amenities, builders are i n c o r p o r a t i n g W r i g h t ' s idea that the h o m e can b e a place to live in and e n j o y into their m a r k e t i n g strategies. O f t e n this m a y a m o u n t to little m o r e than assigning the n a m e o f a W r i g h t h o u s e to a design that

otherwise has nothing in c o m m o n with the original (Mitsui N o r i n ' s " H e u r t l e y " home, for example). A case in point is Mitsui N o r i n ' s "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t Residential Style" homes. 3 9 A brochure for the " 1 2 0 0 Series," for instance, shows the homes to be large and well appointed, displaying a Wrightian character very much in keeping with traditional Japanese taste (Fig. 2 . 1 6 ) . At one time homes like this w o u l d have been within reach only of the very wealthy, but the economic b o o m of the 1980s and early 1990s has changed all that. Although the tremendous growth of those years has been tempered by the recent recession, families still have sizable incomes. Sophisticated and well traveled, the Japanese are n o w acquainted with the larger homes and the more home-oriented way of life c o m m o n in the United States. This is the new target market for the housing industry, one for which it hopes Frank Lloyd W r i g h t will have special appeal. T h e Japanese have always looked outward for fresh ideas and inspiration, but never before had they so completely disowned their own culture as they did in the attempt to modernize/'" Architecture was no exception to this rejection/' 1 Within the chaotic environment of our time, however, Wright's belief in architecture as "a great spirit" may still provide some inspiration for the Japanese/' 2 His

principles of an organic architecture, and the resulting simplicity and serenity that characterize his spaces and their surroundings, are again attracting attention and support. This renewed interest among Japanese in Wright's work may reflect the rediscovery of the timeless principles of order and simplicity at the core of their own traditions as well as the return of the human spirit into their architectural spaces. In a world largely propelled by accelerating technology, the loss of poetry and beauty in everyday life should be mourned. M a n y of Japan's contemporary architects are attempting to recapture these qualities, if not in the tradition of Wright, certainly in the same spirit.

THREE: HOLLAND,

KINDRED

WRIGHT,

AND

SPIRITS WIJDEVELD

Mariette van Stralen

I rank Lloyd W r i g h t had more impact on architecture in the Netherlands than in any other European country, and the relationship is well k n o w n and much discussed. 1 A logical point of departure for this reconsideration of Wright's influence in the Netherlands is Hendrik Petrus Berlage's 1 9 1 1 trip to the United States and his subsequent reports of it, including the b o o k Amerikaansche

reisherinneringen

(Reminiscences of an American journey, 1 9 1 3 ) . Berlage c o n f o r m e d to the general European v i e w of America as a land with enormous industrial and economic potential, but one that owed its culture to Europe. 2 As for American architecture, he named three exemplary practitioners: Louis H . Sullivan, H e n r y H o b s o n Richardson, and Frank Lloyd Wright. H e considered Wright's work in particular to be original and exceptionally attractive; he saw him as a "spirit freed f r o m all tradition," a statement which suggests that Berlage embraced the present and had no need to copy precedent. 3 Thus he helped lay the foundations for what he described, in 1 9 2 1 , as Wright's "peaceful American penetration." 4 Because of Berlage's extensive publications and numerous lectures, historians have taken too much for granted that h e — a s the " N e s t o r " of m o d e r n D u t c h architecture—started the trend of interest in Wright by publishing articles acclaiming his work. 3 This accounting disregards the fact that Dutch magazines had already focused on American architecture before Berlage's trip, and that many Dutch architects had traveled to the United States before Berlage. For instance, J . A . van Straaten worked as an architect in A m e r i c a between 1 8 8 3 and 1 8 9 2 ; J a n Frederick Staal spent six months there from 1 9 0 1 to 1 9 0 2 , w h e n he certainly visited N e w York and Chicago; and J . L. M . Lauweriks made a trip to the United States in 1909. With such interest displayed by architects, it is reasonable to conclude that American architecture in the Netherlands was already a subject of discussion w h e n Berlage embarked on his trip in 1 9 1 1 , and that other Dutch architects w h o

I 45

visited America also played an important part in bringing Wright's work to public attention/' From this initial interest, two different perceptions of Wright eventually emerged that mirrored the positions, respectively, of De Stijl and the Amsterdam School. While De Stijl championed an abstracted, industrial ideal, the Amsterdam School emphasized the creative spirit of the architect.7 Though both groups shared the same goal, "the betterment of society through contact with its art" (a goal that Wright himself shared), the means to achieving this "betterment" differed. 8 On a large scale, the perception of Wright as an "industrial" architect by De Stijl and as a "romantic" by Berlage and the Amsterdam School rests squarely in the center of the debate between the Functionalists and the more romantic architects.9 The expressionist Amsterdam School, which counted Hendricus Theodorus Wijdeveld, Michel de Klerk, Jan Staal, and Piet Kramer as members, paralleled Wright in its idealistic, organic approach to design. Interest in the inherent expressive nature of materials and in vernacular forms of architecture, and a belief in the individual genius of the architect, earned the group their "romantic" label. Visual similarity between their work and Wright's can be seen in the horizontalism of Wright's Prairie houses and of the Amsterdam School's buildings, a look that in the latter case may have been intended as a foil to the popularity in Holland of the neo-Gothic with its vertical lines. While these connections alone do not imply influence, Wright certainly served as a catalyst for the debate in the Netherlands between romantics and Functionalists—a debate that the Functionalists finally won, thus imprinting the way Wright's influence on Dutch architecture has been charted. Historians' emphasis on De Stijl's limited interpretation of Wright as an "industrial architect" has resulted in the exaggeration of his influence on members of the group, who championed a rationalist vision of art and architecture. De Stijl formed in 1 9 1 7 as an aggressively "rational" aesthetic group of architects and painters; a few of its members had personal contact with Wright, and many of their works bear a striking resemblance to his. But the question of influence, both of Wright on De Stijl and of D e Stijl on Wright, has been misrepresented. As a group, De Stijl identified with Wright's interest in the potential of the machine for society and art. They saw Wright as an architect who, early in his career, had great expectations for the role of the machine in society and who was therefore a precursor of the "neue Sachlichkeit," the new objectivity or rational aesthetic. GerritThomas Rietveld's (1888—1964) copies of Wright's Avery Coonley House chairs, made for Robert van 't H o f f ' s Verloop Villa in Huis ter Heide just outside Utrecht (1914—15), for example, can be seen as an example of Wright's direct influence; they can also be seen as an early step toward Rietveld's development of furniture prototypes suited for industrial production, a move that was influenced by Pieter Jan Christopher Klaarhamer and others." 1 B y the same token, historians have exaggerated the influence exerted by De Stijl on Wright. Kenneth Frampton, for example, states that such an influence

Figure 3.1 J. N. Verloop summer house, Huis ter Heide, 1914-15. Robert v a n ' t Hoff, architect. (NAI 014752)

first emerges rather hesitantly in the Mesa project of 1 9 3 2 and then again in the M a l c o l m House of 1 9 3 2 - 3 4, the first of a long series of so-called Usonian houses dating from 1 9 3 4 to 1 9 5 0 . H e further asserts that Wright adopted D e Stijl's spatial concept, though not the typical D e Stijl neoplastic palette of primary colors. 1 1 However, nothing in this argument actually substantiates the influence of D e Stijl on Wright; moreover, no reference is made to source material. A discussion of Wright's meaning to some of the individual members of D e Stijl will help clarify the varying degrees and mechanics of influence. R o b e r t van 't H o f f (1887—1979), a founding member of the group, was the first D e Stijl architect to be significantly influenced by direct contact with W r i g h t , and as a result he and his w o r k became important instruments in the dissemination of Wright's work to other group members. After his father gave him a copy of the Sonderheft in 1 9 1 3 , he became so enthusiastic about W r i g h t that he traveled to America to study his architecture in situ. 12 H e visited Wright's O a k Park house and the U n i t y Temple, M i d w a y Gardens, and the Larkin Building; he was also the first Dutch architect to meet Wright, and they apparently discussed the possibility of collaborating on a design for a house and adjoining museum. 1 3 Wright, however, does not mention such a collaboration. Prior to this time, English country-house architecture was a major stylistic source for D u t c h architecture, and for van 't H o f f , Wijdeveld, and Jan Wils in particular. Wright's influence, however, moved v a n ' t H o f f to turn f r o m designs inspired by the rural English model, with the characteristic central hall acting as the connecting element between all the rooms, toward an abstract architecture realized with the help of modern building techniques. This n e w style is seen i m mediately in van 't H o f f ' s villa for J. N . Verloop in Huis ter H e i d e (Fig. 3 . 1 ) .

wright and Holland | 47

Figure 3.2

T h e villa, with its c r u c i f o r m plan, dominant horizontal planes, and l o w o v e r -

A. B. Henny country house, Huis ter

hanging r o o f , has the standard features of Wright's Prairie Style houses. Van

Heide, 1919. Robert van 't Hoff, architect. (NAI 012102)

't H o f f ' s n e w use of reinforced concrete as a building material also accorded with his political convictions: a m e m b e r of the C o m m u n i s t Party, he anticipated that a rationalization of the building process w o u l d produce improved w o r k i n g conditions. 1 4 T h e country villa v a n ' t H o f f designed for A . B. Henny in Huis ter Heide ( 1 9 1 9 ; Fig. 3.2) shows a refinement of the Verloop model. While similar in detail to the earlier villa, the overall effect is radically different and shows v a n ' t H o f f ' s gradual move toward abstraction in his designs. T h e closed course of windows in the Verloop design is transformed into large areas of glass without mullions; sloping roofs become flat; unbroken wall surfaces f o r m a counterbalance to the d o m i nant horizontal planes. Despite these early examples, however, after 1 9 1 9 Wright's influence is no longer apparent in v a n ' t H o f f ' s designs: the American architect's stylistic impact was not permanent. 1 '' W h e n v a n ' t H o f f j o i n e d in establishing D e Stijl, he brought his first-hand e x -

48

|

MARIETTE

VAN

STRALEN

perience of Wright's work to the notice of other members of the group. V a n ' t H o f f showed his extensive visual documentation of Wright's architecture to J . J . P. O u d ( 1 8 9 0 - 1 9 6 3 ) during one of their first meetings, possibly the first occasion that O u d saw any of Wright's w o r k . " ' In the case of O u d w e have another e x ample of influences that are more complex than has thus far been assumed. For instance, the generally accepted account of O u d and W r i g h t exaggerates the i m portance of the personal relationship the two architects shared. 17 In fact, their c o n -

tact was slight: over the years they e x c h a n g e d a f e w b r i e f , f o r m a l letters, b u t m e t o n o n l y o n e o c c a s i o n , in Paris in M a y 1 9 5 2 , p r o b a b l y in c o n n e c t i o n w i t h the " S i x t y Years o f L i v i n g A r c h i t e c t u r e " e x h i b i t i o n , w h i c h O u d was c o o r d i n a t i n g ; they i m m e d i a t e l y quarreled, h o w e v e r , b r i n g i n g an e n d to their c o n t a c t . 1 8 M o r e -

Figure 3.3 Factory design, Purmerend, 1919. Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud, architect. (NAI 003277)

over, O u d w r o t e considerably less about W r i g h t than his list o f publications m i g h t suggest, because his article on W r i g h t ' s i n f l u e n c e o n E u r o p e a n architecture was r e p r i n t e d several times. 1 9 O u d ' s design f o r a f a c t o r y in P u r m e r e n d ( 1 9 1 9 ; Fig. 3 . 3 ) is o f t e n cited as an e x a m p l e o f W r i g h t ' s influence. H o w e v e r , e x a m i n a t i o n o f the design shows a c o m p l e x interaction o f parts: the f a c t o r y has a B e r l a g i a n left half and a W r i g h t i a n right half, w h i l e the recessed central section s h o w s O u d ' s d e v e l o p i n g architectural sense o f c u b i s m and neoplasticism. O u d designed the f a c t o r y w h i l e s t u d y i n g W r i g h t ' s w o r k closely; in 1 9 1 8 he w r o t e about W r i g h t ' s creation o f a " n e w plasticity" in the R o b i e H o u s e in De Stijl magazine. 2 " O u d expressed his sense o f this " n e w plasticity" in the central section o f the factory, w i t h its a s y m m e t r i c a l a r r a n g e m e n t o f interpenetrating vertical and h o r i z o n t a l masses, b u t chose to c o m b i n e the section w i t h o t h e r elements that reflected o t h e r aesthetics. 2 1 A l t h o u g h W r i g h t ' s i n f l u e n c e is clearly visible in the P u r m e r e n d f a c t o r y design and O u d at o n e p o i n t declared that the road to C u b i s m in architecture had b e e n p a v e d b y W r i g h t , 2 2 he later emphatically d e n i e d W r i g h t ' s i n f l u e n c e . Instead he insisted: " I k n o w s o m e t h i n g a b o u t these cubist ' d y n a m i c s ' b e c a u s e the first attempts ( f r o m 1 9 1 7 : see Wasmutli's Monatshefte,

v o l u m e s 1—2) w e r e p r o d u c e d b y

m e . C u b i s m in architecture goes back to M o n d r i a n , n o t to W r i g h t : I i n t r o d u c e d

WRIGHT

AND

HOLLAND

|

4 9

Figure 3.4 Gale House, Oak Park, Illinois, 1904. FLW, architect. From t h e Sonderheft,

64.

Mondrian's ideas into architecture." 2 3 With these protests, O u d sought to secure his o w n position in the international debate. T h e influence of W r i g h t prompted a temporary swing in Oud's early work that, for opportunistic reasons, he later refused to acknowledge. 2 4 Wright's impact on D e Stijl architect Jan Wils (1891—1972) was, by contrast, considerable. W i l s — w h o , like v a n ' t H o f f , had previously modeled his interior spaces on English country-house architecture—first learned of Wright's w o r k in 1 9 1 4 w h e n he began working in Berlage's office. 2:> Wright's Prairie houses were, Wils believed, better geared to m o d e r n living because the rooms connected in an open manner, allowing free movement throughout the house. 26 B e g i n n i n g in 1 9 1 6 , Wils combined Wrightian elements with local building types, 27 but eventually his explorations resulted in a full-fledged Wrightian design: the pavilion in the municipal park in Groningen ( 1 9 1 7 ) , which, strongly indebted to the R o b i e House (see Fig. 1.5), develops a Prairie Style composition quite literally. 28 In late 1 9 1 7 Wils j o i n e d the D e Stijl group, and from 1 9 1 8 on his work reflects the dilemma of whether to w o r k in the style of W r i g h t or D e Stijl. Wils w r o t e that in Wright's work internal space is reflected in the exterior v i e w and that, by using this concept, Wils could express a " c l o s e d " plasticity with volumes that advanced and receded on a purely constructional basis. 29 Despite his use of what he considered to be a Wrightian technique, Wils's designs were heavier and more austere than Wright's, of a somewhat monumental order. In comparison with

Figure 3.5 Cafe-restaurant-hotel De Dubbele Sleutel, W o e r d e n , 1919. Jan Wils, architect. (NAI 0 1 2 3 2 7 )

Wright's relatively light and open Gale House (i 909; Fig 3.4), for example, Wils's cafe-restaurant-hotel D e Dubbele Sleutel ( 1 9 1 9 ; Fig. 3.5) appears as an asymmetrical grouping of spaces that project themselves like monolithic masses into a cubist composition. In 1 9 1 9 Wils disassociated himself from D e Stijl; from this point on he evolved an entirely individual and independent architectonic idiom. 3 " His work is difficult to place, falling between functionalism and the Amsterdam School, reflecting at once an intellectual and an emotional approach to architecture. 31 Because of the D e Stijl influence Wils appeared to be more " m o d e r n " than he actually was, a fact further supported by his close ties with the Hague School. T h e term " H a g u e S c h o o l " is used to denote a cubist building style typical of T h e Hague in the 1920s and 1930s and realized by architects, such as Wils, J o hannes Duiker, and Bernard Bijvoet, w h o were influenced by Berlage, Wright, and D e Stijl. This style made use ot austere brick wall surfaces with expressive horizontal articulation provided by the addition of concrete bands in the facades, protruding canopies, wide w i n d o w boxes, and projecting eaves. These details accentuated, as w e have seen in Wils's work, often asymmetrical compositions of cubist building-masses with spatially interpenetrating volumes that recall Wright. T h e whole served to give organic expression to the more or less free organization of the designs based on a search for a compositional harmony between a " d y namically floating" horizontalism and a " m o n u m e n t a l " verticalism. 3 2 T h e early

Figure 3.6 Portrait of Hendricus T h e o d o r u s W i j d e v e l d a n d his w i f e , Ellen, s h o w n playing t h e cello, 1931. ( W i j d e v e l d Scrapbook; F L W A 6704,0003)

work of Duiker and Bijvoet in particular shows the influence of Wright: their design for the State Academy in Amsterdam ( 1 9 1 7 ) consisted of a complex organized around a series of closed interior courtyards with a varied articulation of the interior building volumes expressed on the exterior, recalling Wright's design for Unity Temple. 3 - 1 For each of these individuals, and for a broad range of other Dutch architects as well, Wright served as a starting point, an inspiration, and a catalyst. Willem Marinus D u d o k (1884—1974), for example, w h o remained independent of the Hague School, the Amsterdam School, and D e Stijl, saw himself, like Wright, as a "building poet." Although his work assumed an entirely individual position within Dutch architecture,- 14 Dudok's interest in Wright appears to be typical of his colleagues: Wright's designs allowed a broad spectrum of aesthetic possibilities, from modernist to romantic, theatrical, and even Utopian elements, allowing architects of divergent ideologies to project their own vision into his work or, conversely, to see their vision reflected in his work. Wright's vision found no greater reflection than in the work and ideas of H e n dricus Theodorus Wijdeveld (1885—1987; Fig. 3.6). As the editor-in-chief of Weudingen, the main outlet for expressionist architects in the Netherlands, W i j develd related closely to Wright's more " r o m a n t i c " side. Discussions of Wright's influence in the Netherlands have focused little on Wijdeveld, a curious fact since he came into contact with Wright's work early, published seven special Weudingen issues on Wright in 1 9 2 5 , and, among Dutch architects, had the most longlasting and intensive personal contact with the famous American. 3 ' Critic Lewis M u m f o r d asserted that no other architect was as close to Wright: I know no one else who stands closer to him in abundance of gifts, in creative capacity, in imaginative ebullience, in range and vision, than

F i g u r e 3.7 Beach cottage, Zandvoort, 1915 ( n o w destroyed). Hendricus Theodorus Wijdeveld, architect. (Bernard F. Eilers, photographer; Nederlands Fotoarchief 194)

y o u do. It is as if nature, having brought forth W r i g h t , was a little anxious as to what might happen if some accident should stop him in mid career and so, almost a generation later, produced a second W r i g h t , in another part o f the world, blessed with the same store of gifts, but with all the many marks o f individuality that place and time and temperament and experience produce. This often seems to happen in the world: Shakespeare and M a r l o w e , G o e t h e and Schiller! A n d there it happened once again. 31 '

Wijdeveld and W r i g h t shared more than stylistic similarities; they shared similar visions and dreams. Both architects likewise had dominant personalities, and although they had a high regard for each other, they also came into conflict. After one meeting, W r i g h t commented that Wijdeveld was an even greater egotist than himself, which surprised him: " I thought I was the limit." 3 7 D u r i n g the 1 9 1 0 s , Wijdeveld used Wright's architecture as a means to distance himself from the classical formal language of his first building, the country house E n d y m i o n in Bloemendaal (1909—10), and to embrace a f o r m of architecture that had representational significance. This early phase of influence resulted in designs that are almost copies of Wright's work. Typical examples are a design for a country house on the river Vecht ( 1 9 1 4 ) and a small beach cottage in Z a n d voort ( 1 9 1 5 ; Fig. 3-7). , s Wrightian influences in both include the horizontality of the composition, the course of identical windows, the colored facade tiles, the

Figure 3.8 Drawing of the interior of the Avery Coonley House, Riverside, Illinois, 1906. FLW, architect. (FLWA 0803.103) Figure 3.9 (opposite) Study for a musician's house, 1919. Hendricus Theodorus Wijdeveld, architect. From Wendingen 2, no. 6 (June 1919): n.p.

stained-glass windows, the flowerpot terraces, and the roof structure. T h e most immediate counterpart for the latter is Wright's Avery C o o n l e y House in Riverside, Illinois (1906—8); although much more elaborate than Wijdeveld's house, it also features a decorative exterior tile pattern and upper-floor living quarters, for instance. Wright's presence in Wijdeveld's designs, however, extended beyond the e x terior and into the interior. In many of his country-houses Wijdeveld, like Wright, designed specialized spaces to focus and define the attention of their inhabitants. Even in an early design like that for E n d y m i o n , each domestic function is allocated a separate, individually designed room, with the drawing r o o m and the living room arranged around central hearths. T h e J u n e 1 9 1 9 issue of Wendingen, an issue dedicated to contemporary designs for interiors, displays Wijdeveld's interest in what can be called a "theatricalization of living." Wijdeveld included two studies for interior designs, " S t u d y for an Actor's H o u s e " and " S t u d y for a M u sician's House." B o t h feature large open interiors with spaces defined by changing forms and heights in the ceilings and floors and separate, partly unenclosed corner spaces. T h e inclusion in the same issue of an article by Wils on W r i g h t accompanied by two illustrations, an interior drawing of the Avery C o o n l e y House (Fig. 3.8) and a photograph of the Susan Lawrence Dana House in Springfield, Illinois (1902—4), reinforces the generally Wrightian details of Wijdeveld's designs. B u t Wijdeveld takes his idea of spatial specialization a step further by v i -

sually inhabiting the space: in the musician's house, for example, Wijdeveld designed performance platforms, where he depicts a group of musicians playing, with casual seating areas around the hearths for listeners (Fig. 3.9). Wijdeveld's interest in W r i g h t never led to copying; instead their shared interests spanned Wijdeveld's career. For both architects, a close relationship to nature was essential. Wright's designs are rarely symmetrical; he sought, instead, to suggest natural growth and evolution. 3 9 T h e transition from the building to the landscape had to be as smooth as possible. B o t h architects used w i n d o w boxes and terraces to effect this transition physically, and the use of stained-glass w i n dows and other decorations that found their inspiration in organic forms likewise reaffirmed associations with nature. Following Ruskin, W r i g h t tended to emphasize the weight of his buildings at ground level, so as to reinforce visually the grip they had on the soil. T h e next higher level opened up to allow in air and light. 4 " Wijdeveld, too, used this basic model. His country houses, for example, always show a clear distinction between the base, the second floor, and the roof, all of which are nevertheless h a r m o niously integrated. Similarly, he frequently emphasized the way the building stood rooted in the soil by cladding the first layer in brick. Despite such similarities, there are unmistakable differences in the way both architects set their buildings in the landscape. Although he designed gardens, W r i g h t usually adapted to the landscape, achieving a synthesis between building

, TT .

Figure 3.10 Plan for a residential tower, u n d a t e d . Hendricus Theodorus Wijdeveld, architect. (NAI 0 1 1 5 9 8 ) Figure 3.11 (below) M o d e l for Broadacre City, 1934. FLW, architect. (Skot W i e d e m a n n , p h o t o g r a p h e r ; FLWA 3 4 0 2 . 0 0 9 0 )

.

Figure 3.12 National Park, A m s t e r d a m (city), Haarlem (nature), Z a n d v o o r t (sea), 1926. Hendricus T h e o d o r u s Wijdeveld, architect. (NAI 0 0 6 3 8 0 )

and nature. Wijdeveld, in contrast, w h e n given the opportunity by his clients, would select a site and create a staged relationship between house and garden, as illustrated by his houses E n d y m i o n , D e Wachter in A m e r s f o o r t (1922—28), and D e B o u w in Hilversum (1927—30). Indeed, until after World War II Wijdeveld continued to draw heavily on English turn-of-the-century country-house precedent as designed by architects such as C . E A . Voysey and Sir E d w i n Lutyens. W r i g h t was more " m o d e r n " than Wijdeveld in his approach to the landscape. O n a larger scale, Wijdeveld's designs for residential tower-houses, which probably date to the early 1930s and possibly to after his initial visit with W r i g h t in 193 1 , are visually similar to some of Wright's residential plans based on complex geometric forms, such as St. M a r k ' s - i n - t h e - B o u w e r i e (1929), w h i c h W r i g h t planned for N e w York City but never built (Fig. 3 . 1 0 ; cf. Fig. 3 . 1 6 ) . B o t h tower designs are based on plans with polygonal models and glass exteriors and cantilevered floors. T h e two architects also shared an interest in urban planning designs directed at the creation of "ideal living communities" in more rural environments. W r i g h t had already demonstrated his attraction to community planning in 1 9 0 1 with his " H o m e in Prairie T o w n " and with his plan for Broadacre City (1934—35), i n which he proposed a decentralized grid of communities separated by open spaces (Fig. 3 . 1 1 ) . In a similar vein, in 1926—27 Wijdeveld had envisioned a national park, with Amsterdam representing the city, Haarlem representing nature, and Z a n d voort representing the sea—a hypothetical zoned reorganization of the N e t h e r lands into tower communities in which the historical cities would be preserved, with people moving from them into the towers (Fig. 3 . 1 2 ) . B o t h designs center

Figure 3.13

(right)

T h e "Illinois," or Mile H i g h project, C h i c a g o , Illinois, 1 9 5 6 . FLW, architect. (FLWA 5617.002)

F i g u r e 3 . 1 4 (far

right)

" P l a n for the Impossible, 15 Miles into the E a r t h , " 1 9 4 4 . H e n d r i c u s T h e o d o r u s W i j d e v e l d , designer. (NAI 0 1 1 4 2 9 )

5 8

I

MARIETTE

VAN

STRAIEN

around population nuclei that are connected by motorways and punctuated by skyscrapers set in the midst of woods and pastureland. While neither scheme is particularly practical, Wright's plans were a f o r m of social criticism based in a c o m plex vision of American society, whereas Wijdeveld's scheme is based in a metaphysical belief in the power of nature to improve society and humankind. T h e two architects resembled each other also in the fact that they both generated fantastic designs. In Wright's case, this applies in particular to his later designs such as the Mile High in Chicago ( 1 9 5 6 ; Fig. 3 . 1 3 ) , his fantastic plan for an office tower of cantilevered floors that would reach one mile into the atmosphere. Although he could not realistically expect that it would ever be built, Wright nevertheless promoted the idea actively. A n example of the same implausible idealism in Wijdeveld's work is his "Plan for the Impossible, 1 $ miles into the E a r t h " (1944; Fig. 3.14), a proposal for a research center dedicated to studying the earth's core that consisted of a fifteen-mile-deep hole in the earth roofed by an enormous glass dome. Surrounding the dome were skyscrapers designed to accommodate the researchers and students w h o would flock from all over the world to take part in the research. B y comparison to this research center, a project idealistically intended to advance scientific knowledge and to promote international cooperation and harmony, Wright's Mile High seems merely an exercise in braggadocio. 41 A second example of Wijdeveld's Utopian bent is his design for a " H a l l of L i f e " (1948; Fig. 3 . 1 5 ) , one of a series of six drawings accompanying his self-published b o o k A Work in Progress.42 In this story a professor (Wijdeveld, in the guise of a professor at the University of N o r t h Carolina, a position he actually held) and his students go on a j o u r n e y together seeking universal truths. T h e y see the Wall of Life, a rock wall transformed into a representation of the history of the planet earth, and the Museums of M e m o r y , a place for exhibiting excavated artifacts and the principles of the world's evolution. Finally, they arrive at the Hall of Life. Like Wright's G u g g e n h e i m M u s e u m in N e w York (1943—59), Wijdeveld's Hall of Life has a concentric design oriented toward a dome. T h e Hall was intended to house a large auditorium in w h i c h two thousand people could v i e w a holographically projected " f i l m " about the creation of the world and its natural history. Inside the building a spiral walkway leads to the auditorium, w h e r e chairs are arranged in concentric rows from w h i c h the public gazes up at the dome. T h e G u g g e n heim has a similar concentric f o r m that widens as it spirals upward into an open center, ensuring that one never loses contact with the dome. W r i g h t also initially imagined that movies could be projected onto the domed ceiling and viewed from reclining seats on the museum's floor below. Despite these parallels, Wijdeveld's design was part of a wildly fictional w o r k describing an idealized vision of the potential for the study of history and science to improve humankind. 4 3 In c o n trast with Wright's very real achievement in the G u g g e n h e i m , the Hall of Life is a fantastic Utopian project, wrapped up in Wijdeveld's sense of a " n e w religion" and fascination with theater, light, sound, and movement.

Figure 3.15

For both architects, this Utopian strain extended to an interest in education

Illustration for A Work in Progress,

and in creating communal colleges for fellowship. Little known is the fact that W i j -

with Hall of Life depicted at bottom right corner, 1948. Hendricus Theodorus Wijdeveld, designer. (NAI 011711)

develd exerted a strong influence on Wright with regard to his college, the Taliesin Fellowship. 44 From 1 9 2 7 — t h u s earlier than W r i g h t — W i j d e v e l d toyed with the idea of founding an international community on the shores of Holland's L o o s drechtse Plassen. H e published these plans along with an introduction and program in the booklet " N a a r een internationale werkgemeenschap" (193 1), w h i c h appeared in English under the title "An International G u i l d , " and sent copies all over the world. 4 "' A m o n g the recipients was Wright, with w h o m he had corresponded since 1 9 2 3 . 4 6 W r i g h t subsequently extended several invitations to W i j develd to come and w o r k with him on just such a project. 47 O n 1 2 J u l y 1 9 3 0 ,

60

|

MARIETTE

VAN

STRALEN

before the booklet's official publication, Wijdeveld sent a telegram saying h o w he longed to realize his fellowship plans but wavered between choosing W i s c o n sin, w h e r e Wright lived, or the Netherlands for the location. 48 A great deal had to be done before the two architects could begin their joint venture and set up what was to b e c o m e the Taliesin Fellowship: Wright's buildings in Hillside, Wisconsin, were in ruins and required drastic renovations. W r i g h t warned Wijdeveld that they still had a daunting amount of work to do, that they

were in for many disappointments, and that he (Wright) was not used to w o r k ing with other people but that the time n o w seemed ripe for him to do so. H e felt convinced that their similar outlook on life and attitude toward w o r k would make him and Wijdeveld "comrades in arms." 4 9 B r i m m i n g with enthusiasm, W i j develd planned to move into part of the Taliesin complex with his family once renovation was completed. This physical proximity would enable the two architects to continue working on their plans for the fellowship, and Wijdeveld could support himself by working in Wright's office."'" In preparation for their collaboration, Wijdeveld stayed with Wright for several months beginning in October 193 i . It was during this period that the brochure "TheTaliesin Fellowship" ( 1 9 3 3 ) was compiled, based on Wijdeveld's publication "An International G u i l d . " In a letter from Taliesin Wijdeveld wrote to his wife, Ellen: W r i g h t says he hadn't read the proposals in the yellow b o o k because he thought it was in D u t c h . I put them to h i m and read h i m the program out loud. A f e w hours later W r i g h t ' s o w n proposals had been completely r e v i s e d — s h o r t e n e d and a m e n d e d to incorporate half o f m y o w n international guild plan. H e r e and there word for word even. It seems I've drawn up a plan that even W r i g h t can g o along with. W e ' r e n o w elaborating and revising this plan and intend to have it printed."''

In this brochure Wijdeveld is cited as the college principal and head of the architectural department, and his w i f e is listed as the "lady principal." 3 2 Later, Wright would mention that Wijdeveld had influenced his plans, writing: " W h e n he [ W i j develd] came to America in 1 9 2 9 [Wright noted the date incorrectly; it was actually 193 i ] I had in mind a quite different affair for Taliesin than the one I eventually worked out.""' 3 In the end, however, the collaboration was stillborn. Wijdeveld returned to Holland in January 1 9 3 2 , and in February W r i g h t informed him that he had to call o f f the plan for them to work together in America: bringing Wijdeveld's f a m ily to a foreign country was too big a responsibility for W r i g h t to accept. 34 This abrupt end to the architects' collaboration must have come as a huge disappointment to Wijdeveld, though no record remains of his response. That same year W r i g h t proceeded to launch the college on his own. In the ensuing years W r i g h t wrote to Wijdeveld on at least two occasions asking him to become the college principal. 3 3 Again, Wijdeveld's response to these letters has not been preserved. After his initial disappointment, he was perhaps r

r

no longer interested in the post. In the meantime, in any event, he, along with the architect Erich Mendelsohn and the painter A m é d é e Ozenfant, set about establishing another college, the Académie Européenne Méditerranée, in Cavalière in the south of France, though these plans, too, failed to materialize w h e n the first new college buildings were gutted by fire. B u t the idea of founding a fellowship continued to haunt him, and in 1938 he opened his international guild

WRIGHT

AND

HOLLAND

.

|

61

Figure 3.16 U n p a c k i n g f o r exhibition installation, Stedelijk M u s e u m , Amsterdam, May 1931. Shown helping young students f r o m t h e local art school are Heinrich K l u m b (center),

W o l t e r s d o r f (rear), a n d Seyferth

(right) w i t h m o d e l of St.-Mark's-in-theBouwerie (1929). (FLWA 3 1 0 0 . 0 0 1 5 )

Elckerlyc in Lage Vuursche, the Netherlands, which remained open until well after the onset of World War II. 5 '' Wijdeveld and Wright reconsidered the possibility of a collaboration after the war, though again Wright wrote telling Wijdeveld that he felt too old to collaborate with anyone.'" In the summer of 1948, however, Wijdeveld did spend a f e w weeks with Wright during which he gave "Sunday morning lectures" at theTaliesin Fellowship. Wright also arranged for Wijdeveld to act as a visiting professor in the College of Architecture at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles in 1948—49, where he lectured in aesthetics in architecture,' ,s a subject for which Wijdeveld, according to Wright, was well suited. Indeed, Wright regarded his Dutch colleague above all as an aesthetician: "a tireless worker; an enthusiast beyond compare with an artistic sensitivity certainly beyond Mendelsohn, Gropius and others: a true aesthetician I should say."''9 Lewis M u m f o r d was so struck by the similarities between Wright and Wijdeveld that he suggested in 1 9 5 9 , w h e n W r i g h t died, that the Taliesin Fellowship should be taken over by W i j d e veld. H e was convinced that no one was better qualified than Wijdeveld to c o n tinue the college in the spirit of Wright/'" To what extent was Wright's Taliesin Fellowship comparable to Wijdeveld's Elckerlyc? Both were at once architectural firms and residential colleges: not only did the students work together, but they also led a communal and strictly regimented life of learning and recreation. Both colleges paid ample attention to the arts in general, rather than being confined to architecture and town planning; the curricula included musical appreciation as well as, at the Taliesin Fellowship, film screenings and, at Elckerlyc, visits to the theater.

Figure 3.17 Installation of t h e e x h i b i t i o n at t h e Stedelijk M u s é u m , A m s t e r d a m , M a y 1931. (FLWA 3 1 0 0 . 0 0 0 1 )

O n e notable difference between the two colleges lay in the importance attached to craft and practical work, which occupied a prominent place at Wright's college. Students at Taliesin served kitchen duty and farmed. While Wijdeveld clearly valued practical training in the course work and stressed the self-reliant character of his guild, he did not always put these ideas into practice. For instance, nothing came of the projected vegetable garden at Elckerlyc, nor did the students turn out real merchandise, as they did at the Bauhaus. T h e r e were no machines at Elckerlyc, only drawing boards and an extensive library Wijdeveld's Elckerlyc was also much smaller (it trained a total of twenty students) and operated for a much shorter period than Wright's Taliesin Fellowship, though they do have in c o m m o n that neither put forth any famous architects. T h e cult of personality that characterized both colleges may indeed have hampered students' development. Even as the two architects communicated in 1930—31 about the possibility of collaborating on the Taliesin Fellowship, Wijdeveld made another significant contribution to the dissemination of Wright's work by arranging for a major exhibition to be mounted at Amsterdam's Stedelijk M u s e u m in M a y 1 9 3 1 (Figs. 3 . 1 6 and 3.17). 6 1 T h e exhibition, "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect," had previously been on tour in the United States, and Wright asked Wijdeveld to arrange for it to be shown in the Netherlands. Wijdeveld agreed: not only did he admire Wright's work, but he had already organized and designed a number of exhibitions on previous occasions. Although no money was available to publish an accompanying catalog, a special issue of the Dutch architectural weekly the Bouwkundig

weekblad

devoted to Wright's work marked the occasion, reproducing several texts by Wright and an introduction by Wijdeveld/' 2 In this introduction, Wijdeveld rather oddly

pointed out the unconventional character of Wright's architecture and urged that Wright's work should not be condemned for its seeming unorthodoxy. H e was very likely responding to the growing criticism by Dutch functionalist architects, w h o dominated the architectural debate in the Netherlands in the 1920s and 1930s. 6 3 In the years that followed, criticism of Wright's work continued to mount. Fallingwater (1934—37), f ° r example, was described in 193 8 as a "strange" house/' 4 In another instance, Wright's design for the Price Tower, an office building in Bartlesville, Oklahoma (1952—56), was called a "peculiar" building because of its unusual construction: the building weighed only a seventh of other similar-sized buildings/'"' A n d of the Desert House (1950), w h i c h he built for his son David, it was said that the "unusual" design made for "a house that looks like a monster or rattlesnake from some angles." 66 These comments were typical during this less accepting period. Despite this criticism, Wright's work continued to receive popular attention. Notable in particular is the visit of the " S i x t y Years of Living Architecture" e x hibition mounted in the A h o y Building in Rotterdam in 1 9 5 2 . T h e exhibition had previously toured several other venues, and W r i g h t asked O u d — r a t h e r than Wijdeveld, w h o was professionally isolated 6 7 —to supervise it in the Netherlands. To contextualize the exhibited works, O u d suggested featuring a number of o b jects, such as a fountain that evoked the Fallingwater House, flowers, cactuses, boulders, animal skins, exotic rugs, and, last but not least, two living parrots. In a letter to W r i g h t O u d wrote: " N o , don't be afraid; it does not at all look like 'kitsch' but gives the whole show a bit of the atmosphere that your houses must have in reality." 68 B u t O u d was mistaken: the appointments were carried out in poor taste and looked overdone. Wright's work was reduced to a caricature of itself. Despite its kitschy appearance, the exhibition was a popular success: no fewer than ten thousand people visited/' 9 It was widely covered by the daily and trade press, where it was warmly received. Reviews tended to focus on the Utopian aspects and exuberance of Wright's work, and one writer drew a parallel between Wright and Wijdeveld, pointing to the Utopian element in the w o r k of both architects. 70 Although this might be construed as a positive response to Wright's work, this was not in fact the case. At that time people were afraid that W r i g h t might exercise a negative influence on y o u n g architects; some claimed his architecture was so exuberant that it was a dangerous example for those w h o lacked his talent. Implicit in these complaints was the objection that W r i g h t was not sufficiently dogmatic. 7 1 From the end of the war until shortly after Wright's death in 1 9 5 9 articles on his work appeared occasionally in Dutch magazines. M a n y of these took stock of the impact he had had on Dutch architecture in the 1 9 1 0 s and 1920s: in short, they acknowledged Wright's influence on Dutch architecture in the past. T h e y also tended to focus on the unusual structure of his buildings, describing them in an objective style, as shown by this report on a design for a mile-high skyscraper (probably the Mile High Illinois; see Fig. 3 . 1 2 ) : " H e has envisaged his

latest cosmos-scraper as a steel colossus sheathed in a golden aluminium skin. This he has chosen to site along one of the lakes near C h i c a g o [siV] where, glistening in the sunshine, it stands eye in eye with the flabbergasted sun. Construction costs are put at 3 30 million [florins] ," 7 2 Another article depicted Wright's Research LaboratoryTower in Racine, Wisconsin (1943—50), alongside a concrete diving tower in M i a m i , Florida, by the obscure architect Igor Polevitsky. 73 This spurious c o m parison suggests that W r i g h t had by then lost the special significance he once had in the Netherlands. 7 4 This preoccupation with the unusual structural aspects of Wright's work and the contradictory j u d g m e n t that his architecture was overexuberant, even strange, may have a simple explanation, one that rests in the fact that functionalism had temporarily w o n the architectural debate in Holland. T h e following comment f r o m 1 9 5 7 captures the consensus on his work: Once a pioneer of new architecture, Frank Lloyd Wright has now lost his way and, in his eagerness to please, has neglected function for form. This is the view taken by most contemporary architectural experts and Functionalists. . . . Wright claims that Sullivan's famous statement ["Form follows function"] was misinterpreted in the Netherlands. We have taken it to mean functionalism in the literal sense, whereas it was apparently meant to point to the need for an organic architecture. Organic architecture was indeed introduced by Frank Lloyd Wright. But then he went wrong: his architecture was not organic but romantic. The battle began.7'' E v e n the independent architect D u d o k , w h o had enthusiastically acclaimed Wright's architecture in 1 9 2 6 , thought W r i g h t had taken the Utopian character of some of his designs—the G u g g e n h e i m M u s e u m and the Mile High Illinois, for e x a m p l e — f a r too far. 7 '' Wijdeveld alone rejected this n e w attitude toward Wright. As w e have seen, the G u g g e n h e i m actually served as a source of inspiration in Wijdeveld's o w n work. It is therefore not surprising that Wijdeveld's work in this period, like Wright's, is dismissed as overly Utopian. After a long period of relative unpopularity, Wright's work is currently enjoying a reappraisal. A number of other contemporary architects have discovered a fascination for Wright's work, including R e m Koolhaas of O M A , w h o finds particular significance in Broadacre City. 77 A m o n g younger architects, B e n van Berkel, Kees Christiaanse, and Wiel Arets cite as especially important the enormous overhangs Wright used in his country houses, the link he established between his houses and the surrounding countryside, and his skillful use of new technology, as shown by his Research Laboratory Tower in Racine. 78 A n d yet these three architects produce work that is very different from Wright's. It is as if w e were back at the b e ginning of this century w h e n architects working independently and steered by a totally different vision saw their o w n ideas projected in Wright's w o r k , though now, of course, architects have an added advantage: access to a broader critical and historical grasp of Wright's long relationship to the Netherlands.

FOUR: A

WRIGHT

AND

ITALY

RECOLLECTION

Bruno Zevi

j u s t b e f o r e the A m e r i c a n A c a d e m y in R o m e d e c i d e d that y o u c o u l d n o l o n g e r keep it here, in the U n i t e d States (I speak o f c o u r s e o f the Italian Renaissance), and that it should be sent back to w h e r e it c a m e f r o m , w e e x p e r i e n c e d in the peninsula a short, splendid season o f true architectural culture. T h a t m o m e n t was d o m i n a t e d b y Frank L l o y d W r i g h t , the genius o f the t w e n t y first century. A n d w h e n in 1 9 5 1 he c a m e to Italy to receive h o n o r a r y c i t i z e n ship in Palazzo V e c c h i o , F l o r e n c e , and the d e g r e e honoris causa in the Palazzo D u c a l e o f V e n i c e , it s e e m e d like the a c m e o f a sublime itinerary in space. W e w e r e b u o y e d w i t h j o y and delight, and c o u l d n e v e r suspect w h a t was to c o m e w i t h the return o f a fake Renaissance filtered through F r e n c h and A m e r i c a n B e a u x Arts and the subsequent e x p l o s i o n o f a m o s t foolish eclecticism u n d e r the title of Postmodern. M y story starts o n 2 1 J a n u a r y 1 9 3 5 in T u r i n . E d o a r d o Persico, a great a r c h i tectural critic still quite u n k n o w n in the U n i t e d States, delivered a lecture called "Architectural P r o p h e c y . " Fascism was then at its p e a k , and Persico was an u n c o m p r o m i s i n g antifascist f o r w h o m architecture served as a b a r o m e t e r o f a c o u n try's civilization. H e spoke o f W r i g h t ' s vision as b e i n g the v e r y r o o t o f the m o d ern m o v e m e n t and the u n i q u e e m b o d i m e n t o f a desperate quest f o r f r e e d o m , individuality, and the right to diversity in c o n t e m p o r a r y society. S o the Taliesin master b e c a m e a rallying p o i n t f o r the fight against dictatorship, n o t o n l y in Italy, but also, f o r instance, at H a r v a r d U n i v e r s i t y ' s G r a d u a t e S c h o o l o f D e s i g n , w h e r e in 1 9 4 1 a g r o u p o f students, m a i n l y f o r e i g n , published a p a m p h l e t celebrating W r i g h t ' s stature against the skeptical teaching o f Walter G r o p i u s . In fact, Persico inspired in fascist Italy three masterpieces o f antifascist a r c h i tecture: the Casa del Fascio at C o m o , b y G i u s e p p e T e r r a g n i ; the m a g n i f i c e n t F l o r ence R a i l w a y Station, b y G i o v a n n i M i c h e l u c c i and his g r o u p ; and Sabaudia, the

Figure 4.1 The first Italian e d i t i o n of Towards an Organic Architecture, by Bruno Zevi (Turin: Einaudi, 1945), f e a t u r i n g Fallingwater o n its cover.

democratic city on a human scale planned by Luigi Piccinato and his partners. I do not mean that these works were directly stimulated by Wright. N o , but they could be built because there was in Italy a revolutionary atmosphere, instigated by Persico and by Giuseppe Pagano, editor of the magazine Casabella, w h o died in a Nazi camp. We leap to 1 9 4 5 . T h e first architectural b o o k to appear after the war was my Towards an Organic Architecture. Because of a shortage of glossy paper, it contained only one photo, and that was on the cover: Fallingwater at Bear R u n (Fig. 4 . 1 ) . Italian architects lived on this image for months; it alone was enough to inject them with vitality. In 1 9 4 5 the Association for an Organic Architecture (APAO) was founded in R o m e , and it soon had outposts in Turin, Genoa, Venice, Bologna, Florence, Naples, and Palermo. A Milan group was also federated with the association but had no formal chapter. T h r e e designs reflect the animus of the time immediately following the war: the Fosse Ardeatine M e m o r i a l on the outskirts of R o m e , in m e m o r y of victims

Figure 4.2 Fosse Ardeatine Memorial, Rome, 1 9 4 4 - 4 7 . Nello Aprile, G i n o Calcaprina, A l d o Cardelli, Mario Fiorentino, a n d Giuseppe Perugini, architects; sculptures by Mirko Basaldella a n d Francesco Coccia.

68

|

BRUNO

ZEVI

Figure 4.3 Rome Railway Station, 1950. Leo Calini, engineer; Eugenio Montuori, A n n i b a l e Vitellozzi, M. Castellazzi, V. Fadigati, a n d A. Pintonello, architects.

Figure 4.4 Monument to the Dead in the Concentration Camps in Germany, Cimitero Monumentale, Milan, 1946. BBPR, designers.

of Nazi criminality, perhaps the best monument of its kind in the world (Fig. 4.2); a correct modern solution to the front of the R o m e Railway Station, w h i c h was about to be completed with a most awful fascist-style colonnaded portico (Fig. 4.3); and a small, almost transparent monument in the cemetery of Milan, dedicated to those w h o died in German concentration camps, designed by the Banfi, Belgiojoso, Peresutti, and Rogers firm ( B B P R ; Fig. 4.4). These were the years of postwar reconstruction and of conflicts about appropriate methods for carrying it out. We, the organic, the Wrightian architects, did not win. In 1946 I was invited to Cleveland by the American City Planning Institute to present the opening speech at the first postwar congress of that organization, and I chose a polemical subject: " T o w n Planning as an Instrument of an American Foreign Policy." This problem of town planning was, in my view, urgent. T h e U.S. authorities in Italy had behaved in a way that damaged efforts b e ing made toward the renewal of democracy in that country. Especially in the south, they connected their initiatives to the official institutions of the Italian government, which, at the bureaucratic level, were still mainly Fascist. W h e n it came to establishing an American embassy in R o m e , the authorities followed an appallingly anticultural course: instead of producing a courageous modern building, designed perhaps by Wright, they bought a royal palace in via Veneto, and then, in the name of efficiency, they ruined it.

WRIGHT A

AND

ITALY.

RECOLLECTION

|

6 9

Figure 4.5 Rural village " L a M a r t e l l a , " M a t e r a , 1951. L u d o v i c o Q u a r o n i et al., designers.

O n the whole, w e were defeated. B u t w h e n one fights unconditionally, with no second line of defense, one is never completely defeated. In those years, not only did w e create a number of buildings conceived in the organic spirit, but, what is more relevant, w e also moved a new organic approach into urban housing programs and into rural villages, such as " L a Martella" near Matera (Fig. 4.5). This spirit penetrated even into industrial architecture, as seen in the Olivetti factory at Pozzuoli, near Naples (Fig. 4.6). Luigi Cosenza, its designer, was an engineer and, for a short time, a partner of Bernard Rudolfsky; he was not an architect or, even less, a design professor, but he loved W r i g h t and molded a factory, perhaps unique, w h e r e industry and nature would meet. I come n o w to the fabulous year of 1 9 5 1 . A splendid exhibition of Wright's work was organized at Palazzo Strozzi in Florence by Oskar Stonorov, the Philadelphia architect for the worker's union C I O , and by the art historian Carlo L u dovico Ragghianti. A legendary antifascist leader, Ragghianti had in 1 9 4 4 crossed, at night, the top passageway of Florence's Ponte Vecchio, which had been mined by the Germans, to ensure contact between the Allies, encamped on the other side of the Arno, and the resistance fighters inside the city. T h e 1 9 5 1 exhibition of Wright's work fascinated not only Italy, but all E u rope. Recognizing Wright's immeasurable greatness, the old world thanked the new for its astounding creativity. T h e huge Broadacre City model (see Figs. 1 . 1 4 , 3 . 1 1 , and 5 . 1 ) was seen in the middle of the exhibition, and full-size photo m u rals gave the impression of being inside the buildings and moving fluidly through their spaces. A f e w hours after Wright's arrival in Florence, w h e n he visited the

F i g u r e 4.6

(above)

Olivetti factory, Pozzuoli, near Naples, 1951. Luigi Cosenza, architect.

F i g u r e 4.7 W r i g h t , C o u n t Carlo Sforza

(center),

a n d Carlo Ludovico Ragghiami (right), at t h e "Sixty Years of Living A r c h i t e c t u r e " exhibition in Florence. ( F L W A 6808.0014)

exhibition and suggested some little variations, Stonorov told him gently but firmly that nothing would be changed because it had been conceived as W r i g h t ' s first posthumous exhibition, only the corpse was still alive. C o u n t Carlo Sforza, an antifascist leader w h o had f o u n d refuge in the U n i t e d States during the war and later became minister of foreign affairs in the d e m o cratic government, made W r i g h t an honorary citizen of Florence (Fig. 4.7). W h e n the Medici trumpeters sounded their instruments, W r i g h t ' s daughter Iovanna fainted. It could not have happened in any other part of the globe. In Palazzo Vecchio, a masterpiece of medieval architecture, in an immense hall covered by mannerist paintings, Italy celebrated o n e of the greatest personalities of architectural history, if not the greatest.

F i g u r e 4.8

I was with Wright from early morning to late that night. He spoke not a word

a n d W r i g h t , Venice, 1951.

about the months spent in Fiesole in 1 9 1 0 , not a comment on Brunelleschi's cupola of the D u o m o or on Michelangelo's chapel in San Lorenzo. He was interested only in the views of the city as seen from the top of the ninety-four-meter tower designed in the fourteenth century by A r n o l f o di Cambio. In Venice there was a quite different climate. Actually, in Florence nobody really cared about Wright, except for a f e w hundred people w h o came from all parts of the peninsula. B u t in Venice the Taliesin master was a popular myth because the school of architecture was composed ot people with a passion for Wright, from the director, Giuseppe Samona, to the design professor, Carlo Scarpa, and B r u n o Z e v i , the young teacher of architectural history (Fig. 4.8). W h e n W r i g h t walked in the calli or through the piazzcttc, or w h e n he traveled by gondola, Venetians of all social strata recognized, greeted, and applauded him. Wright was surprised and happy—such recognition had never happened to him before; indeed, he liked that much more than the solemn ceremony in the Palazzo Ducale, where he was awarded the degree honoris causa. Let me mention three more episodes in the trip to Venice: InTorcello there is a little bridge with no parapets, just in front of the basilica; Wright went up alone

Figure 4.9 Carlo Scarpa (left), Wright, and students, Venice, 1951. (FLWA 6808.0026)

and, in spite of risk, danced on the bridge for quite a while in a delightful way. T h e n w e went to Murano, to visit the glass factory. In the vestibule was a selection of products fabricated over many years. W r i g h t looked around almost absentmindedly, then said that he wanted to buy this, this, that: five or six objects. Believe it or not, they were all designed, long ago, by Carlo Scarpa. Without k n o w ing, Wright had generated a poet, Carlo Scarpa, w h o lagged behind W r i g h t not a century, like the majority of us, not even half a century, like the deconstructivists, but perhaps only twenty or thirty years (Fig. 4.9). In Venice Wright discovered the message of the baroque. I had selected for him a room at the Hotel Gritti, just in front of Santa Maria della Salute by Baldassare Longhena. H e was astonished by the octagonal shape of the church, by the crown of explosive volutes, and especially by the two cupolas. His hands followed slowly the different profiles from the top of the church to its base alongside the lagoon. For the first time, he grasped what, without knowing it, he had rejected a priori. Finally, w e reached R o m e . T h e r e were no official engagements, almost nothing to do. His wife, Olgivanna, decided to visit the Vatican. H e felt that he shouldn't. So w e were free to spend the day, first in the atelier of the painterwriter Carlo Levi, w h o made a portrait of him, then at an exquisite lunch at the

Figure 4.10 Perspective, Masieri M e m o r i a l project, Venice, 1952. FLW, architect. (FLWA 5 3 0 6 . 0 0 2 )

Gianicolo (but far from the American Academy) with the historian of Byzantine art Sergio Bettini, and later wandering much of the afternoon around Rome, where he met the architect I love most after Wright, the baroque master Francesco Borromini. This report on Wright and Italy must be expanded: In 1952—53 he designed for the family of one of his disciples, who died in a road accident in N e w York, the Masieri Memorial on the Grand Canal (Fig. 4.10; see also Figs. 5.5 and 5.6), and we fought for years to have it built. However, we lost this battle, just as those

for L e Corbusier's soft and gentle hospital and Louis Kahn's Biennale were lost. T h e 1960s and the 1970s, as you will remember, saw a process in w h i c h the M o d ern Movement was deliberately confused with its opposite, the International Style. T h e critics w h o had stood for the International Style against W r i g h t , accusing him of being romantic, escapist, Utopian, and so on, n o w started to attack the International Style with the same arguments W r i g h t had used for decades. This did not, however, produce a much greater appreciation of Wright's creativity. T h e n came the 1 9 8 0 s — P h i l i p Johnson and Michael Graves, A l d o Rossi, R i cardo Bofill, and the postmodern nausea that ended only in 1 9 8 8 , with the " D e constructivist Architecture" exhibit at the M u s e u m of M o d e r n A r t in N e w York. N o doubt neoacademic and postmodernist shame touched Italy too, but the organic Wrightian reaction was decisive. As far as I know, no professional institute or magazine anywhere else in the world showed itself as consistently willing to fight neoacademism and postmodernism, no matter the cost, as did the Italian Institute of Architecture and the monthly magazine L'architettura: cronache e storia. O n l y in Italy, if I am not mistaken, did Wright's stature appear in its true M i c h e l angelesque splendor, as something that belongs to a century or so f r o m now. We feel that w e have to work hard and cheerfully to reach, in a hundred years, that "architecture as space" that W r i g h t himself created. To end this recollection, I must mention the principles w e absorbed f r o m Wright. O n the theoretical level, W r i g h t grasped and developed all aspects of modern architecture. In Italy, in order to fight the classical language of architecture, an anticlassical language was codified, based on seven "invariant" principles or anti-rules: Listing of contents and functions, derived from William M o r r i s and the arts and crafts movement, to which W r i g h t subscribed in the key of the machine. Asymmetry and dissonance. Indeed, the Taliesin master is the A r n o l d Schoenberg of architecture. Antiperspective, three-dimensionality, directed to deny the boxlike building as seen from a static Renaissance point of view. Four-dimensional decomposition. W r i g h t is the father of the Dutch D e Stijl movement. Cantilever, shell, and membrane structures, w h i c h j o i n to end the schism between engineering and architecture. 6.

Living, dynamic, fluid space. Herein lies the very identity of Wright.

7.

Continuity between inside and outside, between building and landscape, in urban texture.

Seven invariants, all employed by Wright. T h e r e is no other architect in history as powerful or sublime.

WRIGHT A

AND

ITALY:

RECOLLECTION

|

7

5

FIVE: THE

WRIGHT

PROMISE

Maristella

OF

AND

ORGANIC

ITALY ARCHITECTURE

Casciato

In January 1 9 1 0 , Frank Lloyd W r i g h t arrived in Florence. Marginal in respect to other European centers of modern architecture, Florence seemed an ideal refuge for Wright as he sought to distance himself from the criticism that accompanied his departure from the United States in the company of M a m a h B o r t h w i c k . A f ter two months in Florence, W r i g h t moved to the Fiesolian hills; there, in the pleasant Villa of Belvedere, he w o u l d continue his voluntary exile for another six months. It was during this period that W r i g h t developed themes elaborated in his long essay " T h e Sovereignty of the Individual in the Cause of Architecture," which served as preface to the Wasmuth portfolio. 1 " O f . . . j o y in living there is greater proof in Italy than elsewhere," he wrote. "Buildings, pictures and sculpture seem to be born like flowers by the roadside, to sing themselves into being. Approached in the spirit of their conception, they inspire us with the very m u sic of life." 2 In M a y 1 9 5 1 , W r i g h t returned once again to Florence on the occasion of the first exhibition of his work in Italy, this time accompanied by his third wife, O l givanna, and their daughter, Iovanna (Fig. 5 . 1 ) . T h e forty years between the two visits had wrought tremendous change, for n o w W r i g h t was a venerable eightyfour years old and internationally famous. In Florence he was ecstatically described by one onlooker as standing straight, his gaze turned toward infinity, and as having the sweetest voice. 3 For the many architects, students, and friends w h o came 76 |

to pay him homage, Wright powerfully embodied the fascinating figure of a creative pioneer. 4 For these Italian admirers, however, W r i g h t also incarnated an ideal of liberty and democracy that the young postwar republic was striving to achieve. In postwar Italy, only recently liberated from authoritarianism and whose economic rebirth was in part due to American aid, Wright's contribution to modern archi-

Figure 5.1 Wright and friends at the "Sixty Years of Living Architecture" exhibition in Florence with the model of Broadacre City, June 1951. Pictured are (left right):

to

Olgivanna Wright, Wright, Bruno

Zevi (partly

obscured),

an American

friend of the Wrights, lovanna Wright, Carlo Ludovico Ragghianti, Count Carlo Sforza, Oskar Stonorov, and Licia Collobi Ragghianti.

tecture was perhaps less important than his spiritual influence. T h o s e crucial years between the end of the war and the economic b o o m will be the tocus of this essay, as we explore how, in architecture as well as in life, as Cesare Pavese put it, Italians "discovered Italy while looking to the m e n and the words in America."'' Spurred by a sense of urgency during postwar reconstruction, many Italian architects, young and established alike, chose W r i g h t as their maestro in their quest for a liberating freshness and vitality. But w h o was Frank Lloyd W r i g h t for such diverse Italian architects as Luigi Figini, G i n o Pollini, Giuseppe Samona, Carlo Scarpa, Giancarlo D e Carlo, B r u n o Zevi, Angelo Masieri, Gino Valle, B r u n o M o rasutti, Edoardo Gellner, Luigi Pellegrin, Francesco Passanti, Marcello D'Olivo, and Leonardo Ricci? Apart from his personal charisma, to what measure and in what context did W r i g h t ' s thought become a renovating force for their architectural expression? Historians have provided veiled answers to these questions/' If their conclusions have been less than incisive, it is perhaps because some of the architects in question are still active professionals, which makes an accurate assessment of Wright's influence on their work difficult to determine. Some scholars have described the rediscovery of W r i g h t in post—World War II Italy as merely a shortlived episode, a superficial infatuation. 7 T h e question of " W r i g h t i s m " has been

better addressed by Ernesto N a t h a n R o g e r s , w h o states that Italian architecture first absorbed W r i g h t ' s themes indirectly, then concretized his forms, ad hoc, into its o w n language. 8 F o l l o w i n g R o g e r s ' s cue, in this essay I address the spirit o f W r i g h t i s m rather than seeking examples o f direct imitation.

CHRONICLE OF A DISCOVERY P r i o r to World War II in Italy, interest in W r i g h t ' s w o r k was limited. It was not until 1 9 2 1 that the n a m e W r i g h t (surname only) finally appeared in an Italian publication, in the first issue o f Architettura e Arti Decorative.9 W r i g h t was not m e n tioned in the context o f architectural developments in the U n i t e d States, h o w ever, but in the discussion o f the birth o f " c u b i s m " in m o d e r n D u t c h architecture. E c h o i n g J . J . R O u d ' s earlier statements in De Stijl, the article linked the A m e r i c a n architect and the C o m o - b o r n Sant'Elia, visionary interpreter o f the futuristic "città n u o v a , " emphasizing the fantastic nature o f both m e n ' s w o r k . T h e article ultimately concluded that both architects w e r e isolated " g r a n d masters" and labeled them m e r e " p r e c u r s o r s " o f truly m o d e r n architecture. 1 0 T h i s j u d g m e n t was still p o p u l a r in Italy as late as 1 9 3 3 . T h a t year the I n t e r national E x h i b i t i o n o f M o d e r n A r c h i t e c t u r e at the Fifth M i l a n e s e T r i e n n a l e e x cluded W r i g h t f r o m the list o f ten architectural greats w h o w e r e to b e featured in the show. A g n o l o d o m e n i c o Pica, curator o f the e x h i b i t i o n , again placed W r i g h t o n a par w i t h S a n t ' E l i a , c o n t i n u i n g to j u d g e b o t h solely as isolated f o r e runners. Also in 1 9 3 3 , changes w e r e made at the Milanese magazine La Casa bella that w o u l d have a great impact on W r i g h t ' s future reception in Italy. Tossing aside the article at the b e g i n n i n g and fusing the main words o f the title, the n e w l y r e n a m e d Casabella acquired an equally n e w director, the Istrian architect G i u s e p p e P a g a n o Pogatschnig, w h o was flanked by E d o a r d o Persico as editor in chief. 1 1 A c o u r a geous defender o f rational architecture, Pagano sympathized w i t h the ideals o f the E u r o p e a n m o d e r n m o v e m e n t but had not yet m o v e d away f r o m the g e n e r ally accepted opinions c o n c e r n i n g W r i g h t . 1 2 Persico, in contrast, b r o u g h t a m o r e sophisticated understanding o f W r i g h t to Italy. 13 In J a n u a r y 1 9 3 5 he gave his most f a m o u s lecture, entitled " P r o f e z i a dell'architettura" (Architectural p r o p h e c y ) — t h e prophet in question being n o n e other than Frank L l o y d W r i g h t . Persico observed that m o d e r n architecture was reduced to the fatal situation in w h i c h the only possible means o f expressing m o d e r n i t y was through technical revolution, as represented by " t h e perfect trinity o f m o d e r n construction: glass, iron, c o n c r e t e . " Instead he proposed m o v i n g the emphasis f r o m the technical to the visual. F o r W r i g h t ' s w o r k o f the Prairie years, this meant reducing its c o n n e c t i o n w i t h C u b i s m : " C u b i s m is yet to c o m e , not only because w e are in 1 9 0 1 or 1 9 0 4 , but also because to define the

figura-

tive elements o f this construction w e must refer to the Impressionist vision, to the vision o f C é z a n n e . . . . W r i g h t might be considered the C é z a n n e o f the n e w

architecture." 1 4 In reformulating his question on the destiny of architecture, Persico sought the answer " b e y o n d architecture." Following in Wright's footsteps, he concluded that "the destiny (of modern architecture), its prophecy, is to claim the fundamental liberty of the spirit." 1 "' Persico's interpretation of Wright's individualism and its relationship to the collective g o o d coincided with Wright's o w n proposals for liberating man from the tyranny of efficiency. In the same year as Persico's lecture (1935), W r i g h t included this concept in a message that his son, J o h n Lloyd, read in his father's name in R o m e at the International Congress of Architecture, organized by the Fascist National U n i o n of Architects. Emphasizing the themes explored in his B r o a d acre City scheme, W r i g h t stated that the conditions existed in Italy for applying "the principles of the n e w pattern h o m e . " Furthermore, he included a direct address to Mussolini and his architects, entreating them to "lead their country to a modern lease on life by abandoning the old academic order and to establish this more natural and humane order." 1 6 In the years that followed, Casabella continued to be the only Italian magazine to present Wright's work. T h e first special issue dedicated to W r i g h t appeared in 1 9 3 8 , after Persico's death; the art critic Raffaello Giolli penned the editorial introducing the issue. Unlike Persico, Giolli separated himself from the Wrightian myth, allowing the architect's buildings to speak for themselves. 1 7 Giolli did, h o w ever, openly identify with the aging Wright, and especially with his sincerity and courage, qualities the critic considered necessities for renovation in architecture as well as in life. 1 8

A M E R I C A N I S M A N D THE ITALIAN D E V E L O P M E N T OF O R G A N I C A R C H I T E C T U R E

T h e homages of Persico, a historian, and Giolli, a critic, elucidate the significance of the myth of American individualism in Italian culture of the late 1930s. 1 9 W r i g h t , along with other American "individualists" such as H e r m a n Melville, Walt Whitman, Sinclair Lewis, William Faulkner, and J o h n Dos Passos, to name those best k n o w n in Italy, became symbols of the progressive America of R o o s e velt and his N e w Deal. In the words of Italo Calvino, A m e r i c a represented "a disorderly synthesis of all that fascism claimed to negate or to exclude." 2 0 In 1 9 3 9 Pasquale Carbonara published his L'architettura in America: La civiltà nordamericana riflessa nei caratteri dei suoi edifici (Architecture in America: N o r t h A m e r ican civilization reflected in the character of its buildings), w h i c h , as the subtitle indicates, examined the "civilizing f o r c e " that shaped America's history and architecture. Although it concentrated on typological analysis of buildings, C a r bonara's b o o k made frequent reference to W r i g h t as the "ultimate exponent of nineteenth-century American individualism" and the grand interpreter of the American domestic ideal. 21 After the war, interest in Wright's work grew. Translations of his books began appearing in 1 9 4 5 . Architettura e democrazia was the title given to Modern Architec-

ture, the c o m p i l a t i o n o f W r i g h t ' s influential P r i n c e t o n lectures, and it i n c l u d e d an e x c e r p t f r o m Persico's 1 9 3 5 lecture as its i n t r o d u c t i o n . Architettura L'architettura

ddla democrazia,

organica:

edited by A l f o n s o G a t t o and G i u l i a Veronesi, was

the translation o f An Organic Architecture (The Architecture of Democracy), w h i c h c o n tained the f o u r lectures given by W r i g h t in L o n d o n in 1 9 3 9 . 2 2 B r u n o Z e v i ' s b o o k Verso un'architettura organica (Towards an organic architecture; see Fig. 4 . 1 ) , w h i c h was to b e c o m e a milestone w o r k f o r the cultivation o f interest in W r i g h t and other A m e r i c a n architects, also appeared in 1 9 4 5 . 2 1 In 1 9 4 6 , as the echoes o f w a r began r e c e d i n g into history, Giulia Veronesi w r o t e o f " W r i g h t ' s h o u r , " and her b r i e f but illuminating essay resounds w i t h a sense o f the epic: " T h e old A m e r i c a n continues to b e the m a n o f the day; today n o disc o u r s e c o n c e r n i n g architecture can disregard r e f e r e n c e either to his w o r k or his w o r d . Italy was late in b e c o m i n g aware o f h i m . " 2 4 S h e also emphasizes Persico's c o n t r i b u t i o n to W r i g h t ' s notoriety, stating that ten years b e f o r e , w h e n Persico first m e n t i o n e d W r i g h t ' s n a m e , " n o o n e k n e w w h o he w a s , " and even less w h a t he stood for. In this p o s t w a r climate o f i n v i g o r a t e d interest, t w o events accelerated the r e newal o f Italian architectural culture and its relationship to W r i g h t ' s " o r g a n i c arc h i t e c t u r e " : the birth o f the m a g a z i n e Metron and the f o r m a t i o n o f the A s s o c i a zione per l'Architettura O r g a n i c a (Association f o r O r g a n i c Architecture), k n o w n by its a c r o n y m A P A O . B o t h o f these events had R o m e as their stage and B r u n o Z e v i as their c h i e f protagonist. T h e magazine Metron, w h i c h existed f o r less than ten years (the last issue appeared in 1 9 5 4 ) , was f u e l e d by the animating h o p e that characterized Italy d u r i n g the years o f postwar r e c o n s t r u c t i o n . 2 ' ' T h e initial issues (nos. 1—24) w e r e m o d e s t , but as time w e n t on the m a g a z i n e published a f o r m i d a b l e series o f contributions to critical analysis that enabled Italy to rejoin the international arena o f m o d e r n architectural t h o u g h t (Fig. 5.2). O f special n o t e are the t w o d o u b l e issues d e d i cated to W r i g h t : o n e d e v o t e d to the F l o r e n t i n e e x h i b i t i o n , the s e c o n d d e v o t e d to the M a s i e r i M e m o r i a l project in V e n i c e (Fig. 5.3). 2 6 Metron served as A P A O ' s propagandist, w h i c h is n o t surprising c o n s i d e r i n g the i n f l u e n c e Z e v i exercised o n b o t h the m a g a z i n e and the association. T h e g r o u p , w h i c h b e c a m e officially operative o n 1 5 J u l y 1 9 4 5 and m e t f o r f i v e years, 2 7 was f o r m e d to p r o m o t e a "liberal association o f w o r k and r e s e a r c h " that w o u l d unite m o d e r n architects interested in the r e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f Italy. T h e m e a n i n g o f W r i g h t ' s t e r m " o r g a n i c " was the subject o f m u c h debate. F o r A P A O generally, the organic was an abstract c o n c e p t c o n n e c t e d w i t h the " s e a r c h f o r r e a l i t y " and the d e f i n i t i o n o f a social ideal. F o r Z e v i , it wasn't the visual motifs that w e r e most valuable, but those that w e r e m o r e h u m a n because they p e r m i t t e d the individual to discover a unity o f the spirit, thus f o r g i n g b o t h a n e w personality and a n e w culture. 2 X A P A O ' s " D e c l a r a t i o n o f P r i n c i p l e s " was published in the s e c o n d issue o f Metron.2'' T h e g r o u p called o n its m e m b e r s to p r o v i d e a b r i d g e b e t w e e n ratio-

metron miiiisio-ugosto

195

architettura

wmMiMmfflmmm

Figure 5.2 Cover of Metron

Figure 5.3 (nos. 3 1 - 3 2 ,

S e p t e m b e r - N o v e m b e r 1949) ¡ssue

Cover of Metron

issue (nos. 4 1 - 4 2 ,

M a y - A u g u s t 1951) dedicated to the

on the masters of modern architecture.

"Sixty Years of Living Architecture"

Pictured are (top row, left to right)

exhibition in Florence, s h o w i n g Crystal

Erich Mendelsohn, Alvar Aalto, Wright;

Heights project.

(middle row) Le Corbusier, Sven Gottfried Markelius, Erik G u n n a r Asplund; (bottom

row) Walter Gropius, Ludwig

Mies van der Rohe, Richard Neutra.

WRIGHT THE

PROMISE

AND OF

ITALY

ORGANIC

ARCHITECTURE

nalistic and organic thought, w i t h the organic b e i n g recognized as " a d e v e l o p ment and maturation o f rationalism." 3 " A P A O ' s declaration also included a r e sounding, albeit w e a k , political appeal to democracy. 3 1 A P A O did succeed in a w a k ening the professional c o n s c i e n c e o f m a n y architects t h r o u g h o u t Italy; shortly after its f o u n d i n g , the m o t h e r association gave rise to a vast family o f local branches. 3 2 In his Verso un'architettura organica Z e v i further discussed the ideals o f organic architecture and its chief apostle, Frank L l o y d W r i g h t . T h e title, w h i c h added the adjective " o r g a n i c " to L e Corbusier's Vers une architecture, expressed the author's desire to g o b e y o n d E u r o p e a n functionalism and Italian rationalism. T h e b o o k was particularly useful f o r Italian architects w h o , " f i n a l l y liberated f r o m political imposition, [could n o w ] return to reality, c o m i n g forth f r o m an absurd and artificial w o r l d that confused the limits o f architecture w i t h those o f life." 3 3 In the p r e f ace, dated F e b r u a r y 1 9 4 4 , Z e v i expressed himself clearly as b e i n g in favor o f o r ganic architecture, the contents o f w h i c h he described so succinctly that successive debates have added little to the definition: The best architects are tending today towards a kind of architecture which has been called organic. This term, if it has no other merit, at any rate does not end in "ist" and thus indicates that it is to be understood as referring not to a programme or a dream of architecture but to an actual tendency discernible in buildings and in architects. . . . Its meaning in regard to architecture must be defined . . . as something equally opposed to the theoretic and the geometrical, to the artificial standards, the white boxes and the cylinders which distinguish so much of the first modern architecture and to its general nudism. 34 Z e v i ' s goal was to r e d e e m the t e r m " o r g a n i c " f r o m the linguistic definition that had been popularized by W r i g h t , and thus to reestablish its architectural m e a n ing. T h e g r o w t h o f organicism was dependent on the fact that it had f o u n d vital nourishment in W r i g h t ' s genius. Z e v i ' s contributions to the Italian understanding o f W r i g h t ' s thought and w o r k through A P A O , Verso un'architettura organica, and his 1 9 4 7 b o o k Frank Lloyd w e r e supplemented by Metron.^

Wright

T h e magazine f u n c t i o n e d as a sounding board

f o r an Italian reformulation o f W r i g h t ' s architectural language; the call to e m brace W r i g h t ' s thought was also a call to social ethics. Metron published, along with its critiques o f the n e w ideas that dominated Italian architecture i m m e d i ately f o l l o w i n g the war, almost the full text o f W r i g h t ' s speech delivered at the New York Herald Tribune's f o r u m on postwar reconstruction, in w h i c h , speaking o f architecture and democracy, he emphasized that " i f they are organic, they c a n not be separated." 3 6 Italian architects w e r e just b e g i n n i n g to e x a m i n e these same ideas. 37 D e m o c r a t i c rhetoric was potent in an Italy that was still trying to grasp the complexities involved in transforming a fascist bureaucracy into the liberal administrative structure so necessary to m o d e r n planning.

T h i s passionate rediscovery o f W r i g h t , w i t h Z e v i as its animator, did not, h o w ever, o c c u r w i t h o u t criticism. W r i g h t ' s Italian critics w e r e largely exponents o f conservative, traditional Catholicism f o r w h o m the true enemy, hidden b e h i n d the rhetoric on W r i g h t i a n thought, was n o n e other than B r u n o Z e v i himself. T h i s antipathy had its roots in a curious m i x t u r e o f anti-Semitism ( Z e v i c a m e f r o m a J e w i s h family) and opposition to the supporters o f socialist t h o u g h t w h o w e r e then rallying around the banner o f the Partito d ' A z i o n e , to w h i c h Z e v i b e l o n g e d along w i t h other notable m e m b e r s o f the intelligentsia w h o had f o u g h t in the Resistance. In Libello contro l'architettura organica (Libel against organic architecture), p u b lished in 1 9 4 6 , Piero Bargellini addressed the " b a d l y instructed k n o w - i t - a l l s " — in other words, Italian architects w h o had precipitously and too enthusiastically adopted the w o r d " o r g a n i c " w i t h o u t deep understanding o r conviction. F o r Bargellini, this problem lay not w i t h W r i g h t , w h o m he considered w o r t h y o f great respect, but w i t h the abuse o f the term. 3 8 B y contrast, in the j o u r n a l La

Nuova

Città, Giusta N i c c o Fasola and Giovanni M i c h e l u c c i offered o n g o i n g critical analysis o f W r i g h t ' s architectural theory, addressing in particular the p r o b l e m o f o r ganic humanism, or the "natural, psychological, and social" aspects o f the h u m a n being, and its i n f l u e n c e on W r i g h t ' s designs. 3 9 " 6 0 YEARS OF LIVING ARCHITECTURE": WRIGHT COMES TO FLORENCE In 1 9 4 7 Metron published G i u l i o C a r l o A r g a n ' s essay " I n t r o d u z i o n e a W r i g h t " (Introduction to Wright), ushering in a n e w phase o f critical investigation o f W r i g h t ' s w o r k . T h e essay p r o m o t e d public appreciation o f W r i g h t and spurred the flowering, in the first half o f the 1 9 5 0 s , o f a true W r i g h t i a n phase in Italian architecture. 4 0 Argan's essay responded to earlier criticism: This organic architecture, which monumental and reactionary architects have accused of being merchandise imported from abroad, of being pseudo-intellectual, and of other epithets with which those who don't think or who choose the easy way out attempt to liberate themselves from new movements and artistic themes, finds, instead, in our country not only a profound and natural reverberation but—what's more important— a critical maturation more precise in its investigations, more ample in its essential intuitions, and more able to open toward new perspectives. 41 A r g a n ' s writings o f f e r e d the supporters o f organic architecture a n e w alternative to the principles o f the idealist aesthetic. His favorable assessment o f W r i g h t was a key factor in creating the triumphant climate at W r i g h t ' s s h o w at the Palazzo Strozzi in Florence. N o t only was this exhibition to be the apex o f W r i g h t ' s success in Italy, but it has remained to this day an epic event in the collective m e m o r y o f Italian architects. H o w e v e r , the idea o f a W r i g h t i a n exhibition was b o r n , it seems, a great dis-

WRIGHT THE

PROMISE

AND OF

ITALY:

ORGANIC

ARCHITECTURE

|

8 3

tance away from any design tables, the fruit instead of a " n e w liberalism" that came to dominate American political life after the 1948 presidential elections. In the early months of 1949, Clare B o o t h e Luce, then a Republican member of C o n gress and subsequently, under President Eisenhower, the American ambassador to Italy (1954—56), and Arthur C . Kaufmann, executive head of Gimbel's D e partment Store in Philadelphia, had an important conversation. A t issue was politics in postfascist Italy, where, in a turn of events unsatisfactory to the United States, the C o m m u n i s t Party had taken on a prominent role in the nation's reconstruction effort. 4 2 Finding themselves faced with an Italy perilously balanced between democracy and renewed authoritarianism, Luce and Kaufmann agreed on the necessity of promoting a cultural project that would serve a double purpose: to propagandize the creative power of an American genius and to d e m o n strate that this genius had developed as a result of life in a free country. That they chose W r i g h t as their example is not surprising. His masterpieces were world famous, formidable vehicles for the diffusion of American democracy. Kaufmann contacted Oskar Stonorov in Philadelphia to organize the exhibition. T h e European segment of the show would be launched in Italy, the objective being " t o help cement among nations of the world the bonds of g o o d will so much needed in these days." 43 T h e Florentine art historian Carlo Ludovico Ragghianti, w h o was asked to c o ordinate the exhibition in Italy, conducted a rapid survey of Italian architects to discover their feelings about such a show. A n indirect confirmation of these c o n sultations is found in the response of Giuseppe Samoná, dean of the Istituto U n i versitario di Architettura (School of Architecture) in Venice and active participant in A P A O : " I am so happy to hear that W r i g h t will probably come to Italy; it will be a marvelous event for many of us." 44 Ragghianti, in his later invitation to Samoná to j o i n the exhibit's executive committee, emphasized the "exceptional i m portance of this show, both for the cultural rapport between the United States and Italy and for the intrinsic significance of an exhibition dedicated to a living architect, but also for [its] impact . . . on the actual architectural culture of Italy and of Europe." 4 0 "Frank Lloyd Wright: 60 Years of Living Architecture" was conceived as the largest one-man show ever realized for an architect. 46 To j u d g e by the number of boxes sent to Florence, that objective was more than realized. B u t what funds supported such an extraordinary and surely expensive undertaking? E v e n today this is unclear. W r i g h t himself on more than one occasion lamented the uncertain financial management of the operation. 4 7 In Italy, at any rate, the State D e partment, the United States Information Service, and the Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs supported the exhibit at the very least in a political sense. T h e exhibition was held in Florence under the auspices of its mayor, M a r c o Fabiani, and through the initiative of Ragghianti, w h o was the director of the Studio Italiano di Storia dell'Arte (Italian Institute of A r t History), which had its

headquarters in the Palazzo Strozzi, the site o f the exhibition. C o u n t C a r l o Sforza, the minister o f foreign affairs, presided over the exhibition's h o n o r a r y c o m m i t tee. T h e r e w e r e also a technical c o m m i t t e e and an executive committee, both chaired by Ragghianti and including B r u n o Z e v i . 4 8 T h e inclusion o f so many n o table personages gave the Florentine event a certain importance, w h i c h was added to by the presence o f W r i g h t himself. A f t e r arriving in Florence, W r i g h t , at the invitation o f S a m o n a , traveled to Venice in the days immediately preceding the exhibition's opening. T h e r e he was awarded an h o n o r a r y degree f r o m the V e n e tian S c h o o l o f Architecture on 2 1 J u n e in the Sala dei Pregadi at the Palazzo Ducale. 4 9 R e t u r n i n g to Florence, W r i g h t attended the exhibition's inauguration on S u n day, 24 J u n e , an occasion that coincided w i t h the solemn public ceremony, in the Sala dei D u g e n t o in the Palazzo Vecchio, at w h i c h C o u n t Sforza presented the A m e r i c a n architect w i t h the G o l d M e d a l o f the C i t y o f Florence. In the e x h i b i tion brochure, W r i g h t addressed the organizers o f the exhibit and seemed to c o n nect w i t h the h o p e f u l energy o f his hosts: " T h e essence o f the Italian creative spirit that all artists love will always be alive. . . . To y o u n g Italy m y best h o p e and wish: that Italy w e r e young."''" T h e exhibition was enthusiastically t r u m p e t e d by W r i g h t ' s Italian friends and sympathizers, w h o saw h i m as " t h e greatest artistic genius o f o u r century . . . the last pioneer. . . . O n e day w e ' l l say to o u r children w i t h pride: w e k n e w W r i g h t in 1 9 5 1 . " 3 1 T h e address by the editorial staff o f Metron to W r i g h t also contained tones o f excessive adulation: Your architecture is the fruit of your genius and of a democratic life. We genuflect before your genius and defend democracy and the rights of the individual. From the night of fascist barbary was born a new republic conquered through the sacrifices of its best sons. . . . You represent, therefore, the true America that meets the cultivated Italy. This is a bond stronger than any political pact. We sign it with joy. God bless you. 32 T h e exhibition o c c u p i e d fifteen halls and covered sixty years, ranging f r o m the first houses designed by the y o u n g W r i g h t to the E . K a u f m a n n garage, d e signed in 1 9 4 9 . O n exhibit w e r e approximately eight hundred drawings, t w e n t y eight models, a full-scale m o d e l o f the core o f a small residence, several additional photographic panels, and a series o f enlarged color transparencies. Text in the f o r m o f b r i e f captions, longer comments, and passages extracted f r o m W r i g h t ' s o w n writings a c c o m p a n i e d the images. 3 3 T h e first hall served as an introduction to the c o m p l e x personality o f W r i g h t the m a n and the designer. Included here was " T h e H y m n o f W o r k , " a p o e m written by W r i g h t in 1 8 9 6 that served as his personal "declaration o f i n d e p e n dence." T h e r e w e r e also photographs o f the architect at his w o r k table, some d r a w -

WRIGHT

THE

PROMISE

AND

OF

ITALY

ORGANIC

ARCHITECTURE

|

85

Figure 5.4 Wright with Bruno Zevi (left) a n d C o u n t Carlo Sforza (center) beside the "Potpourri" panel in the first hall of the "Sixty Years of Living Architecture" exhibition at the Palazzo Strozzi in Florence, June 1951.

ings, and a panel entitled "Point of D e p a r t u r e " that explained Wright's relationship with Louis Sullivan. Another panel, labeled " P o t p o u r r i , " was a collage of photographs of buildings constructed for the World Exposition of C h i c a g o in 1893 (Fig. $ .4), meant to illustrate the architectural environment in which W r i g h t began to evolve his o w n vision. A large w o o d and plastic model of Broadacre City, cleaned, repaired, and repainted for the occasion, was the pièce de resistance of the fourth hall (see Figs. 3 . 1 1 and 5.1), and it made a profound impression. O n its explanatory panels the curators synthesized Wright's thoughts about urban planning; other boards c o n tained the principles of organic architecture as well as a series of aphorisms on "una nuova libertà per la vita" (a new liberty for life) that were integral to his thought. Because the ideas underlying Broadacre City could be applied in any country, they were a potential source of inspiration for Italian urban planners involved in postwar reconstruction. This was certainly the hope of the exhibition's organizers, w h o asked W r i g h t to present a talk in w h i c h , imagining himself in conversation with Stonorov, he discussed his concept of the modern metropolis. In that talk, later published in Florence, W r i g h t gave a passionate description of Broadacre City, its harmonious relationship with nature and the countryside, and its existence as a free city in the midst of modern life.'' 4

In the last hall, the model of the Guggenheim Museum constituted the ideal conclusion to the exposition, for it epitomized, with its helicoidally ascendant form, Wright's concept of spatial continuity. This concept was to become one that many Italian architects adopted and used to produce uniquely expressive designs, something that would not have been possible if they had relied on direct imitation of Wrightian forms. T h e Sicilian work of Leonardo Ricci, as seen for instance in the village of Monte degli Ulivi near Riesi (1961), where he was responding to the beautiful landscape of olive trees, provides a definitive example of the sensitivity achievable through local interpretations of Wrightian space. Despite the largely positive response to the exhibition, there were many who resented what they perceived as a subservient acceptance of Wright's genius. 55 Furthermore, Wright's ideas were received by Italian professionals with considerable skepticism. Most commentators criticized in particular the impracticality of Wright's scheme of urban development, as exemplified in Broadacre City, attaching these criticisms to a generic confrontation between the Ville Contemporaine of Le Corbusier and the "archipelago" city of Wright. 36 Among the most lasting critical responses to the exhibition were those of Giuseppe Samona and Giusta Nicco Fasola. T h e latter's analysis was so profound that her opinions still animate debates on the architect's merits. 57 Samona's comments provoked Wright to respond with enthusiasm and even affection: "A competent English translation of your extraordinary criticism of my work has just reached me. I have enjoyed, for the first time in my life, comprehensive insight of the nature of that work." 5 8 What interested Samona was how Wright's poetic vision was expressed, not in the way a house interior was treated, but in the way the house was to be "lived in." 59 This subtlety accounted for the convincing unity of Wright's buildings, a unity evident in his Prairie Style houses and developed in the Usonian projects. However, said Samona, Wright's idea of unity was based on oneness with nature and concerned the intrinsic harmony of the inhabitants and the building materials. Samona intuited that Wright's true modernity lay in the spatial and material continuum of his projects, which were encompassed by an architectural concept that began with the world surrounding the house and finished with the person who lived within it. Samona's Wrightian thinking allowed him to cut the two Gordian knots of modernity: the concept of rationality as it was automatically linked to functionalism, and the dialectic between the abstract and the concrete. His conclusions are hardly surprising when viewed within the context of his directorship of the fertile didactic entity that was the School of Architecture in Venice. 60 The school in Venice was a "new Bauhaus," the only Italian institution that succeeded in elaborating on Wright's themes and combining them with a renovating cultural initiative directed toward the professional world of architecture and the teaching of design. These twin aims were both expressed during a debate over whether the school should award Wright an honorary degree. Where Wright

WRIGHT THE

PROMISE

AND OF

ITALY-

ORGANIC

ARCHITECTURE

|

87

excelled, the Venetian school maintained, was as the champion of a new humanism. It was around this aspect of Wright's work and character, to w h i c h Italian historiography attributed great importance, that the discussion undertaken by the professors in Venice revolved. T h e Florentine exhibition simply augmented Wright's influence, as did the architect's numerous publications, which had spurred "three generations of American and European architects to an awareness of their art and to a civic conscience." 6 1 In closing its debate, the faculty insisted on the importance to the profession overall of the Taliesin Fellowship, founded and directed by Wright, because it stimulated and inspired architects in every part of the world.

PRACTICING WRIGHT

Wright's visit to Venice in J u n e 1 9 5 1 led to one of the most clamorous episodes of cultural eclipse that twentieth-century Italian architecture has ever known. T h e controversy erupted around the project that Wright later developed for the Masieri Memorial, located along the Grand Canal, w h i c h for months filled the pages of newspapers both in Italy and abroad. In what appeared to be endless debate, the communal board of Venice quarreled with many important cultural and public figures over every imaginable aspect of the project. T h e outcome of the debate had an impact on a much larger issue: the fate of future planning and building in the old city center of V e n i c e — i n short, the fate of the "Venezie possibili" (the "possible Venices")/' 2 T h e controversial project centered on Angelo Masieri, a thirty-year-old designer from Friuli and a f o r m e r student of Carlo Scarpa's at the Venetian School of Architecture. Masieri loved Wright's architecture, and he owned a small, threestory house at the intersection of the Grand Canal and the R i o Nuovo. 6 3 This house also happened to neighbor the fifteenth-century Palazzo Balbi and face the C a ' Foscari, both important Venetian historical sites. Masieri asked Wright, on the occasion of the master's brief visit to Venice in 1 9 5 1 , to design, as a replacement for the existing house, an edifice which could be used both as a residence for himself and his young wife, Savina, and as Masieri's architectural office. This was a dream the couple had cherished for quite some time. Masieri also hoped to be able to w o r k with his much-admired master on the design. W r i g h t accepted the proposal, but put o f f the definition of the task and of the characteristics of the project until a successive meeting could be arranged and held at Tal88

| MARISTELLA CASCIATO

iesin W e S t .

Thus in the late spring of 1 9 5 2 the y o u n g couple embarked on a Wrightian " G r a n d T o u r " of America, with the double objective of admiring firsthand the architecture of the master and of approaching Wright once again about the Venetian project. However, the adventure ended tragically. O n 28 J u n e Angelo Masieri was killed in an automobile accident as he was returning f r o m Arizona, w h e r e he had gone to meet W r i g h t — t h o u g h sadly, the meeting did not take place b e -

cause of Wright's absence. Supported by the Masieri family itself as well as by friends at Venice's School of Architecture, Savina did not abandon the project, and six months after her husband's death she wrote to Wright: " H e [Angelo] loved and worshipped you. It was his dream to live in a house of your creation. M y husband's parents and myself still hope that dream may come true, though under changed circumstances. Such a building would lastly keep alive his remembrance, housing a beneficent institution for undergraduates of the School of Architecture, where he himself accomplished his studies."64 This new project, which proceeded under the auspices of the School of Architecture and in particular of Carlo Scarpa, provided Wright with two design options: an edifice with apartments that could be rented out, creating a fund for scholarships or other cultural activities that would be managed by the school's faculty; or a sort of house-hotel in which about twenty deserving architectural students could live. The second option was preferred by the Masieri family. Wright responded quickly. He accepted the project, which by now he felt honored to be charged with, and wrote to Savina: "I am indeed willing to plan a memorial building to him. . . . It seems to me the dormitory for students would be the best. . . . Nothing could please me more than to do something in Venice worthy of my good and gracious friends." 63 The details were finalized within an extraordinarily brief period. In little more than a month after he had received Savina's initial letter, Wright sent her a telegram informing her that the design was ready and he was only waiting to hear from her as to the most suitable method for its shipment. 66 The solution imagined by Wright for the Masieri Memorial was simple: a triangular edifice, mirroring the lot on which it would stand, composed of a twostory ground floor with mezzanine, two upper stories, and a garden terrace (Figs. 5.5 and 5.6; see also Fig. 4 . 1 0 ) . T h e triangle's smallest side faced the Grand Canal; the other two sides paralleled the adjacent buildings. T h e new structure would not adjoin the Palazzo Balbi because Wright introduced a private-use lane between the two buildings. Wright's design for the principal facade was composed of marble pilasters, large windows, balconies, and two angular pillars that combined to produce, in a chiaroscuro effect, an interpretation, both personal and modern, of the essence of Venetian architecture. Explaining the motives that inspired his work, Wright stated: "Loving Venice as I do I wanted, by way of modern techniques, to make the old Venice tradition like anew." 67 At first, excited arguments over the project were muted out of respect for the Masieri family, who, it was felt, were promoting an essentially noble initiative. Also, as the university took the first steps toward obtaining bureaucratic approval for the project, few people actually saw the plans. It was Wright himself who brought the Masieri Memorial to international attention. The scandal exploded in the summer of 1953. In May of that year Wright displayed a perspective of the design in an exhibition at the National Institute of Arts and Letters in N e w York. The U.S. Information Service, which at that time

Figure 5.5 Site plan and elevation, Masieri Memorial, Venice, 1952. FLW, architect. (FLWA 5306.008) Figure 5.6 (opposite) Elevation, Maslerl Memorial, Venice, 1952. FLW, architect. (FLWA 5306.025)

90

|

MARISTELLA

CASC

IATO

was very active in Italy, publicized the exhibit and reproduced the drawing—which in fact exaggerated the facade, making it appear at least as tall as the adjacent Palazzo Balbi—within the pages of its newsletter. The drawing ignited a fire in the debate between the illustrious defenders of the untouchability of Venice (Italian intellectuals and architects such as Cederna, Quaroni, Papini, and Bellonci) and the tenacious preachers of the gospel of organic architecture (including Zevi and the members of APAO, together with Pane, Ragghianti, Rogers, and Bettini). 68 Daily newspapers and weekly magazines fanned the flames of controversy with defamatory articles, labeling the Masieri Memorial with epithets such as "casamostro" (monster-house) and publishing retouched photographs that falsified its appearance. But was all this excitement actually about Wright and his ideas? O r was the dispute about his project only a clamorous occasion for once again bringing to light old controversies, stifled interests, and calls for a return to Italian roots that had existed for some time? The chronicle of the critical response has been reconstructed many times; it is therefore worthwhile to discuss only the most important points of the opposition to Wright's project. The crux of the problem lay in the seeming impossibility of combining the architecturally modern and the historical. Antonio C e derna repeatedly pointed to the danger that lay in offering an influential precedent

t c l t r x o u r é C m f CIMA

I'

" f o r a thousand little craftsmen w h o w o u l d transform Italy into the image and likeness o f the E 4 2 [meaning the classicizing architecture o f the Esposizione U n i versale di R o m a ( E U R ) , planned to be held in 1 9 4 2 ] . " 6 9 A m o n g those w h o defended the project, Ernesto R o g e r s was most capable o f l o o k i n g b e y o n d the immediate controversy. His c o m m e n t a r y on the debate was a reproach against the o v e r s h a d o w i n g o f the real concerns o f c o n t e m p o r a r y Italian architecture by a project that was not itself that important. 7 " B u t perhaps the river o f words that rained on W r i g h t ' s " s k y s c r a p e r " o n the G r a n d C a n a l also served to wash away opponents o f the status q u o and b r i n g n e w attention to the innovative designers at the S c h o o l o f Architecture in Venice. T h i s irony was stated with perfect clarity by M a n l i o Brusatin, w h o noted that " t h e objective [of the critics], b e y o n d everything that was said or written, was to attack heavily the tendencies o f the Venetian S c h o o l o f Architecture," and therefore its direction by G i u s e p p e S a m o n à , its teaching staff, and its c o m m i t m e n t to developing a n e w m e t h o d f o r the preservation o f Venice's historic center. T h e events o f the f o l l o w i n g t w o years b e l o n g m o r e to the chronicle o f city administration than to the history o f architecture. J u d g m e n t s w e r e handed d o w n by both the Building and Health Commissions o f the Municipality o f Venice; technical opinions w e r e called f o r and given; urgent requests f o r calming words w e r e sent to W r i g h t by Savina Masieri; and interrogations w e r e undertaken by the S o cietà Adriatica di Elettricità (Adriatic Electric C o m p a n y ) , o w n e r o f Palazzo Balbi. T h e dialogue, though, took place a m o n g the deaf. All o f this activity sexved only to camouflage a fundamental aversion to W r i g h t ' s project, and in the end it came to nothing. W r i g h t ' s " V e n i c e a f f a i r " was a closed case by the autumn o f 1 9 5 5 . 7 1

THE VENETIAN SCHOOL This controversial chapter, w h i l e ending in o u t w a r d defeat f o r W r i g h t , nevertheless cast a spotlight on the inherent vitality o f the Venetian S c h o o l o f A r c h i tecture and m a d e abundantly clear the strength o f its call to W r i g h t i a n architectural concepts. A t the end o f the war, the school s h o w e d its c o m m i t m e n t to these concepts by g i v i n g political and cultural r e f u g e to a g r o u p o f " e x i l e s , " architects w h o might otherwise have felt themselves strangers in their o w n country, including C a r l o Scarpa. In 1 9 4 8 the director, S a m o n à , called Z e v i to Venice, o f f e r i n g h i m the first chair in the history o f art and the history o f architectural style at the S c h o o l of Architecture. T h e r e swiftly f o l l o w e d the recruitment o f other " e x c l u d e d " architects o f the caliber o f Franco Albini, L u d o v i c o B a r b i a n o di B e l g i o j o s o o f the group B a n f i , B e l g i o j o s o , Peresutti, and R o g e r s , and Ignazio Gardella (all o f w h o m came f r o m the Milan area and had been instrumental in developing Italian rationalism), the urban planners L u i g i Piccinato and Giovanni Astengo, and the y o u n g engineer Giancarlo D e Carlo, w h o had earned his second degree in architecture f r o m the Venice school.

Z e v i ' s propaganda in favor of W r i g h t and organic architecture found an accepting audience at the Venetian school. Venice had remained, as it were, isolated from both the rationalist experience and the architectural vicissitudes of the Fascist regime. In some ways its isolated position made it an island of privilege where the contradictions and uncertainties of modern architecture could be studied, verified, and repaired. Thus it was able to demonstrate a sentimental inclination toward Wrightian spatial and environmental concepts. For fifteen years the Venetian School of Architecture remained a factory for n e w ideas. W h e n in the second half of the 1960s the dissolution of the school began, Carlo Scarpa wittily invoked the names of those he considered to be the school's guiding lights: " F o r a perfect faculty of architecture one w o u l d need W r i g h t as teacher of design, L e Corbusier for urban planning, Aalto for the architecture of the interiors, Mies for technology and the constructive elements . . . and finally Samona to run it all." 72 Without doubt, Carlo Scarpa was the architect w h o exercised the most influence on Wright's reputation in Italy. H e regarded W r i g h t with a measured deference and used the most original of Wright's models to develop the varied language of his o w n craftsmanship. In the 1950s Scarpa f o u n d a way to introduce Wrightian motifs and design principles (without discounting his attraction to A l var Aalto's design methods) into his o w n methodology. As a university professor Scarpa nurtured many brilliant students in the study of W r i g h t , some of w h o m went on to perfect their understanding, often by means of a trip to America. 7 3 T h e influence of Wright's style of architecture on Scarpa's design projects is a favorite topic of historians, in particular Francesco Dal C o and M a n f r e d o T a f u r i . Inspired by Scarpa's achievements, Dal C o has proposed an investigation of the profound intellectual affinity between the two architects, both of w h o m he called "tenacious observers" and "collectors of images." 7 4 T h e i r most important link can perhaps be perceived in the relationship each man established with his o w n cultural tradition. B u t differences existed there as well, Dal C o points out, noting that while W r i g h t desired to establish new traditions and values, Scarpa rejected such "ideological" leanings. 73 Dal C o also notes that the only foreign tradition f o r w h i c h both W r i g h t and Scarpa demonstrated enthusiasm was orientalism in general and Japanese architecture in particular. This was a "love f r o m youth," according to Bernard Huet, one that created a profound tension in the mature works of both men. Tafuri emphasized the cultural disparity between the two men rather than dwelling on Scarpa's interest in Wright's evolutionary style. Unlike many Italians, Scarpa was not interested in Wright's "American roots"; rather, Tafuri sees Scarpa's interest as lying in Wright's "art of discontinuity," as represented in works like the Ocatillo Desert C a m p (1928). B y the closing years of the 1950s Scarpa had distanced himself from the stricter Wrightism that had characterized his work in the late 1940s (typified by his 1949 design for an apartment building at Feltre;

Figure 5.7 (above) Sketches for a project for a four-story apartment building at Feltre, 1949. Carlo Scarpa, architect. Figure 5.8 Sketches for the Venezuelan Pavilion at the Venice Biennale, 1954-56. Carlo Scarpa, architect.

Fig. $.7), declaring his independence through the development of his o w n "dissolved" syntax. 76 O n e explanation for this divergence might lie with Wright's Usonian houses ( 1 9 4 8 - 5 1 ) , designs that represented both a semantic evolution in formalism and decorativism, and a maturation of the architectural values f r o m the Prairie years. According to Brusatin, the presence of W r i g h t in Scarpa's w o r k must be traced backward f r o m the Usonian houses to U n i t y Temple (1906), and then forward to M i d w a y Gardens ( 1 9 1 3 ) and the Imperial Hotel ( 1 9 1 5 ) . 7 7 T w o of Scarpa's buildings are significant examples of Wright's influence: the Pavilion of the B o o k of A r t (1950) and the Venezuelan Pavilion (1954—56), both located at the Giardini di Castello at the Venice Biennale. T h e Pavilion of the B o o k of A r t was saluted with great enthusiasm by Metron, w h i c h heralded it as "lightning from a clear s k y " and a pure "act of courage" produced by the "best architect of Venice." 7 8 It was constructed in the manner of Taliesin West and influenced by the W r i g h t of the Lake Tahoe experimental cabin designs (1922), yet it was also a showcase for its o w n unique attributes. T h e pavilion's linear structure reached outward, uniting interior and exterior and creating a continuity of space that was one of the most important postulates of organic architecture. Scarpa's Venezuelan Pavilion (Fig. 5.8), one of the best-known buildings in m o d e r n architecture, according to Brusatin, constituted " t h e seal and the c o n clusive proof of the direct influence of Wright's architecture" on Scarpa's work. This project poetically implied a dynamic conversation between Wright and Scarpa, in which Scarpa masterfully absorbed the lessons of Wright's U n i t y Temple. 79 F e w episodes in the history of modern architecture have generated the idealist fervor that the Wrightian challenge brought to Italy. T h e most convincing echoes of that fervor can be found in the works of A P A O ' s members and among the architects associated with Metron or those w h o were Z e v i ' s friends. M a n y of their names have already been mentioned; among their buildings the following is a partial list: the Villa Giacomuzzi in U d i n e (1948—50), the Villa Bortolotto at C e r v i g n a n o in Friuli (1950), and the Veritti tomb at theUdinese graveyard ( 1 9 5 1 ) , all designed by Masieri, w h i c h show very strongly Wright's geometric matrix in both squared and triangular forms; the Villa Scimemi at M o n d e l l o on the outskirts of Palermo, designed by Samona (1950—54), a reinterpretation of Usonian architecture (Figs. 5.9 and 5.10); the palazzina in via M o n t e Parioli, R o m e , by Silvio Radiconcini and Z e v i (1950—52); schools in U r b i n o and in Sassari (1956), designed by Luigi Pellegrin; the Zigaina H o u s e at C e r v i g n a n o in Friuli (1958), by Giancarlo D e Carlo, another good example based on Wright's interpretation of the domestic universe. Finally, the works of Marcello D ' O l i v o and of Luigi Figini and G i n o Pollini merit special attention. In the case of D ' O l i v o , Wright's Prairie houses provided particular inspiration for a restructuring of his work. T h e Villaggio del Fanciullo, the most significant example of D ' O l i v o ' s Wrightian designs, was a large c o m plex meant for orphans and displaced children, constructed between 1 9 5 0 and

WRIGHT THE

PROMISE

AND OF

ITALY:

ORGANIC

ARCHITECTURE

|

95

Figure 5.9 Plan, Villa Scimemi at Mondello, near Palermo, 1950-54. Giuseppe Samonà, architect. Figure 5.10

(opposite)

Exterior, Villa Scimemi at Mondello, 96

I

MARISTELLA c A s c i A T o

near Palermo, 1950-54. Giuseppe Samonà, architect.

1955 at Villa O p i c i n a , just outside Trieste. D ' O l i v o envisioned the villaggio as a small city in strict r a p p o r t w i t h the barrenness of t h e Carsican plain. H e c e n t e r e d his design on a large d i n i n g hall, w i t h a rectilinear b o d y and t w o d i a m o n d - s h a p e d towers; a typesetting studio; and a central pavilion w i t h d o r m i t o r i e s and living r o o m s for its small guests. D ' O l i v o derived the site planning, spatial motifs, and decorative elements directly f r o m W r i g h t i a n architecture, for e x a m p l e f r o m the master's project for the U n i t a r i a n c h u r c h in s u b u r b a n M a d i s o n , W i s c o n s i n (I947). 8 " In the C h u r c h of the M a d o n n a dei Poveri in Milan (1952—54; Fig. 5.11) and in the social services c o m p l e x for Olivetti ( 1 9 5 4 - 5 7 ; Fig- 5 - 1 2 ) at Ivrea, by c o n trast, Figini and Pollini c o m b i n e d W r i g h t i s m w i t h their o w n v i e w of rationalism. T h e c h u r c h , designed in the climate of postwar Italy and i m m e d i a t e l y labeled "neorealistic," was c o n s t r u c t e d along C o r b u s i a n " r e g u l a t o r y lines," starting f r o m the h e x a g o n of the chorus, w i t h the intent of r e s p o n d i n g to the needs of b o t h the officiating priest and the c o n g r e g a t i o n . T h i s care for the " h u m a n " was a value that Italian organic architecture always respected. At the opposite e n d of the scale is the " o r g a n i c " solution p r o p o s e d for the Olivetti building, w h i c h , s e e m i n g d e rived in part f r o m the g e o m e t r i c p o l y g o n of the Villa S c i m e m i at M o n d e l l o by S a m o n a , indicates a will to u n i t e the reality of organic architecture w i t h the p o litical reasoning of a great industrial giant.

wright and ualy THE PROMISE OF ORGANIC ARCHITECTURE

| 97

Figure 5.11 (above) Section, Church of the Madonna dei Poveri, Milan, 1952-54. Luigi Figini and Gino Pollini, architects. Figure 5.12 Plan and elevations, Olivetti social services complex, Ivrea, 1954-57. Luigi Figini and Gino Pollini, architects.

9 8

|

MARISTELLA

CASCIATO

Figure 5.13 W r i g h t e x h i b i t i o n at t h e M i l a n Triennale, 1 9 6 0 . Carlo Scarpa, designer.

T h e 1950s concluded with an explicit homage by Scarpa to W r i g h t w h e n he curated the architect's magnificent exhibition at theTriennale of Milan in i 9 6 0 (Fig. 5 . 1 3 ) . Scarpa carved the galleries into fragmented spaces separated by panels marked with simple Wrightian decorative motifs, like the geometric shapes of the square and circle. H e designed the lighting to create a magical atmosphere, carefully screening and focusing it to manipulate vision and space. N o w that some historical distance f r o m these events exists, one may legitimately ask: What exactly is organic architecture? A n d did the study of W r i g h t in Italy make the rediscovery of the organic Italian architecture more fruitful? Perhaps only Scarpa was able to interpret Wright's work in a way uniquely his own, while the majority of his colleagues, because of the orgy of eclecticism that invaded the profession, arrived at uninspired results completely antithetical to the promise of organic architecture. WRIGHT THE

PROMISE

AND OF

ITALY:

ORGANIC

ARCHITECTURE

|

9 9

SIX:

USEFU L

CONSTRUCTING IN

SOVIET

HOSTAGE

WRIGHT

RUSSIA

AND

FRANCE

Jean-Louis Cohen

T h e impact that Frank Lloyd Wright's first works had on G e r m a n and Dutch architecture and their subsequent promulgation in Europe has been discussed and reexamined in these essays. T h e discovery of W r i g h t by the leading figures of two of the principal scenes that affirmed the new architecture after World War I, namely France and Russia, however, has remained relatively u n k n o w n to this day. T h e concrete conditions of the circulation of Wright's works in Europe, and of his response to the European scene, are beginning to be better understood; 1 as w e shall see, however, in Russia and France, w h e r e architects set as their goal the routing of art nouveau and eclecticism, the inspiration of Wright's Prairie houses and the Larkin Building was quite different from that which shaped the thinking of many of their European counterparts. Whatever distance separates the Netherlands f r o m Italy, or France from R u s sia, it must be emphasized that the European reception of Wright was determined by a phenomenon that affected all of Europe, namely, Americanism. 2 F. R u d o l f Vogel discussed Wright's residential designs in Das amerikanische Hans ( 1 9 1 0 ) , for example, situating them within a general panorama of N e w World domestic architecture. 3 O n the occasion of his 1 9 1 1 trip to America, Hendrik Petrus Berlage also fixed his attention on the work of Wright, " t h e master w h o has created projects without equal in all of Europe." 4 Wright's buildings interested European architects not only for the novelty of their spatial solutions, but also because they manifested a n e w architectural style anchored in urban American culture. Wright's influence was particularly intense and widespread in G e r m a n y and the Netherlands, but in other nations there was notable resistance to Wright's ideas; in these places it was not until the 1920s that Wright's buildings and projects received serious consideration. In certain cases, the resistance was overcome at the expense of a distortion of the meaning of Wright's work, which was newly in-

vested with local concerns. B u t this " d i s t o r t i o n " also revealed aspects o f W r i g h t ' s w o r k that had previously g o n e unremarked. F r o m this point o f view, a l o o k at the different scenes o f Russia and France permits a grasp o f the stakes linked to the discovery o f W r i g h t in t w o architectural cultures opposed to each other in m a n y ways. Presented above all as an A m e r i c a n " r e b e l , " W r i g h t was nonetheless discussed on the level o f content and m e a n i n g in p o s t - 1 9 1 7 Russia, whereas he was the object o f a m u c h m o r e formalist reading in France until 1 9 3 9 .

WRIGHT A N D THE SOVIET SCENE W r i g h t was incontestably one o f the key figures o f the Amerikanizm

that g r i p p e d

Russia even b e f o r e the revolution o f O c t o b e r 1 9 1 7 . T h e r e is n o evidence to show, however, that W r i g h t was truly k n o w n b e f o r e W o r l d War I, despite S. Frederick Starr's claims o f W r i g h t i a n traces in a Pantelejmon G o l o s o v project o f 1 9 1 2 . 5 V o gel's b o o k was noted in the Russian architectural press, w h e r e the most recently presented w o r k s by an A m e r i c a n w e r e those o f Louis Sullivan. T h e architectural production that developed in the U S S R o f the N e w E c o n o m i c Policies has, o f course, nothing in c o m m o n w i t h W r i g h t ' s architectural agenda, since orders f o r villas obviously disappear after 1 9 1 7 . T h i s did not prevent h i m f r o m b e c o m i n g a constant presence in the Soviet literature f r o m the m o m e n t avant-garde theorists devoted their first commentaries to him. Was E l Lissitzky familiar w i t h W r i g h t ' s w o r k s w h e n he studied architecture in Darmstadt p r i o r to 1 9 1 4 ? T h e y could not in any case have escaped the artist's notice d u r i n g his stays in Western E u r o p e b e t w e e n 1 9 2 2 and 1 9 2 4 . His ties to the Wendingen circle, w h i c h devoted a m o n o graphic issue to W r i g h t in 1 9 2 5 , have b e e n demonstrated and are doubtless the direct cause o f his k n o w l e d g e o f W r i g h t . In 1 9 2 5 , in the j o u r n a l Krasnaia niva, Lissitzky critiqued the duality o f the structure o f A m e r i c a n skyscrapers and their surface ornamentation, a contradiction discussed in 1 9 2 3 by L e C o r b u s i e r in Vers une architecture and also d e n o u n c e d by V l a d i m i r M a y a k o v s k y f o l l o w i n g his trip to N e w Y o r k in 1 9 2 $ . H e n c e f o r t h , therefore, Lissitzky f o u n d the sole authentically innovative place in the N e w W o r l d to lie in the A m e r i c a n West, the place w h e r e W r i g h t appeared as " A m e r i c a ' s only architect, w h o dared to discard all t e x t b o o k precepts and to create a n e w type o f dwelling, w h i c h has revealed h i m as the father o f c o n t e m p o r a r y architecture." 6 W h e n Lissitzky the f o l l o w i n g year published an analysis o f the f r a m e w o r k o f i n dustrial buildings and skyscrapers in E u r o p e and A m e r i c a , he discussed Sullivan's and W r i g h t ' s innovations, but only so he could then put their achievements at a distance by asserting that the n e w architecture's " c e n t e r o f g r a v i t y " was n o longer to be f o u n d in A m e r i c a , but resided n o w in the w o r k o f the Taut B r o t h e r s , M i e s van der R o h e , and Perret. 7 M o i s e i G i n z b u r g , an architect w h o , like Lissitzky, was constrained by b e i n g a J e w and f o r c e d to study abroad, caught w i n d o f W r i g h t ' s w o r k w h i l e at the Brera A c a d e m y in Milan. T h e first evidence o f his discovery o f W r i g h t ' s w o r k

Figure 6.1 Lokshin Villa, Evpatoria, Crimea, 1917. Moisei G i n z b u r g a n d N. A. Kopelyovich, architects. From Moisei G i n z b u r g , Sf/7 i epokha: Problema sovremennoi arkhitektury ( M o s c o w : Gos. Izdatelstvo, 1924). Figure 6.2 (opposite) Robie House, Chicago, 1906. FLW, architect. From Moisei G i n z b u r g , "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " Sovremennaia arkhitektura 2, no. 2 (1927): n.p.

X X I X . M.. SI.

rnH36ypr

H H. A .

KorieAHOBim

M a k e r n AO>va A o k u i v m b i x B EBnamopviw 1 9 1 7 TOA

are the plans he drafted f o r the Lokshin Villa f o r Evpatoria in C r i m e a u p o n his return to Russia in 1 9 1 5 (Fig. 6 . 1 ) . 8 W i t h its broad, gently sloping, o v e r h a n g i n g r o o f and the triple w i n d o w o f its central p o r t i o n , the house resembles the 1 9 0 1 Frank T h o m a s House, w h i l e the d o o r set in a semicircular arch, the base in a course o f carved stones, and the perron adorned w i t h t w o large vases directly evoke the A r t h u r H e u r t l e y H o u s e o f 1 9 0 2 . T h e overall architectural c o n c e p t i o n , however, maintains a clear axial s y m m e t r y and a compactness that have nothing in c o m m o n w i t h the modular principle and horizontal extension o f W r i g h t ' s Prairie Style houses. 1 ' In 1 9 2 6 , by n o w the principal theorist o f Constructivism, G i n z b u r g t o o k an interest in W r i g h t ' s domestic architecture, addressing the R o b i e H o u s e in a c o m mentary in Sovremennaia arkhitektura (Fig. 6.2). Despite his j u d g m e n t that W r i g h t ' s architecture b e l o n g e d to a fruitful but o u t m o d e d p e r i o d , G i n z b u r g f o u n d W r i g h t to be representative of the A m e r i c a n " f a r m e r - p i o n e e r s " and placed h i m in an i m portant position, alongside the airplane, as a m o d e l f o r " n e w w o r k m e t h o d s " in architecture. " ' T o G i n z b u r g , W r i g h t ' s R o b i e H o u s e o f f e r e d " a n entirely n e w plan, simple, open, suffused in air and light, and developing freely in space." 1 1 F o r the Russians, j u d g e d to be " e v e n m o r e pioneers than the A m e r i c a n s , " there is in this assessment a challenge comparable to that o f machine technology, in reference to w h i c h G i n z b u r g cites analyses o f W r i g h t that w e r e then already old. W h e n in 1 9 3 3 he addressed the question o f dwelling spaces in a global vision, G i n z b u r g once again presented the R o b i e House, the plans f o r the A v e r y C o o n l e y H o u s e , and

< S > P A H K F R A N K

X i n O H A L L O Y D

P A M T W R I G H T

H a y i n a x TeopeTHuecKaa pa3pa6oTKn «J»ynKmioHa^bHoro v.eToaa—oaHa H3 BaiKHefluinx 3aaa4 coBpeMeHHofl apxHTeKtypu TeM rpoMaanee aaa Hac 3Ha«jeHHe npoBepKH TeopeTimecKHx noaojKeHHfl 3Toro MeToaa Ha Ka>KflOM KOHKpeTHOM upHMepe MaTepHaai,HOH aeHTeabnocTH qeaoBCKa. HMCHHO C STOH ueabio MM noMecTHJtH b C A 3 aaponaaH H MeTOAW ero KOHCTpyiipOBaHHH. H TOWHO c TaKOfl )KC ueabio Mbl CWHTaeM Heo6x6aHMWM yaoMHHyTb 06 aMepHKaHCKOM apxHTekTope paHK Jljioñji PaíiTe, oKoao MeTBepTH BeKa TOMy na3aa aaBiueM npHMepu npHMeHemm B KOHKpetHoH AeflTCJibHocTH 3oaqero HOBblX MeTOflOB paÓOTbl-

co

OflHH H3 HeMHOrHX, II04TH CüHHCTBeiIHblñ B cBoe BpeMí?, PafiT nonaa OCOÓCHHOCTH Tex ycaoBHfl, B KOTopux eMy npHiiiaocb paóoTaTb, yBHaea HOBbie npeanocuaKH, H3 KOTOpbix c.iaraeTCH coBpeMennan apxHTenTypa. N P ^ W A E B c e r o ÓWTOBOÍ} Y O A A

AMEPHKAH-

CKHX 4>epMep0B H0B0cea0B, c ero npoMe>KyT04HUM w o a o m e n H e M MEWAY 6MTOM

ropoa-

CKoro ocoÖHHKa H aepeBeHCKoö (JjepMbi,— HaTo.iKHya PaflTa Ha H3o6pereHHe cosepojeHHo noBoro naana npocToro, OTKpwroro, oMbißaeMoro CBCTOM H B03ayx0M, cBoöoano pacKHHyToro B npocTpaHCTBe. ntpeóyio om apxumeKmypnoto coopyMeHun mozo otee, nmo u om ne.toeena: ucKpeHHOcmu u myrnpenneü. npaedueocmu, u moAbno c amuM CBH3OHU öah MCHU ace Kanecmea apxurneKmypu'i—roBopaa PaflT,—-H STO npHBeao ero K qeTKOMy (fryHKiiHOHaabHOMy qaeHeanio cBoero 3aaaHH3. CTOHT B3ra>WYTB na npnBOAHMBIFL 3aecb AOM B O n - n a p K e . HTO6 yÖeanTbca B TOM, qTo pacqaeHenne 06mero nuTHa naaHa — ecTb pacqaeHeHHe n > 4>yHKUHflM: >KHaa« qacrb, cayaceÖHasi, noMeuieHHH a.iH rocTefi H np. TOUHO T3K>Ke c 6oabuiofl acHocTbJO

oue-

HUA P a f r r TE BO3MO>KHOCTH, KOTOPUE a a BA.T e M y HOBWH M A T E P N A A — > K e a e 3 0 - 6 e T 0 H .

Bee QACTH coopyjKeHHH, HAVHUA« OT paenpe-

a e a e H w a CTCHHOH NOBEPXHOCTH H OKOH, n p o nopUHtt 3THX OKOH H KOH43H CHJIbHO B b l -

CTynaioiüHMH ropH30HTaabHbiMH n/iHTSMH— Bee 3T0 ecTecTBeHHoe caeacTBHe HOBMX CBOÑCTB MaTepHaaa—>Keae30-6eT0Ha H HOBoro öuTOBoro VK/iaaa, CKpuBaiomerocn 3a 3THM >Keae30-6eT0H0M. M Koraa B Hauie BpcMH Haxoasrrca aioan, HE 3Haiomne „B KaKOM CTHae HM ceroann

(MAH. HAUPTGESCHOSS

paöoTaTb" H ynoBaioliwe Ha cnacHteJibHyjo cHay OTMepaiHX (})opM,—xoqeTcn c oco6oH HaCTOM'IHBOCTblO npOTHBOnOCT3BHTb HM caoBa. cKa3aHHwe 6oaee 15 aeT TOM y Hà3aa PaATOM: .Apxume/cmop Hautet o apeMCHU HC ujueem 6oAee EAWHOIÌ 3a6omuì ne.u COSMO jtc HO noAHee ucn0Ab30eanib n.iodu HOBOZO opydun npou3Bodcmea HatueÜ moxu—MATUUHU. 3mozo ucmuHHOZo nnoHCpa deMorcpamuu. Ho nmo we deAa/om BMCcmo dmozo apxumetanopu? OHUynompeÓAXfom amu opydun npou3aodcmea na 60cnpou36edeHue tfiop.u, C030OHHUX dpyzuMU BpeMenaMu, dpyzu.N HC6OM, (popM—cezodnsi Mepmeux, u OHU dejiatom 3/no npu noMomu MOUIUHU, deilcmsumeAbHoe Hasuanenue tcomopoü UMßHHO 3mu omMeptuue (popMbt ynunmooKumb".

3aaaqn, CToainwe nepea h3mh, coBpeMeHHbiMH apxHTeKTopaMii C C C P , erne 6 o a e e oieBHAHu, ICM OHH ÖBIAII y PaßTa. MBF eine 6oaee HOBOceaw, MeM aMepHKaHCKHe ({jepMepu, — HOBoceabi HOBOTO COUNAABHOöbiroBoro yKaaaa, cTpoHTean HOBNX 4)opM HE;I0BEWECK08

>KH3HH.

BO3MO)KHOCTH

HOBUX

CTpoHTeabHbix MaTepnaaoB H poab Ha mero ,,opyaHH npoH3BoacTBa"—MaiuHHa, B03pocan BO MHoro KpaT pa3 3a HCTeKinne 15 AET. H>->KHO osaaaeTb STHMH HOBWMH npeanoCUAKAMH H BonaoTHTb HX B iiauieH KOHKpPTHoH pa6oTe. Ecan MHoroe yaaaocb B cßoeft oÖaacTH caeaaTb QETBEPTB BeKa TOMV Ha3aa oanHoqKE PaflTy, TO, KOHCHHO, "óoabuie HyjKHO caeaaTb HaM B Hauie BPEMA—KOAAEKTHBY, ACHO CTaBHiueMy ce6e CBOH 3aaa«m, HacToHMHBO oBaaaeßaiomeMy HOBHM MeToaoM paÖOTbl.

ERSTE AUSSTELLUNG DEll ARCHITEKTUR DER GEGENWART SA .. „.„„,.„ ^ MITGLIEDER-VERZEICHNISS: M. BARSCH, G. BARCHIN. BAUHAUS (Dessau), VICTOR BOURGEOIS (BRUXELLE), A. BUROFF. VAN-DER-VLUGT (Amsterdam). WEEGMANN. A. WESSNIN, V. WESSNIN, L. WESSNIN. W. WLADIWIROFF. B. WEÜKOFFSKY. ALEXE) GAN MORICE GASPARO (Bruxelle). GALPERIN (Leningrad) WALTER GROPIUS (Dessau). M. GINSBURG, J. G0L0SS0FF. P. G0L0SS0FF. HOFFMANN (Berlin), R. GUEVREKIAN (Paris). A. IWANITZKY N COLLEY S. KOJIN. ANNA KAPUSTINA, ). KORNFELD. KREUTZAR (Prag), KROGA (Prag). P. KOSINSKY (Warschau), A. KORSCHEWSKY (Warschau). A. KAWETZEWSKY (Warschau), A. KARYNSKY (Warschau), B. KORSCHUNOFF. A. KRESTIN (Leningrad). G. KRASSIN. W. KOKORIN. W. KRASSILNIKOFF G. LUDWIG. GUSTAV LUDECKE (Heilerin). J. LEONIDOFF. ANDRE LURCAT (Paris). MALLET-STEVENS (Paris). MORET (Paris) J. NIKOLAJEFF A. NIKOLSKY (Leningrad). A. OL (Leningrad). J. 1. P. OUO (Rotterdam) ALEX PASTERNAK. «I. PARUSNIKOFF. J. RAICH, G. RIETVELD (Utrecht)' ). SSOBOUEF, L. SLAWINA. SIRKUS (Warschau), SSYNIAWSKY. MAX TAUT (Berlin), FISSENKO, A. FUFAIEFF. D. FRIEDMANN. ZARNOWEROWNA (Warschau), A. SCHUSS1EFF, S. TSCHERNISCHOFF, T. TSCHIJIKOWA, TSCHOUKA (Warschau), IRENE WILLIAM. NINA WOSOTiNZEWA HOCHSCHULEN ZU MOSKAU, LENINGRAD, KIEW, ODESSA. TOMSK U. A BAUFIRM IN: TECHVJBETJN. ASBOSTROM MJSXWJTO' U. A H H M H M B

5 8 , Wh/ioìì a o h e OK-iiapKe, Hanaro. ®p. n , P a ì T .

5 7 . floM OpeeMana s noc-Anwe/ioee. 0>p. i l

PaìT,

39

Figure 6.3

(opposite)

Robie House, Chicago, 1906, and Freeman House, Los Angeles, 1923. From Moisei Ginzburg,

Zhilishche

( M o s c o w : Gosstroyizdat, 1934), 39. Figure 6.4 Urban scheme for M a g n i t o g o r s k , 1930. Ivan Leonidov, designer. From naia arkhitektura

views of the Freeman House, but this time without commentary (Fig. 6.3). 1 2 Some of the illustrations were drawn from the Russian edition of Richard Neutra's book Wic bant Amcrika (How America builds), published in 1 9 2 9 , in which Soviet readers were able to learn about certain of Wright's Californian constructions. 1 3 Points of convergence between Constructivist ideas and Wright's own thinking appear in the course of the debate on the ideal f o r m of the socialist town that opened with the meeting to devise the first Five-Year Plan in 1 9 2 9 . N o t long before W r i g h t began his reflections on the future planning and division of the American territory, w h i c h would lead to the Broadacre City project, the " d e urbanists"—advocates of territorial spread—intervened in the debate on urban and town planning to reject, as Wright would later, both capitalism's dense metropolitan conglomerations and the radical solutions proposed by architects like Le Corbusier. Just like the precepts Wright would formulate in 1 9 3 2 , the linear mechanisms for community planning proposed by Mikhail Okhitovich and his c o m rades at the 1 9 2 9 convention rested on a model of regional control based both 011 the introduction of the individual h o m e and on the mass availability of the automobile of Henry Ford, w h o in the 1920s was a great popular hero in the U S S R . 1 4 In certain projects of like inspiration, such as Ivan Leonidov's plan for Magnitogorsk (1930), there was even a limited visual resemblance to Wright's designs: towers were articulated in a decentralized arrangement, as they would be at Broadacre (Fig. 6.4). 1 3 B u t there the similarities end. O n e of the most astonishing episodes in the Soviet reception of Wright is linked to the American visit in 1 9 3 0 of filmmaker Sergei Eisenstein, the sole representative of the Russian avant-garde of great standing to go to the United States since Mayakovsky's 1 9 2 5 trip. While in N e w York, Eisenstein undertook the prepara-

Sovremen-

5, no. 3 (1930): 5.

CraTbH d).Jl.PaHTa HarmcaHa- fl/is ..flpxmeKTypbi CCCP" B OTBCT Ha SHKGTy p e j i a K U H H (cm. Ns 6 33

KAK

fl

1933 [-•)•

PABOTAHD

ttJPAHK l\l\Oi\& PA&T

lIs.ioHvCiuie H TeojiOTinecKOe ö ö o c lioDBHiic npoueeca TBopieesoii paSoTbi apxiiTCKTopa HB.iaeTffl eajio no eeiic TBOpiCCTBOM. IloiIUTajOCb Bee JKC OTBeTiiTb Ha noeTaB-ieniibic b b m i i Boiipoew. lì yc.ioBHHX Kaai^oro s a l a m i h e.ie;iyeT ìicKaTb >iero^a e r o pcmeHiiH. H u m , {¡>opMa 11 oornnii xapaKTep npoeKTa n p e s o n p e a e a n i o T c a xapaKTepoM y q a e T s a , xapauTepoM npiiMeHfleMbix M a T e pua.iOB. cnoeooaMii iipiiMeiicHna i i x , iipnpo^HbiMn ^amibiMii n , naKOHeu. HaaHaieHiieM ^ainioü noeTpoiiun. II Beer^a TBOpieeKaa Tin;uiBii^ya.ii»nocTi

hx

Be.iiiKHMii

naMnTHiiKaMH,

enocoC-

e T B y e T n b n a m n a m i e o s ^ a m n o Be.uiHiix

apxnTeBTypnbix TBopemili. H o tc acau l i « , KOTopbie ^o.isKiibi uoa^BiiraTb mm, OCTceTBCHHO, pe3KO OT.lIIMilKlICJI OT HIIX. Pe^KO Ol,I IWH'T, ITOÖbl MCTO,1bI K0.1•leuTHBHoii paCoTbi p a e n p o e T p a i i a n i i C b n Ha oG.iacTb no;vnniHoii TBOpieeKoii paóoTbi apxiiTeKTOpa. ee.ui n e ( " u r n i n . Tex c:iynai-1!, i;or;iu < u u h apxiiTCKTop BbinoaiiacT t o , "ito 3a;ìVMii.i a p y r o i t . H o ;ia;t;e b dthx e n y i a j i x Bbieiuero e o BepmencTBa 11e.11.3j1 socTiirnyTb. B neKyeeTBe apxHTeKTypbi saMLicca

Figure 6.5

tion of a film entitled Glass House, the idea for w h i c h he initially had in Berlin

Wright, "Kak ia rabotaiu" ("The

in 1 9 2 6 . In his working scrapbook he glued a v i e w — c l i p p e d from the 29 J u l y

way I design"), Arkhitektura

5SSR 2,

no. 2 (February 1934): 71.

1 9 3 0 issue of New York magazine—of one of the towers studied by Wright for St. Mark's-in-the-Bouwerie. T h e filmmaker saw in the tower project the materialization of the "glass skyscraper" he had imagined four years earlier, which was to serve as the central theme for a film he would never bring to light. 1 6 While this is not an instance of direct influence, it illustrates the spirit shared by artists in very different circumstances. With Russian architecture's turn toward socialist realism in the 1930s, interest in W r i g h t did not cease, but its nature changed. If the C o m m u n i s t Party daily, Pravda, addressed him on two occasions, in 1 9 3 2 and in 1 9 3 3 , it was in order to draw anticapitalist comments from him about the situation of architects in a West struck by the Great Depression. Since Le Corbusier was practically persona non

1 0 6

|

JEAN-LOUIS

COHEN

grata, it fell to W r i g h t to incarnate the figure of the f a m e d "architect f r i e n d " of the U S S R . W r i g h t did not deny himself the opportunity to denounce the state of intellectuals in the United States, characterizing them as "hapless beneficiaries of a success system they have never clearly understood, but that has worked miracles for them while they slept." Although he stated that in America "the present economy has practically eliminated our profession, such as it was," W r i g h t did not hide his reservations regarding the Soviet system. 1 7

Several months later, the U n i o n of Architects' journal Arkhitektura

SSSR,

founded in 1 9 3 3 , questioned Wright on the subject of his w o r k methods. In an extended investigation of the design process of Western architects, Wright's creative technique was presented (Fig. 6.5) alongside those of the Frenchmen R o b e r t Mallet-Stevens, André Lurf at, and R a y m o n d Fischer, the Dutchman J . J . R O u d , the Austrian Josef Frank, the Belgian Victor Bourgeois, and the Swiss Hannes M e y e r and Hans Schmidt. In the text, W r i g h t deems that the notion of " c o m position," about which he is questioned, is " d e a d " f r o m the m o m e n t the building is thought of as an "entity." 1 8 Invited to take a position on the issue of relations to the classical " h e r i t a g e " that underlay the doctrine of socialist realism then being introduced in Soviet architecture, W r i g h t resisted all nostalgic postures on the matter and warned against the indiscriminate use of classical forms. 1 9 T h e architect and critic David Arkin, w h o solicited this contribution f r o m Wright, played a particularly important role in the Russian discussion of Wright's theories and projects. In 1 9 3 2 he included Wright's p o s t - 1 9 1 8 works in his panoramic study Arkhitektura sovremennogo Zapada (Modern Western architecture; Fig. 6.6), drawing the attention of the Russian public to Wright's solutions to urban problems and providing a translation of the text on the "third dimension" published in Wendingen in 1 9 2 $ . 2 0 Arkin also emphasized Wright's influence on the modern architects of Western Europe and noted that the "clearest formulas in the w o r k " of W r i g h t do not escape the "contradictions of the n e w architecture." 2 1 In 1 9 3 2 , in Iskusstvo bytovoi veshchi ( T h e art of the everyday object), a b o o k devoted to domestic space and furnishings, Arkin likewise mentioned Wright's 1 9 0 1 lecture entitled " T h e A r t and Craft of the Machine." 2 2 In 1 9 3 6 Arkin discussed the question of the relationship between aesthetics and the machine in his preface to the Russian edition of Lewis M u m f o r d ' s 1 9 2 7 b o o k Sticks and Stones, as translated f r o m the G e r m a n edition. This e n c o m i u m to the architectural culture of the United States purports to be a study of the culture itself, stating that " n o w h e r e else but in A m e r i c a has the capitalist city set before the architect so many complex and contradictory problems, nowhere else have the very methods of the architectural project, and the very type of the architect himself, k n o w n changes as substantial as in A m e r i c a . " Underlining this condition, Arkin stressed the marginal character of the works of Sullivan and of that " m o s t recent of innovators, Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " w h o s e w o r k fell outside the mainstream. 23 Ever considered by Soviet Russia to be an anticapitalist "rebel," w h o s e abstract sympathies for the U S S R could be put to profitable use, W r i g h t was one of the f e w foreigners invited to participate in the 1 9 3 7 C o n f e r e n c e of Architects (Fig. 6.7). This solemn visit to M o s c o w certainly w o n over his wife, Olgivanna, w h o served as interpreter during the trip. T h e meeting served as a high mass intended to consecrate definitively the " n e w course" of architecture in the U S S R , one to be achieved both by the public humiliation of the old Constructivists and by the use of foreign "guests," criticism of w h o m w o u l d be of the most veiled sort. 24

TiwBfRii »s' oiM.iú.iímiiaffl i c i u m m n .--ro K O i m r a u i i n . H»ì. H.i-»Vp'>f,

ftSÄBIimiS

HpUtl"ít'i;aTt'.-I(.llOfí

.1.111

: m - HÍ»VIÍ?.lMi«-H> OOOÖeK-UO 3 0 ; m e c T B a .

e c o KatmHií'ICeiaiMH «CTII.TOM1H, £ OpiIUMCHTaílWlOACK(>paTlIBHI.IMl! Hala.1351» MO.K'plIa —1-0 H.iaamiMCCKHM

iiacaeaneM

BC.CM Itpll-

óypmyaaiiotí

apxHTPK-

T v p i j .lonímfpiia.TOCTiiaei'nofi iiopi,T. O tiüf 113 n e p B w x Ifá'ftt üp:I.M.IU-i ! apXIlTCHTOpOB II XyjOÍKIlIIKOB-npil!;.ia;uiiii«>a COBTII O GIITIIMAJ§fpiia;ibiiMx

iioaiuimi

W C K i i B & i t sçTi'Tixmi, nofíTii n a BMyjggy k M a m m i f . •pneiiTiipOBaTi»«! n a MaumiiHoe i i p o n a B o a c T c o 11 CMIITiTt.cBcnHaycTpiia.ii.HOil mm

TexmiiíOií i¡ai>

(JiaüTopoM a p x i r r e i i T y p i i o r o 11 :

cBamimit-

iMM

't i "

!ip0MHiti'i!>imnr0r-!0C¡.:y1 r i a p H J K a .

P/aOBaHHH

\B 3AaHHJix MEINEE KANHTAABHORO CAOJKHORO pHcyiiKa

.HamAH uiHpoKOS

rana,

a T&KJKC B AETAAAX

iipHMeHeiine

HcicyccTaeH-

Hbie MATEPNAAM. MHor«« o S p a s y w NPEACTABAFLIOT 6OAMUOH HH-

MeuiaeT sthm onwroM

noAb3(>BaTbCH.

Paa

KOH-

cyAbTauHOHHwx (pHpM c n e ^ a A b a o 3aHhMacTCH BonpocaMH nAa-

TVpHOro H

yCT.pOHCTaa 3-AaHHH

?KHAHUJ.

H T . n.

npOeKTHpOBaHHH

'KOM'6HHHpOBa.HHe

CTpOHTeAbHblMH

GoAbHHIj,

BajKHeHUIWM MOMeHTOM

MaCC03bIX

CTaHAapTHblX

CpHpMSMH.

BCUBO3vM0?KHOro

3/WHHH

HBAflerCfl

3ACM6HTOB,

IlpaBAa, ®Ce

3TO

060-

apy.HTeKoTSop

npeAAarae.vibix He MOJKeT

A^'H»

Figure 6.8 Illustration of Broadacre City model, 1935. From Boris lofan, "Materlaly o sovremennol arkhltekture SShA

IlAaH BpoAeKp-CHTH. A p x . CD. A .

Pairr.

Broadacre City. Arch. F. L . Wright.

1935

1935

it Italil."Akademia arkhitektury 3, no. 4(1936): 33.

When Wright's turn came to address an audience at the Moscow Center for Architects, he proposed taking forty young Soviet apprentices to Taliesin. He also recalled the 1930 call of Le Corbusier, suggesting that Moscow—a conservative and obsolete city—be left to rot, and that the capital be rebuilt elsewhere. 28 Upon his return to America, Wright cast a look back "across the Pole" at Moscow, criticizing its gigantism but lauding the human qualities of his interlocutors. In the two versions of the article he subsequently published, Wright balanced criticism of the official architecture with praise for "comrade Stalin." 29 U n til 1943 he corresponded with Arkin, whose interest in Western architecture and Jewish origins would lead to his being accused, after 1945, of "cosmopolitanism" and, along with Alabian, the secretary general of the Union of Architects, of being a mercenary for Stalin's normalization. 311 The Central Asian architects who, even before the end of World War II, began to lay the groundwork for the reconstruction of Russia did not take up the regional principles of Broadacre City as such, but the Wrightian plan did figure among the points of reference used to conceive of the postwar Soviet Union. In 1 9 3 7 the satirical writers Ilya Ilf and Evgueni Petrov had published a hilarious account of a trip to the United States, entitled Odnoetazhnaia Amerika (literally, One-Storied America). In this tale, the Americanist vision of the metropolis no longer dominated; instead, a region fitted out with the automobile and whose standard theme was not the skyscraper but the roadway junction became the norm. 3 1 Echoing the words of Ilf and Petrov, who also reported an interview they conducted with Henry Ford, the urbanist Andrei Bunin imagined an

architectural, " o n e - s t o r i e d Russia," based o n increased use o f the a u t o m o b i l e and the individual dwelling. R e f l e c t i n g these opinions, models o f A m e r i c a n h o m e s w e r e at this time o f t e n the subject o f publications c o n c e r n i n g r e c o n struction projects. 3 2 In other respects, W r i g h t ' s influence remained discernible in the f e w expressions o f propaganda organized in M o s c o w b e f o r e the political climate b e t w e e n A m e r i c a and the U S S R froze again in late 1 9 4 5 at the onset o f the cold war. His w o r k s w e r e included, f o r example, in the p h o t o g r a p h y exhibition " T h e A r c h i tecture o f the U . S . A . , " organized by H a r v e y W i l e y C o r b e t t and m o u n t e d in J u n e 1 9 4 4 at the C e n t e r f o r Architects, 3 3 as well as in the m u c h m o r e ambitious e x h i bition o f 3 5 0 photographs selected by the editor of Architectural Record, D o u g l a s Haskell, w h i c h was sent to M o s c o w in 1 9 4 5 in an exhibit designed by F r e d e r i c k Kiesler. 3 4 Invited again in 1 9 4 9 to receptions at the Soviet embassy in Washington, and apparently v e r y pleased to be so, W r i g h t was nevertheless completely shut out o f the talks o n twentieth-century architecture g i v e n b y the U S S R ' s postwar Socialist Realist ideologues. T h e "rehabilitation" o f m o d e r n architecture carried out under N i k i t a K h r u s h c h e v beginning in 1 9 5 4 w o u l d have to arrive before he w o u l d be considered an interesting creator o n c e again. Presented as a destroyer o f classicism in the 1 9 2 0 s , then as an anticapitalist rebel in the f o l l o w i n g decade, and ultimately forgotten, he w o u l d reoccupy a fitting status in the histories o f Soviet architecture only o n c e m o d e r n themes regained pride o f place.

WRIGHT IN FRANCE: A N A M B I G U O U S READING W r i g h t ' s reception in France came even later than in Russia. 3 5 It p r o d u c e d , b e t w e e n 1 9 2 0 and the early 1 9 5 0 s , different themes than those f o u n d in the conflict o f the Soviet movements. T h e e c h o o f W r i g h t was practically indiscernible in France o f the 1 9 2 0 s , as demonstrated by L e w i s M u m f o r d ' s remark that he was astonished that the first French m o n o g r a p h devoted to W r i g h t should be entrusted to the novice historian H e n r y - R u s s e l l H i t c h c o c k J r . M u m f o r d saw in this c h o i c e " a n act that can attest to the French lack o f familiarity w i t h the w o r k o f M r . W r i g h t , f o r his influence in France has b e e n negligible." 3 6 A t first, the superiority c o m p l e x o f the graduates o f the E c o l e des B e a u x - A r t s obliterated the potential f o r the first generation o f W r i g h t ' s w o r k s to be discovered. T h u s , Jacques G r é b e r completely obscures the w o r k o f b o t h Sullivan and W r i g h t in L'architecture aux Etats-Unis:

Preuve de laforce d'expansion

du génie français

(Architecture in the U n i t e d States: P r o o f o f the expansive p o w e r o f F r e n c h g e nius), his 1 9 2 0 w o r k intended to be o f e n c y c l o p e d i c scope. 3 7 T o b e sure, W r i g h t ' s w o r k s are difficult to present as such " p r o o f , " g i v e n the A m e r i c a n architect's u n ceasing criticism o f the B e a u x - A r t s m e t h o d o f composition. 3 8 L e Corbusier, the other o p p o n e n t o f E c o l e des B e a u x - A r t s conventions, had a certain familiarity w i t h the w o r k s o f W r i g h t , but it is linked to his visits to G e r -

ì[

, r S f ^ K

„11

1

Ä

'"ir.

II

Figure 6.9 Plan a n d elevation, H. J. Ullman House, Oak Park, Illinois, 1904. FLW, architect. Illustration from the W a s m u t h folios, erroneously dated 1920 and reproduced as "Habitation en béton" in

L'Architec-

ture vivante, winter 1924, n.p.

many prior to 1 9 1 4 . In a text from the first volume of the Oeuvre complète, he indicates that it was at Peter Behrens's office that "one day in 1 9 1 3 , 8 magazine arrived bearing the works of Frank Lloyd Wright, that precursor, and student of Sullivan's, a greater precursor still."' 9 He was doubtless referring to issues of the Schweizerische Bauzeitung containing articles published by Berlage on his return from his trip to America, or perhaps to the Ausgeführte Bauten of Wright. 4 " Invited by Hendricus Theodorus Wijdeveld to contribute to the 1925 Wendingen volume dedicated to Wright, Le Corbusier recalled the powerful effect the Prairie houses and the Larkin Building had had on him. 41 The young Jeanneret not only thus discovered Wright, but he also conveyed his admiration for him to his mentor Auguste Perret. In 1 9 1 5 he sent documents to Perret about the American's work. 42 Retrospectively, though, Le Corbusier settles accounts with Wright by classifying him as one who ignored the "essential rhythm" of building materials. In other respects, Jeanneret seems to use Wrightian themes at once in the 1 9 1 2 home built in La Chaux-de-Fonds for his par-

Figure 6.10 Plan and elevation, Larkin Building, Buffalo, New York, 1902-6. FLW, architect. Illustration from the Wasmuth folios, erroneously dated 1920 and reproduced In L'Architecture

vivante,

winter 1924, n.p.

ents, in the S c h w o b House, completed in 1 9 1 7 , and, beginning in 1 9 1 4 , in the conception of the D o m - i n o projects. 43 Other architects working in Paris gained access to knowledge of W r i g h t not by way of G e r m a n y but through the " D u t c h connection." In 1 9 2 4 Jean Badovici, w h o was in contact with the various Dutch groups interested in the w o r k of " o n e of the great creative forces of our era," presented the first French reproductions of the Wasmuth portfolio in the pages of L'Architecture vivante (Figs. 6.9 and 6.10). 4 4 T h e principal agent in the circulation of Wright's w o r k at this point was R o b e r t Mallet-Stevens, w h o also contributed to the 1 9 2 5 Wendingen volume. His essay in that w o r k refuted J . J . P. Oud's commentary, w h i c h incorrectly claimed that Wright's " i n f l u e n c e " extended to "Holland, Germany, Czechoslovakia, France, B e l g i u m , Poland, Romania, etc." 45 Mallet-Stevens stated that W r i g h t "was one of the first to dare to break with routine tradition in order to create" and called his w o r k "grand, rich, and logical." W h e n he stressed the importance of c o n crete for industrial constructions "of original and healthy line," as f o u n d in

F i g u r e 6.11 Cavroix Villa, Croix, 1932. Robert Mallet-Stevens, architect.

W r i g h t ' s work, his analysis was similar to Le Corbusier's. It is as if in W r i g h t the Parisians f o u n d justification for the celebration of concrete as a building m a t e rial, reaffirming in a self-congratulatory way France's contribution to the birth of concrete. Mallet-Stevens, again like Le Corbusier, j u d g e d W r i g h t ' s plans and elevations to be comparable "to the great classics." H e considered that W r i g h t "masterfully sets his volumes to play within space, w i t h o u t falling into a sorry search for the picturesque," and that his "compositions" thus "possess an originality of imagination that radiates an impression of gaiety and well-being." Although according to Mallet-Stevens the American's "task" was "easier" than that of the current generation in Europe, he did not conceal his apprehension that "architects w i t h out ideas" would copy W r i g h t ' s buildings. W h i l e "works with the power of W r i g h t ' s " are "impossible to plagiarize," he confessed to sensing " w i t h terror the efforts made by these architects to seize them, and to exploit this theft." O n the whole, Mallet-Stevens made n o attempt to conceal an admiration he admitted was already "of long standing." 4 6 In a lecture entitled "Les raisons de l'architecture m o d e r n e dans tous les pays" ( T h e reasons for m o d e r n architecture in all countries), Mallet-Stevens places the work of "the r e n o w n e d American architect" within the context of a n e w global architecture. C o m m e n t i n g on a view of the Robie House, he declared himself struck by "this desire for long horizontals, lines whose realization only reinforced concrete permits." Likewise, presenting the "very geometric, very regular facade"

Frank Lloyd Wright

Figure 6.12 Front cover, Frank Uoyd Wright (Paris: Editions Cahiers d'Art, 1928),

COLLECTION • LES MAITRES DE L ARCHITECTURE CONTEMPORAINE • PUBLIÉE SOUS LA DIRECTION DE CHRISTIAN ZERVOS ÉDITIONS "CAHIERS D'ART., 40. RUE BONAPARTE, PARIS (VI )

of what he designates a "casino" of Wright's (doubtless M i d w a y Gardens), he contended that "this symmetry and this repetition of elements considerably enlarge the edifice without the aid of arbitrary horizontals." 4 7 Mallet-Stevens thus closely associated the theme of concrete with Wright's works. His C a v r o i x Villa in C r o i x near Lille, built in the early 1930s, contained echoes of the Prairie Style in the horizontal elaboration of its geometry, while maintaining a more traditional sense of overall massing (Fig. 6 . 1 1 ) . In fact, although the process of " e n l a r g i n g " a building toward the exterior that Mallet-Stevens noted in Wright's houses can be seen in the villa's elongation, the compartmentalized character of the interior has little in c o m m o n with American models. Beginning in 1 9 2 7 , the Parisian journal Cahiers d'art announced a series of works "intended to popularize, using means of reproduction as perfect as possible, the most prominent figures in architecture and the laws that guide this architecture." T h e announcement was stated in terms standard to the thought of the y o u n g architect André Lurçat, w h o was put in charge of the collection by Christian Z e r vos, the series' founder. 4 8 T h e first two volumes of "Les maîtres de l'architecture contemporaine" (Masters of contemporary architecture) were to be devoted to Wright and Oud. T h e former is the only work of standing to be devoted to Wright in France prior to 1 9 4 5 (Fig. 6.12). In announcing the publication, Lurçat took care to position W r i g h t within a broader landscape, presenting "the slow and sure development of a mind that k n e w marvelously h o w to combine the facts of reason with the surprises of the imagination, and with the subtlest of sensibilities." 49

In the correspondence that marked the preparatory stages of the b o o k , as Lur^at negotiated shipment of the photographs to be included, Wright vaunted the " n e w principle of employing reinforced concrete" then being used in his California houses, and announced his delight at seeing himself, at last, given recognition in Paris, stating: "It will be good to see myself in France. T h e text for this work was entrusted to the young Harvard graduate and historian Henry-Russell Hitchcock Jr., w h o paid a visit to Lur^at on the r e c o m mendation of O u d . T h e selection of illustrations was expressly credited to Lur^at, w h o likewise conceived of the book's layout, according to Willi Boesiger, then a draftsman in his studio. Boesiger shortly thereafter patterned his design for Le Corbusier's Oeuvre complète after Lurijat's."'2 T h e book's forty-eight plates correspond in large part to the images that appeared in the 1925 Wendingen monograph, revisiting the cycle of the Prairie houses, which are illustrated with plates from the 1 9 1 0 Wasmuth edition. Lurgat also included Wright's California experiments, represented by the Hollyhock and M i l lard houses, Midway Gardens, the Imperial Hotel, and Taliesin/ 3 In his essay, Hitchcock compared Wright's work to current European work, taking into account Wright's manner of discourse—which Hitchcock aligns with both Walt Whitman and Le Corbusier's Vers une architecture—as much as his constructive thought/ 4 If he here reasserts the dominant theme of French analyses that praise especially the constructive dimension of Wright's work, in other respects Hitchcock is careful to warn the reader against architecture's penchant for ornament, the mark of a certain lack of "restraint.""" In the following year, Hitchcock elaborated on this critical vision in his book Modern Architecture: Romanticism and Reintegration In 1929, Lur^at published Architecture, a manifesto modeled on Le Corbusier's satirical tracts, in which he hoped to consolidate his own position in the French scene. O n c e again he invoked the figure of Wright, taking particular note of the Millard House and comparing it to his own work. He recalled that "the effort at renewal can be found even in America, where Frank Lloyd Wright, after Richardson, works to rediscover beneficial laws." 1 ' 7 However, Lur^at scarcely introduced Wrightian themes in his own creations prior to the early 1930s. T h e Hefferlin Villa, built for an American client in Ville d'Avray in 1 9 3 2 , is the earliest e x a m ple of an attempt to capture the spatial fluidity of Wright's houses. To some degree, the elongation of compositions he began to develop during his stay in M o s c o w between 1934 and 1 9 3 7 is indebted to Wright's modular plans. In about 1 9 3 0 French analyses of the American architectural scene began to include Wright's designs more consistently. T h e art historian Louis Gillet observed that Wright was a "leader of modern architecture, an equal of Perret and Le C o r busier," and described the Larkin Building as one " o f severe composition and admirably readable, whose bare masses stylize the components and spell out its purpose as clearly as would the labels of a file."' 1 * M y r o n Malkiel-Jirmounski, in a more refined observation, described Wright as the "first and only American architect," and suggested that his influence in Europe was even more immense and

profound than in his own country. Malkiel-Jirmounski emphasized the effect of the Far East upon what he described as Wright's " C u b i s t conception of masses and of deftly distributed volumes," as well as his "intimate" bond " w i t h nature." 3 '' Despite this period of making up for lost time, Wright's presence in France remained marginal between the wars. In 1926 Jean Badovici described Wright's journeys and his " e x i l e " from America, and emphasized Wright's influence in the Netherlands;''" like so many other critics, however, he considered W r i g h t to belong to the past, and thus relegated him to the status of a precursor out of touch with the current scene/' 1 Four years later, in a special issue of L'Architecture vivante, the only journal to give detailed attention to Wright, Badovici suggested a different reading of Wright's work. This issue, dedicated to Wright, focused largely on the buildings presented in the 1925 Wendingen volume and contained the plates from the Wasmuth portfolio. Overall, though, the issue downplayed the relevance of Wright's buildings and declared it to be limited to American soil, even though Badovici identified Wright as " o n e of the greatest, if not the greatest of modern architects."'' 2 In the end, Badovici subordinated his reading of Wright's buildings to the defense of Le Corbusier's architecture. H e emphasized Le Corbusier's practice, noting that his use of materials like "concrete, steel, and glass" was not " u n equal to his theory, however much a product of genius this theory may be." P u b lication of L'Architecture

vivante was interrupted in 1 9 3 3 , at which point the

principal French journal became L'Architecture d'aujourd'hui, headed by André Bloc and Pierre Vago, which had begun publication in 1 9 3 0 . T h e latter journal's silence on Wright is deafening; travel notes on America such as those by Eugène Beaudouin remain mute about Wright's work, of which, granted, only rare fully constructed examples were to be found until 1936. ( ' 3 French journals did not overlook Wright's response to the 1 9 3 2 M u s e u m of Modern Art exhibition on the International Style, curated by Hitchcock and Philip Johnson, or his general reactions to the rise of the new European generation of architects. In 1 9 3 2 , in Cahiers d'art, the Z u r i c h critic Sigfried Giedion discussed remarks made by the "precursor" (as he termed Wright) the preceding year in a Swiss journal. 6 4 He took up Wright's warning "against the new formalism that would result from use of the surface, line, and triangle." Wright, he noted, claiming "the rights of the individual," demanded above all an "organic evolution." Giedion rejected the " W r i g h t vs. Le Corbusier" disjunction and recalled that without painting, and Cubism in particular, "architecture would have remained subservient and slavish"; he ended by stressing, though not without a certain element of finesse, various impasses in Wright's aims.' 0 T h e figure of Wright was henceforth recognized by intellectuals outside the field of architecture, such as the writer Jean Prévost, w h o in 1 9 3 9 included Wright's biography in a book whose title, Usonic: Esquisse de la civilisation américaine ( U s o nia: sketch of American civilization), demonstrated Wright's centrality—together with the great orchestra leaders and Walt D i s n e y — a m o n g emblematic figures of

" A m e r i c a n civilization."'' 6 M o r e o v e r , Prévost r e c o g n i z e d all the ways this " m a n o f tyrannical g e n i u s " stood in opposition to the A m e r i c a n establishment—this m a n w h o " i m p o s e s u p o n his c l i e n t e l e — i n addition to using his o w n size as a m e a s u r e — h i s tastes as a m a n o f distinction and a m a n o f progress, his e x t r e m e d e m a n d f o r unity." W r i g h t , in the f a c e o f e n g i n e e r s and skyscrapers, a d v a n c e d w i t h his " h o m e s " a different " s o r t o f spirit," o n e that o p p o s e d " g e o m e t r i c f o r m " to the " v e r t i c a l line," thus heralding a n e w role f o r architecture. 6 7 D e s p i t e the title o f his b o o k , h o w e v e r , Prévost does n o t discuss the U s o n i a n house, a true, if recent, r e f o r m u l a t i o n o f W r i g h t ' s d o m e s t i c architecture. A f t e r W o r l d W a r II, a polar inversion e m e r g e d in the F r e n c h attitude t o w a r d W r i g h t . F r e n c h functionalists n o w f i x e d their sights exclusively o n the technical d i m e n s i o n o f his w o r k s , reserving their full enthusiasm f o r R i c h a r d Neutra; 6 8 f r o m that point o n , consequently, W r i g h t was taken o v e r b y the conservatives, w h o subjected his w o r k to closer scrutiny than ever b e f o r e . A n d r é R e m o n d e t , w i n n e r o f the G r a n d P r i x de R o m e and Perret's successor at the E c o l e des B e a u x - A r t s , f o r e x a m p l e , paid special attention to the J o h n s o n W a x A d m i n i s t r a t i o n B u i l d i n g ( 1 9 3 6 ; Fig. 6 . 1 3 ) and R e s e a r c h T o w e r ( 1 9 4 4 ) w h e n he p r o v i d e d the F r e n c h p u b lic w i t h the first p a n o r a m i c o v e r v i e w o f p o s t w a r A m e r i c a . 6 1 ' T h e high p o i n t o f W r i g h t ' s F r e n c h r e c e p t i o n is the Paris s h o w i n g o f the e x hibition " S i x t y Years o f L i v i n g A r c h i t e c t u r e " and W r i g h t ' s visit to F r a n c e in A p r i l 1 1 8

I

JEAN-LOUIS

COHEN

1 9 5 2 . T h e j o u r n a l L'Architecture

française also published W r i g h t ' s positions in a spe-

cial issue (Fig. 6.14). 7 " F o u n d e d in 1 9 4 0 w i t h a clearly a n t i m o d e r n b e n t , this j o u r nal was l o n g directed b y M i c h e l R o u x - S p i t z , and did n o t spare criticism either o f L e C o r b u s i e r or o f N e u t r a , b o t h o f w h o m w e r e s p o n s o r e d by d'aujourd'hui.

In the special 1 9 5 2 issue, L'Architecture

L'Architecture

française c o u n t e r e d the ar-

chitecture o f the " m o d e r n s , " d u b b e d fetishists o f technology, w i t h o r g a n i c architecture and published an address by W r i g h t to the F r e n c h nation. 7 1 U p o n his

.'ARCHITECTURE FRANÇAISE

F i g u r e 6.13 (opposite) Interior, Johnson W a x Administration

Î25-124

Building, Racine, Wisconsin, 1936-39.

(8 79- R e g a r d i n g W r i g h t ' s i n f l u e n c e o n D u t c h architecture, see m y essay " T h e D u t c h R e c e p -

t i o n of F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t : A n O v e r v i e w , " in The Education of the Architect: Historiography,

Urban-

ism, and the Growth of Architectural Knowledge, ed. M a r t h a Pollak ( C a m b r i d g e , Mass.: M I T Press, 1997), 1 3 9 - 6 2 , and t h e essay by M a r i é t t e van Stralen in this v o l u m e (chapter 3). 11.

M a r i o U n i v e r s o , ed., Casabella: Per I'evoluzione

delVarchitettura dall'arte alia scienza,

1928-1943

(Treviso: C a n o v a , 1978). Besides tracing the history o f t h e magazine, t h e b o o k includes an a n t h o l o g y of its m o s t significant articles. Casabella distinguished itself f r o m t h e o t h e r official a r c h i tectural periodicals o f t h e Fascist r e g i m e (the m o s t p r e e m i n e n t o f w h i c h was Architettura e Arti corative, later Architettura,

De-

p u b l i s h e d in R o m e ) and f r o m its M i l a n e s e rival, Domus, by f o c u s i n g o n

c u r r e n t trends and b y p i t t i n g architects against each o t h e r as " m i l i t a n t " critics w h o e n g a g e d in " b a t tles," as clearly expressed in Pagano's editorials. 12.

T h i s fact can b e d e d u c e d by t h e c o m m e n t h e w r o t e after v i e w i n g a p h o t o g r a p h of t h e M a r -

tin H o u s e , and w h i c h h e e x t e n d e d to all of t h e houses that had b e e n p r o d u c e d in O a k Park: " T h e houses are f a m o u s , w h i c h is so very disconcerting because o f their p r o p h e t i c anticipation." G i u s e p p e P a g a n o - P o g a t s c h n i g , " L e ville," Casabella 67 (1933), 2 - 3 . 13.

Pérsico ( 1 9 0 0 - 1 9 3 6 ) was shaped as a historian in t h e liberal a t m o s p h e r e o f Naples. H e m o v e d

to T u r i n in 1925, w h e r e h e w o r k e d at t h e Fiat a u t o m o b i l e f a c t o r y w h i l e also w r i t i n g occasionally f o r Gramsci's j o u r n a l L'Ordine

Nuovo. F r o m his C a t h o l i c faith Pérsico derived a sense o f o r d e r a n d

m o r a l idealism. In 193 1 h e d e c i d e d t o collaborate w i t h La Casa bella, and shortly t h e r e a f t e r h e t o o k over t h e m a g a z i n e ' s layout and c o n t e n t . Pérsico a p p r o a c h e d t h e t h e m e of a r c h i t e c t u r e w i t h his c u s t o m a r y f i g h t i n g spirit. His relationship w i t h Pagano, t h o u g h o n e of f r i e n d s h i p and m u t u a l esteem, was n o t m a r k e d b y u n c o n d i t i o n a l a g r e e m e n t , given t h e diversity o f t h e t w o m e n ' s political a n d aesthetic creeds. Pérsico c o m m i t t e d suicide in J a n u a r y 1936. 14.

In placing impressionism at t h e center of his thesis, Pérsico e m p h a s i z e d W r i g h t ' s c o n n e c t i o n

in t w o ways: h e c o n n e c t e d t h e plein air aesthetic w i t h W r i g h t ' s love f o r n a t u r e and n o t e d that J a p a nese i n f l u e n c e was a c o m m o n f a c t o r t o b o t h as well. 15.

T h e lecture was p u b l i s h e d in Casabella 1 0 2 - 3 (1936) a n d r e p r i n t e d m a n y times; see, for e x -

ample, R i c c a r d o M a r i a n i , ed., Edoardo Pérsico: Oltre architettura—Scritti

scelti e lettere (Milan: Feltrinelli,

1977), 226—35. A c c o r d i n g t o Insolera, " W r i g h t in Italia," 62, H e i n r i c h de Fries's b o o k Frank Lloyd Wright was essential t o Pérsico for t h e p r e p a r a t i o n of his talk. In 1933 Pérsico h a d already n o t e d that " t h e t e r m ' p r e c u r s o r , ' w h i c h does n o t i n t e n d to establish m e r e l y a c h r o n o l o g i c a l fact, b e l o n g s t o an A m e r i c a n : Frank Lloyd W r i g h t . " Q u o t e d in B r u n o Z e v i , Frank Lloyd

Wright

(Bologna:

Zanichelli, 1979), 8. Pérsico had previously w r i t t e n o n W r i g h t in an article that was paradoxically p u b l i s h e d in a literary j o u r n a l r a t h e r t h a n an architectural magazine; see " L ' a r c h i t e t t u r a m o n d i a l e , " Italia letteraria, 2 July 1933, 5. See also Persico's article " B r i n k m a n n e Van der V l u g t , architetti," Casabella 87 (1935): 1 2 - 2 7 ; in it Pérsico u n d e r l i n e s W r i g h t ' s w o r t h as a teacher, because for h i m " a r c h i t e c t u r e has r e t u r n e d , after r o m a n t i c i s m , t o b e u n i q u e l y art, rising above t h e technical c r i t e ria a n d t h e social p r o g r a m . " 16.

N O T E S TO P A G E S

" M e s s a g e f r o m F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t , " in Atti ufficiali: XIII

Congresso internazionale

architetti,

Roma, 22-28 Setiembre 193¡—XII ( R o m e : A c c a d e m i a N a z i o n a l e di S a n L u c a , 1935), 735—36. I t h a n k B a r t T h u r b e r f o r d r a w i n g m y a t t e n t i o n to this text. 17.

" T h e architect is n o t t h e propagandist . . . w h a t c o u n t s is . . . his awareness o f t h e w o r k . "

Raffaello Giolli, " L ' u l t i m o W r i g h t , " Casabella-Costruzioni

122 (1938): 4—5, 4 0 , r e p r i n t e d in Rajfaello

Giolli: L'archittettura razionale, ed. Cesare D e Seta (Bari: Laterza, 1972), 308—16. T h e l a n d m a r k 1938

78-79

|

2 3 3

Casabella e d i t i o n was o c c a s i o n e d b y t h e m o n u m e n t a l J a n u a r y 1938 Architectural Forum t h a t

focused

o n W r i g h t ' s w o r k in t h e 1930s. 18.

T h e c o n c l u d i n g passages o f Giolli's editorial, t a k e n f r o m W r i g h t ' s " H y m n o f W o r k " (1896),

have t h e flavor o f p r o p h e c y . If t h e e p o c h o f d e b a t e h a d b e e n over, t h e ideas e x p r e s s e d in t h e s e f e w lines w o u l d have served t o r e c o n s t r u c t t h e c o n s c i e n c e o f a n a t i o n : "I live as I w o r k a n d as I a m . N o w o r k f o r f a s h i o n o r f o r p r e t e n c e . M y w o r k shall b e w o r t h y o f a m a n . I w o r k as I t h i n k a n d as I a m . I will n o t b e a slave o f f o r t u n e , I will n o t serve m o n e y . . . I will n o t give up. I will act as I will die a n d as I a m . M y l i b e r t y m u s t p r o t e c t m y life, w h a t e v e r t h i n g h a p p e n s t o m e . " A r r e s t e d in S e p t e m b e r 1 9 4 4 , Giolli was d e p o r t e d a n d d i e d t h e n e x t year in t h e c o n c e n t r a t i o n c a m p at G u s e n . 19.

In his s t u d y o f t h e d i s c o v e r y o f A m e r i c a n w r i t e r s , A g o s t i n o L o m b a r d o o b s e r v e d t h a t Italian

w r i t e r s ' " c o n c e p t i o n o f t h e A m e r i c a n n i n e t e e n t h c e n t u r y is t r u e a b o v e all in t e r m s o f t h e i r own poetics, in h o w m u c h it sustained t h e i r own research . . . o f a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a l l i t e r a t u r e t h a t w o u l d i n c a r n a t e t h e aspirations o f a n e w society a n d a n e w liberty." A g o s t i n o L o m b a r d o , " L a s c o p e r t a della letteratura a m e r i c a n a , " in Gli Americani •993). 9 0 . E m i l i o C e c c h i ' s America

e l'Italia,

ed. S e r g i o R o m a n o (Milan: S c h w e i w i l l e r ,

amara ( 1 9 3 9 ; repr. P a d u a : M u z z i o E d i t o r e , 1995) is a f u r t h e r

e x a m p l e o f this literary interest in A m e r i c a . W i t h w o n d e r f u l irony, C e c c h i ' s b o o k g a t h e r e d t o g e t h e r t h e i m p r e s s i o n s a n d m e d i t a t i o n s t h a t w e r e t h e result o f his t w o l o n g s o j o u r n s in t h e U n i t e d States a n d M e x i c o . H o w e v e r , a critical vein ran t h r o u g h o u t , as b e l i e d b y t h e title, " B i t t e r A m e r i c a . " C e c chi saw A m e r i c a as a species o f b a r b a r i s m , " m e r e v i o l e n c e , w i t h o u t a b r e a t h o f h a p p i n e s s . " 20.

Italo C a l v i n o , i n t r o d u c t i o n t o Pavese, Letteratura

americana,

x i - x x x i i i . E l i o V i t t o r i n i , in his

Diario in pubblico (1957), t y p i f i e d t h e a t t i t u d e o f m a n y Italian intellectuals t o w a r d A m e r i c a : " I n this t y p e o f universal literature t h a t is m o v i n g t o w a r d o n e l a n g u a g e , t h e r e is t h e A m e r i c a n l i t e r a t u r e o f today, w h e r e o n e f i n d s t h a t p e r s o n t o b e m o s t A m e r i c a n w h o d o e s n o t have a p a r t i c u l a r A m e r i c a n past . . . o n e w h o is, p e r h a p s , n e w l y a r r i v e d f r o m t h e o l d w o r l d . . . . A m e r i c a will signify f o r h i m a s t a d i u m o f h u m a n civilization a n d h e will a c c e p t it as s u c h , a n d in this sense h e will b e a p u r e a n d n e w A m e r i c a n . " Q u o t e d in L o m b a r d o , " S c o p e r t a della l e t t e r a t u r a a m e r i c a n a , " 9 0 . 21.

Pasquale C a r b o n a r a , L'architettura

in America: La civiltà nord-americana

riflessa nei caratteri dei suoi

edifici (Bari: Laterza, 1939). F o l l o w i n g t h e m u c h - n o t e d cliché a m o n g E u r o p e a n historians o f W r i g h t , C a r b o n a r a also c o m p a r e d B r o a d a c r e C i t y w i t h t h e Ville R a d i e u s e by L e C o r b u s i e r , c o n c l u d i n g t h a t t h e t w o p r o j e c t s w e r e totally o p p o s i t e . 22.

B o t h b o o k s w e r e p u b l i s h e d in M i l a n ; Architettura

e democrazia b y Rosa & Ballo, Architettura

or-

ganica b y M u g g i a n i . 23.

Z e v i h a d o n l y r e c e n t l y r e t u r n e d t o Italy after h a v i n g o b t a i n e d his d e g r e e f r o m t h e G r a d u a t e

S c h o o l o f D e s i g n at H a r v a r d University, t h e n h e a d e d b y W a l t e r G r o p i u s . See Z e v i ' s a u t o b i o g r a p h y , Zevi su Zevi ( M i l a n : M a g m a , 1977). 24.

Giulia Veronesi, " L ' o r a di W r i g h t e la v o c e di L e C o r b u s i e r , " Il Politecnico 3 1 - 3 2 (1946): 7 6 - 7 7 .

2$.

T a k i n g a d v a n t a g e o f t h e u n i f y i n g c l i m a t e o f t h e Resistance m o v e m e n t , w h i c h l i n k e d Italians

of diverse r e l i g i o u s a n d political p r o v e n a n c e , t h e m a g a z i n e g a t h e r e d i n t o its e d i t o r i a l b o a r d p r o 234

I

NOTES

TO

PAGES

79-80

tagonists o f t w o c o n f l i c t i n g schools o f t h o u g h t , R o m e ' s e m p i r i c a l realism a n d M i l a n ' s r a t i o n a l i s m . It was d i r e c t e d b y t w o architects o f t h e o l d s c h o o l : L u i g i P i c c i n a t o s e r v e d as e d i t o r o f u r b a n p l a n n i n g a n d M a r i o R i d o l f i as a r c h i t e c t u r a l e d i t o r . P i e r o B o t t o n i , G i n o C a l c a p r i n a , L u i g i F i g i n i , E u g e n i o G e n t i l i , E n r i c o Peressutti, Silvio R a d i c o n c i n i , a n d E n r i c o T e d e s c h i s e r v e d o n t h e e d i t o r i a l b o a r d . B r u n o Z e v i , w h o substantially c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e m a g a z i n e ' s b i r t h a n d was o n e o f its m o s t active voices, f o r m a l l y j o i n e d t h e b o a r d in 1946. F r o m issue 13 o n , t h e y o u n g T u r i n e s e t o w n p l a n -

ner Giovanni Astengo began his collaboration and soon was part of the editorial board; Z e v i and Radiconcini were elevated to the editing staff. 26.

T h e Metron issues devoted to Wright were nos. 4 1 - 4 2 ( 1 9 5 1 ) and 49—50 (1954). For a c o m -

plete bibliography o f Metron, see L'Architettura: Cronache e Storia 9 - 1 0 (1956): 2 1 5 - 1 8 , 293—98. For an analysis of magazines published after the war, see Brunetti, Architettura in Italia, 6 5 - 7 1 ; and Marco Mulazzani, " L e riviste di architettura: Costruire con le parole," in Dal C o , ed., Storia dell'architettura italiana, 4 3 0 - 4 3 . 27.

A P A O was f o r m e d with the guidance o f a committee that included Berletti, Calcaprina,

Fiorentino, Marabotto, and Zevi. T h e initiative was also supported by the teachers of the " S c h o o l of Organic Architecture" (headquartered at Palazzo del Drago in Rome), Piccinato (city planning), Della Rocca (economy), N e r v i (structural engineering), and Ridolfi (technology); by some m e m bers of the 1 5 A Group, an association of fifteen designers led by Marabotto and Petrilli; and by other architects, some of w h o m were members of the Metron editorial board. 28.

Following this line o f thought, Alfonso Gatto attributed almost a cathartic value to the or-

ganic creed, writing that W r i g h t was "superior to any particular ideological situation. For him the same concept of democracy is 'the affirmation of a right to the life to live,' a reality whose reasons are more instinctive than explicit. [His democracy is] fruit o f an empirical colonization more than a political culture." Alfonso Gatto and Giulia Veronesi, Architettura organica: L'architettura della democrazia (Milan: Muggiani, 1945), 10—11. O n Gatto's significance as a critic o f architecture, see "Alfonso Gatto e l'architettura," in L'Architettura: 29.

Cronache e Storia 247 (1976).

" L a costituzione dell'Associazione per l'architettura organica a R o m a , " Metron, no. 2 (1945):

75—76. See the English translation in Joan O c k m a n , Architecture Culture, 1943-1968:

A Documen-

tary Anthology ( N e w York: Rizzoli, 1993), 6 8 - 6 9 . It was the intention of the founders that this declaration not " b e so precise and restrictive that it bind the liberty o f the associates," nor "so agnostic and vague" that it impeded the active character o f the association. T h e objectives that the association intended to follow presented a clear analogy with those set forth in 1 9 4 4 at the f o r m a tion in Milan o f the M o v i m e n t o di Studi per l'Architettura (MSA). As Brunetti has noted, the presence of Eugenio Gentili Tedeschi in both groups testified to an affinity of purpose between them; Architettura in Italia, 5 6 - 6 5 . See M a n f r e d o T a f u r i , Ludovico Quaroni e lo sviluppo dell'architettura moderna in Italia (Milan: Edizioni di Comunità, 1964); Sara Protassoni, "Per un 'comune orientamento': Le associazioni di architetti italiani," in Matilde Baffa et al., Il Movimento di Studi per l'Architettura, 1945-1961 30.

(Bari: Laterza, 1995), 115—48.

Z e v i has frequently asserted the importance of the linking role the association played during

the fascist years among the many diverse factions in Italian architecture. Giuseppe Samonà, then the respected dean of the School of Architecture in Venice, also supported these concepts. Invited to j o i n A P A O in 1946, he recognized in that association "a living force with the capacity to give vitality to our architecture which has fallen so low." Metron, no. 12 (1946): 7 5 . 31.

For analyses o f A P A O ' s political stance, see Tafuri, History of Italian Architecture, 9; and O c k -

man, Architecture Culture, 68. 32.

Leafing through the pages o f the first volumes o f Metron, one can easily track the establish-

ment of new A P A O chapters. In 1946, the formation of a chapter in Liguria was announced; in the following year new chapters formed in R o m e , Venice, Genoa, Naples, and in the provinces of Piedmont and Sicily. In December 1 9 4 7 , at the first national congress o f A P A O in R o m e , regional chapters were f o r m e d in Tuscany and Emilia Romagna.

NOTES

TO

PAGES

80-82

235

33-

Enrico Tedeschi, review of Zevi's b o o k , Metron, no. i (1945): 5 9 - 6 4 .

34.

Z e v i , Towards an Organic Architecture (London: Faber & Faber, 1950), 1 0 , 72.

35.

T h e objective of Zevi's Frank Lloyd Wright (Milan: Il Balcone, 1947) was to replace the preva-

lent understanding of Wright's work with a complete and visionary treatment o f the subject. A b o u t one hundred illustrations accompanied the text; they were gathered initially with the intent of f o r m ing an album accompanied by critical comments. Edgar Kaufmann Jr. translated the introductory essay into English, in Magazine of Art 43 (May 1950): 186—91. T h e following year Z e v i returned to this tendency toward the organic and the ties between Wright and A P A O in "L'architettura organica di fronte ai suoi critici" (Organic architecture face to face with its critics). This essay, published in Metron, nos. 2 3 - 2 4 (1948): 3 9 - 5 1 , was the introductory report delivered by Z e v i at the first national congress of A P A O Italian chapters (Rome, 6 December 1947). O n that occasion, Z e v i attempted to specify the qualitative elements of organic architecture, in response to calls for a precise definition. Although he was at that time unable to do more than offer a recipe based on the ingredients o f W r i g h t and Aalto, Z e v i announced the publication of his new book, Saper vedere l'architettura (1948), in which, he said, he had expressed his thoughts on the question. At the congress itself he limited himself to a restatement of the fact that the originality o f organic architecture lay in its way o f drafting the project in spatial terms. T h e polemics finally exploded at the time of the seventh C I A M Congress in Bergamo. Z e v i , w h o was actually not present in Bergamo, addressed a long and polemical note to his colleagues, and in particular to Giedion, the secretary of the C I A M . This was published in Metron, nos. 3 1 - 3 2 (1949), and in part, together with Giedion's answer, in Comunità 5 (1949) and 6 (1950). It is quite clear in Zevi's text that his real objective was to reopen the debate on " m o d e r n traditions" through direct discussion with the most charismatic historian o f twentieth-century architecture. M o r e specifically, Z e v i aimed to vindicate Wright's importance as the designer w h o had most influenced the architectural works of recent generations. Quite apart from concepts such as "postrationalism" or the " o r g a n i c " that Z e v i used to introduce a new chapter in the history o f modern architecture, his argument was that Giedion had confined himself in his famous Space, Time, and Architecture

(1941)

to only a half-hearted recognition of the role played by Wright. In his astute reply to those w h o congratulated him on Verso un'architettura organica, Zevi's comment was: " G i e d i o n is the one w h o should take the credit, not me. I just translated Space, Time, and Architecture, making one single modification: I put the chapter on Frank Lloyd Wright after the one on Le Corbusier." T h e heart of the matter for Z e v i was to see spaces within architecture. H e interpreted space not just as a figurative category on a par with planes, lines, volumes, or surfaces, but also as the place for individual and social life, for which it was the true projection. Giedion made a curt reply to Z e v i , without responding to the questions raised, merely correcting occasional terminological or chronological inexactitudes. T h e rather superficial answer from Giedion unleashed a pinpoint reply from Z e v i , w h o took up the various subjects in his message one by one. 36.

"Frank Lloyd Wright definisce la democrazia" and " L a nostra cultura e M e t r o n , " Metron, no.

13 (1947): 2—6; "L'architettura organica guarda l'architettura moderna," Metron, no. 48 (1953): 236

I

N O T E S T O P A G E 82

7—IO.

37.

In regard to the climate of reform that existed in Italy, Z e v i counted as an especially significant

factor the Manuale dell'architetto, a handbook compiled under the auspices o f the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche' (National Research Council) by a small group of architects, including Z e v i , Ridolfi, and N e r v i . T h e Manuale was published by the United States Information Service (USIS). T h e same spirit of reform, Z e v i also recalled, is what led A P A O , being an "association of antifascist architects," to launch the idea in Italy for the creation o f the Ministry of Urban Planning.

38.

Piero Bargellini, Libello contro l'architettura organica (Florence: Vallecchi, 1946), 1 5 2 . Bargellini

wrote, " I f I have permitted myself to argue with him [Wright], I haven't done it for him. I said this to the American mother-in-law with the hope that the numerous Italian daughters-in-law, w h o are already gathering in little groups to whisper, would hear." 39.

La Nuova Città was a monthly magazine on architecture, urban planning, and interior design,

founded by Giovanni Michelucci in 1945 and irregularly published until 1 9 5 4 . For a two-year period ( 1 9 5 0 - 5 1 ) the magazine assumed the name Panorami della Nuova Città. For debates on o r ganic architecture and on Wright, see the following articles: " Q u e s t o avviene in A m e r i c a , " 1 - 2 ( 1 9 4 5 - 4 6 ) ; Giusta N i c c o Fasola, "Architettura 'organica,'" ibid.; Renato Bonelli, "Principi e teoria dell'architettura organica," 4 - 5 (1946); Fasola, " L a visibilità e l'architettura," 6 - 7 (1946); Fasola, " W r i g h t a Firenze," 5 ( i 9 5 i ) . S e e also Brunetti, Architettura in Italia, 1 3 1 - 3 3 . 40.

Giulio Carlo Argan, "Introduzione a Wright," Metron, no. 18 (1947): 9—24. Argan's essay was

illustrated with photographs of Wright's then little-known house-office atTaliesin West, an edifice that, the author said, was "strange" and "difficult" but that posed to "intelligent architects a problem of spatial investigation." A m o n g various other themes discussed by Argan were Wright's relationship to history; the place of the " m o n u m e n t a l " in society; city planning as an instance of civilization, from which Wright's protest against the Mumfordian "megalopolis" derived. T h e article concluded with Argan's explicit invitation to Italian architects to mature and thus allow modern architecture to grow as a living entity. T h e results o f this last appeal would very shortly bear fruit in the works o f Carlo Scarpa and in the acute essay by E n z o Paci, " W r i g h t e lo 'spazio vissuto,'" published in the special issue o f Casabella-continuità "L'ultimo incontro con F. L. Wright," 2 2 7 (1959): 9-10. 41.

Foreword to "Introduzione a Wright," Metron, no. 18 (1947): 9.

42.

This version o f the events that preceded the exhibition and its organization in Italy is reported

in Pfeiffer, ed., Letters to Architects, 1 7 4 - 9 1 . According to M e r y l e Secrest, however, the proposition was initiated by a certain Italian academy of art (no better identification is available) and advanced in the United States by Frederick Gutheim, w h o then involved both Wright and the Philadelphiabased architect Oskar Stonorov in its organization. Subsequently, Stonorov's mediation brought the project to Arthur C . Kaufmann. See M e r y l e Secrest, Frank Lloyd Wright ( N e w York: K n o p f , 1992), 529. 43.

Carlo Ludovico Ragghiami to Giuseppe Samonà, 2 1 D e c e m b e r 1 9 5 0 , Giuseppe and Alberto

Samonà Archive, R o m e . 44.

Samonà to Ragghiami, 9 March 1949, Ragghiami Archive, Archivio "seleArte," Florence.

45.

Ragghianti to Samonà, 2 1 December 1 9 5 0 .

46.

O n c e the exhibition closed in Florence it toured Europe for two years before returning to

the United States. O n the significance of this tour, see Giancarlo D e Carlo, " W r i g h t a l'Europa," seleArte 2 (1952): 1 7 - 2 4 . D e Carlo had been studying Wright's teaching and organic architecture since the mid-i940s, as evidenced, respectively, in his essays published in Domus (1946) and CasabellaCostruzioni 47.

(1946).

Already in N o v e m b e r 1949, in a letter to Stonorov, W r i g h t mentioned that K a u f m a n n had

agreed to donate $5,000 to the Frank Lloyd W r i g h t Foundation as a gesture of appreciation for the enthusiasm with which he, Wright, had taken up the idea of the exhibition. See Pfeiffer, ed., Letters to Architects, 1 7 8 . 48.

Ragghianti's friendship with Zevi, w h o m Wright wanted as "arbiter of the installation in Italy,"

dated from 1 9 3 9 w h e n the two o f them had met in London in circumstances that were, though

NOTES

TO

PAGES

83-85

I 237

perhaps not felicitous, at least productive in the long term. See Z e v i , Zevi su Zevi, 38. D u r i n g the London years Ragghiami and Z e v i were both caught up in intense antifascist political activity, which continued even after the war and resulted in c o m m o n adherence to the Partito d'Azione. In particular, Z e v i remained at Ragghianti's side while the latter occupied a political position. Z e v i was, in fact, nominated director o f urban planning, an office created under the auspices of the undersecretary o f the arts—Ragghianti's position. For a brief intellectual profile of Ragghianti, see Carlo L. Ragghiatiti:

Bibliografia degli scritti, ig28-iggo

(Florence: Centro Editoriale Università Inter-

nazionale dell'Arte, 1990), 3 3 9 - 4 3 . 49.

O n that same occasion, Wright was awarded the Star of Solidarity, an honor given him by the

City o f Venice. Manlio Brusatin records certain instances that give a measure of the enthusiasm with which Wright responded to the warm welcome given him by the Venetians. U p o n leaving the Palazzo Ducale, for example, he reportedly exclaimed, " T h i s is the most beautiful house in the w o r l d ! " See Manlio Brusatin, " C a r l o Scarpa architetto veneziano," Controspazio 3—4 (1972): 9. See also Zevi's essay in this volume (chapter 4). 50.

"Messaggio all'Italia," in Mostra di Frank Lloyd: Catalogo itinerario, a sixteen-page pamphlet

reprinted from the January 1 9 5 1 issue of Architectural Forum; and in Metron, nos. 4 1 - 4 2 ( 1 9 5 1 ) : 19. T h e brochure was a partial translation, specifically adapted to the Florentine exhibition, of the thirtytwo-page brochure distributed when the show was presented at Gimbel's in Philadelphia. See Wright to Stonorov, 30 April 1 9 5 1 , in Pfeiffer, ed., Letters to Architects, 188. 51.

" L a grande mostra di Wright a Firenze," Metron, no. 40 ( 1 9 5 1 ) : 4.

52.

"Messaggio a Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " Metron, nos. 4 1 - 4 2 ( 1 9 5 1 ) : 20. T h e fawning praise of

Wright in relation to this retrospective show aroused anger in some quarters. 53.

A list of the exhibited works and a plan o f the show itself were presented in the double issue

of Metron, nos. 4 1 - 4 2 ( 1 9 5 1 ) . 54.

Mostra di Frank Lloyd Wright: Dialogo—Broadacre

City (Florence: Palazzo Strozzi, 1 9 5 1 ) .

55.

O f such critical reactions to the subservient tone of Metron's message, Piero Bottom's is es-

pecially noteworthy. Bottoni, a fervent communist, was a Milanese architect noted for his sensitivity to the functionalist idiom and an original member of Metron s editorial board. In a letter to the editors of Metron that was destined to cause controversy, he stated his strong disagreement with the decision to honor Wright rather than interpret him in light of the political and social reality o f Italy. A m o n g other things, he said that "Wright's genius is diminished by the servile hand-kissing, just as would be that of Le Corbusier or Gropius. His lesson o f spatial and organic liberty must be interpreted within the temperamental and traditional limits o f each o f us, not in the formal manner with which Italy is making this ostentatious display." Metron, no. 43 ( 1 9 5 1 ) : 6. In response to criticism, the Metron editorial board also issued a statement to its readers: "As was inevitable, w e also became embroiled in the fire. We were accused . . . o f being indiscriminate advocates o f a poetic sensibility, accepting it whole and without discussion. . . . With this special issue o f Metron we have tried, therefore, to offer material to those w h o would like to see and understand." " C a r i lettori," 238

1

NOTES

TO

PAGES

85-87

Metron, nos. 41—42 ( 1 9 5 1 ) : 20. 56.

Enrico Sisi, "L'urbanistica di F. L. W r i g h t , " Bollettino tecnico 1 0 ( 1 9 5 1 ) ; Edoardo Detti, " U r -

banistica," seleArte 6 (1953): 1 5 - 2 3 . 57.

N i c c o Fasola, in " W r i g h t a Firenze," confronted two questions: the relationship between

Wright and nature and the development o f his architectural works. In regard to the former, N i c c o Fasola took up Persico's thesis on impressionism, reading in it the construction o f the everyday do-

mestic environment to which Wright's houses refer. T h e novelty in the case of W r i g h t lay in the fact he did not limit himself to placing an individual person at the center o f his architecture but instead had offered, with his works, a new interpretation o f the relationship between humans and nature. N o longer was nature seen as object; it was now a myth that had acquired almost a religious value. O n Wright's architectural development, N i c c o Fasola's j u d g m e n t was essentially negative. She considered his path an involution from great creative liberty (which he had taught to many, including many European architects) to a comfortable formalism stuffed with pleasing aesthetics. Another Florentine, Giovanni Michelucci, w h o was interested in the relationship of humans and nature and its effects on society, agreed with N i c c o Fasola on the first o f these questions. In Michelucci's opinion, Wright's point of arrival remained the individual, and "individual problems do not exist outside of society." In the end, noted Michelucci, there was not only a myth of nature within Wright's mentality, but also a myth of the individual. Giovanni Michelucci, " U n colloquio mancato," L.A.—Letteratura 58.

e Arte Contemporanea I I ( 1 9 5 1 ) : 7 - 1 9 .

Wright to Samona, 20 March 1 9 5 2 , in Pfeiffer, ed., Letters to Architects, 1 9 1 . T h e excellent

translation o f Samona's essay was executed by Edgar Kaufmann Jr., w h o also proposed it to the JSAH;

it was never published, however. See the correspondence concerning this matter in Giuseppe

and Alberto Samona Archive, R o m e . 59.

Giuseppe Samona, "Sull'architettura di Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " Metron, nos. 4 1 - 4 2

(1951):

3 3 - 4 2 . Samona had already confronted the question " W h a t is organic architecture?" in a passionate text, never published, possibly dated 1946, w h e n he j o i n e d A P A O . His v i e w is unquestionably clear: " T h e adjective organic has been undoubtedly diffused through Wright's building and his human attitude . . . but w e do have some reservations about Wright's role and his ideas, which w e have even sharply opposed. For us Europeans, the adjective organic has to be considered the distinctive attribute o f the new postwar architectural language." Unpublished ms. [1946], Samona Archive. 60.

A brief biographical sketch of Giuseppe Samona ( 1 8 9 8 - 1 9 8 3 ) , one o f the most acute inter-

preters o f Italian intellectual history, is necessary at this point. Samona took his degree in civil e n gineering in 1 9 2 2 . H e was both an architect and a teacher, and for more than three decades he taught with great passion. In 1 9 3 6 he was named professor at the Istituto Superiore di Architettura (after 1 9 4 5 , Istituto Universitario di Architettura), Venice. From 1943 to 1 9 7 2 he served as dean. For more information, see Giuseppe Samona, 1923-1975:

Cinquant'anni

di architetture (Rome: Officina

Edizioni, 1975); FrancescoTentori, ISamona: Fusionifra archittetura e urbanistica (Turin: Testo & I m magine, 1996). C o n c e r n i n g the Venetian School, see Brusatin, " C a r l o Scarpa"; and G i o r g i o Ciucci, " L a ricerca impaziente, 1 9 4 5 - 1 9 6 0 , " in Giuseppe Samona, 57—63. 61.

Faculty meeting minutes, with handwritten corrections, Venice School of Architecture, 6 April

1 9 5 1 , Giuseppe and Alberto Samona Archive, R o m e . 62.

Giuseppe Mazzariol, " T r e progetti per Venezia rifiutati: W r i g h t , Le Corbusier, K a h n , " in

Lionello Puppi and Giandomenico Romanelli, Le Venezie possibili: Da Palladio a Le Corbusier ( M i lano: Electa, 1985), 2 7 0 - 7 1 ; Luisa Querci della Rovere, "II Masieri M e m o r i a l di Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " in ibid., 2 7 2 - 7 5 . Mazzariol indicated strong corporations of architects and engineers as being among Wright's most implacable adversaries. H e therefore suggested that at the base o f the project's rejection was a conflict of interests much stronger than any criticism directed toward its design, which, indeed, introduced Viennese motifs that married well with the elegance o f a certain Venetian tradition. 63.

For more on Angelo Masieri, see Metron, nos. 4 9 - 5 0 (1954); and Massimo Bortolotti, ed.,

Angelo Masieri, architetto, 1921-1952

(Udine: Edizioni Arti Grafiche Friulane), 1 9 9 5 .

64- Savina Masieri to FLW, 19 December 1952, in Frank Lloyd Wright: In His Renderings, Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer and Yukio Futagawa (Tokyo: a.d.A. Edita, 1988). 65. FLW to Savina Masieri, 30 December 1952, in ibid.The bibliography on the Masieri Memorial is very large; reference here is therefore made to the most recent reconstruction in Bortolotti, Angelo Masieri, 53-71; and in Neil Levine, The Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996), 374-83. 66.

FLW to Savina Masieri, telegram, 26 January 1953, fiche M227E05, FLWA.

67. FLW to Savina Rizzi, 19 February 1953, fiche M228B08, FLWA. Wright was to return again and again to the "Spirit of Venice." For example, he defended modernity when it was used so as to allow the emergence of "what was best and noble in local tradition of the Great Tradition." Quoted in Levine, Architecture of Wright, 380. 68. Metron published a penetrating critical study of the Masieri Memorial project by Sergio Bettini, "Venezia e Wright," Metron, nos. 49-50 (1954): 14-26. The editors of Metron wrote that Wright's project had opened the debate on a pressing problem and concluded their editorial by demanding: "This is the building: should we or should we not construct it?" 69.

Quoted in Bortolotti, Angelo Masieri, 62.

70.

"In the national view, and perhaps even in that of Venice, the problem of Wright's house, even though it is touching for the motives of its origins and the sentiments behind them—as it is with every art work—beyond its aesthetic terms, one may say that [the issue itself is] certainly secondary." Ernesto Nathan Rogers, "Polemica per una polemica," Casabella-continuita 201 (1954): 1-4. 71. It is worthwhile to note the eventual outcome of the project. In 1968 the Masieri Foundation asked Carlo Scarpa to propose a definitive design for the building, which by that time was in need of structural repair, so that it could be used as a student residence. The commissioner added the provision that the facade fronting the Grand Canal could not be changed. Scarpa prepared three proposals; the third one was sent to the municipal building committee in 1969, where it was finally approved in May 1973. After Scarpa's death, the project was completed by G. Maschietto and F. Semi, without many parts of Scarpa's original plan. In the meantime, because of a shortage of funds, the Masieri Foundation decided that the building should be used solely as a research institute. 72.

Quoted in Brusatin, "Carlo Scarpa," 10.

73. Some of Scarpa's best-known students are the Friulian Bruno Morassutti, Gino Valle, and, of course, Angelo Masieri. In his design for the building of the Banca Cattolica of Tarvisio (1947—48)— Masieri's first work, developed in close contact with Scarpa—Masieri offered a context in which Wright's organic theories could be tested in Italy. The bank became an important fixture of Friulian architecture in the years immediately following World War II. Much has been written about this "via friulana" of architecture that united an organic inclination with spontaneous motifs of the local building tradition. See Marco Pozzetto, "Note sull'architettura moderna in Friuli," Parametro 135—36 (1985): 12-23; Giorgio Contessi, "La via friulana," Costruire 89 (1990): 266—71; Francesco Tentori, "Friuli anni 5 0 , " in Friuli Venezia Giulia: Guida critica all'architettura contemporanea, ed. Ser240

|

NOTES

TO

P A G E S

89-93

g j 0 p 0 lano and Luciano Semerani (Venice: Arsenale, 1992), 147-53. 74. Dal Co illustrated his thesis with numerous projects of Scarpa's in which one can see fragments both of Wright and of the formal iconism that overflowed in Klee's paintings: a cinema in Valdobbiadene (1946), a high-rise house with offices in Padua (1947), a church in Torre di Mosto (1948), a four-story apartment building in Feltre (1949), the designs for the Guarnieri and Taddei houses in Venice (1950, 1957), and finally the Zoppas Villa at Conegliano (1953). Scarpa came un-

der Klee's influence w h e n he installed the exhibition o f the Swiss painter's works at the Italian Pavilion for the Twenty-fourth Biennale (1948) in Venice. A n analogous influence was registered on the occasion o f the Mondrian exhibition held at the Galleria Nazionale d'Arte M o d e r n a o f R o m e in 1 9 5 6 . 75.

Dal C o , " T h e Architecture of Carlo Scarpa" in Dal C o and Mazzariol, eds., Carlo Scarpa,

46-49. 76.

Tafuri, " C a r l o Scarpa and Italian Architecture," ibid., 89—90.

77.

Brusatin, " C a r l o Scarpa," 8 - 9 .

78.

Metron, no. 45 (1952): n.p.

79.

Brusatin, " C a r l o Scarpa," 1 3 - 1 4 . C o n c e r n i n g the Venezuelan Pavilion, see Tentori, " U n

padiglione di Carlo Scarpa alla Biennale di Venezia," Casabella-continuità, 80.

no. 2 1 2 (1956): 19—30.

Marcello D ' O l i v o , Discorso per un'altra architettura: Cronologia delle opere 1948—1971,

da Santo

Domingo a Libreville (Udine: Casamassima Editore, 1972). See also G u i d o Z u c c o n i , " L a professione dell'architetto: Tra specialismo e generalismo," in Dal C o , ed., Storia dell'architettura italiana, 298; and G u i d o Z u c c o n i , ed., Marcello D'Olivo:

Architetture e progetti 1 9 4 7 - 1 9 3 1 (Milan: Electa, 1998).

CHAPTER 6 Translated from the French by M a r y Beth Mader. 1.

Anthony Alofsin, Frank Lloyd

Wright: The Lost Years, 1910-1922

(Chicago: University o f

C h i c a g o Press, 1993); Alofsin, "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t and M o d e r n i s m , " in Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect, ed. Terence Riley ( N e w York: Museum o f M o d e r n Art, 1994), 32—57. See also the i n c o m plete and dated analysis by Heidi K i e f - N i e d e r w ö h r m e i e r , Frank Lloyd Wright und Europa:

Architek-

turelemente, Naturverhältnis, Publikationen, Einflüsse (Stuttgart: Karl Krämer, 1983). 2.

Jean-Louis C o h e n , Scenes of the World to Come: European Architecture and the American

1893-1960 3.

Challenge,

(Paris: Flammarion, 1995).

F. R u d o l f Vogel, Das amerikanische Haus, vol. 1: Die Entwicklung der Baukunst und des amerikani-

schen Hauses (Berlin: Wasmuth, 1 9 1 0 ) . 4.

H . P. Berlage, Amerikaansche reisherinneringen (Rotterdam: W. L. & J . Brusse, 1 9 1 3 ) . Discoveries

made during the trip are recounted by Berlage in " N e u e r e amerikanische Architektur," Schweizerische Bauzeitung 60 ( 1 4 , 2 1 , 28 September 1 9 1 2 ) : 1 4 8 - 5 0 , 1 6 5 - 6 7 , 1 7 8 . 5.

S. Frederick Starr, Melnikov: Solo Architect in a Mass Society (Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 1978), 23. 6.

ElLissitzky, " ' A m e r i k a n i z m ' v evropeiskoi arkhitekture," Krasnaia niva, no. 49 (1925).

7.

ElLissitzky, "Arkhitektura zheleznoi i zhelezobetonnoi ramy," Stroitelnaiapromyshlennost,

no. 1

(1926): 5 9 - 6 3 . 8.

T h e project is published in Moisei Ginzburg, Stil i epokha: Problemy sovremennoi

arkhitektury

(Moscow: Gos Izdatelstvo, 1924); in English as Style and Epoch (Cambridge, Mass.: M I T Press, 1982). Selim K h a n - M a g o m e d o v states that Ginzburg was in C r i m e a to oversee w o r k on the house; Moisei Ginzburg (Moscow: Izd. Lit. po Stroitelstvu, 1972), 8 - 9 . 9.

Ginzburg had been able to see photographs of the Heurtley and Thomas houses in the Sonderheft.

10.

Sovremennaia arkhitektura, 1 9 2 6 , no. 3.

11.

"Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " Sovremennaia arkhitektura, 1 9 2 7 , no. 2.

12.

Moisei Ginzburg, Zhilishche (Moscow: Gosstroyizdat, 1 9 3 3 ) , 38—39.

NOTES TO

PAGES

93-105

|

241

13-

Richard Neutra, Kak stroit Amerika?,

introduction by Alexei Shchusev (Moscow: M A K I Z ,

1929). 14.

Mikhail Okhitovich, " K problème goroda," Sovremennaia arkhitektura, 1 9 2 9 , no. 4: 1 3 1 - 3 3 ,

and " Z a m e t k i po teorii rasselenia," Sovremennaia arkhitektura, 1 9 3 0 , nos. 1 - 2 : 7 - 1 6 . 15.

There is little likelihood that Wright would have had detailed knowledge of "de-urbanist"

projects, although he had every reason to have discovered them in the press, as in Berthold L u betkin in Architectural Review, 16.

1932.

T h e file on the film can be found a t T s G A L I (State Archives for Literature and Art) in Moscow,

and selections from it have been published in Iskusstvo kino, no. 3 (March 1979). Jay Leyda reproduces the pasted image in Eisenstein at Work ( N e w York: Pantheon B o o k s / M u s e u m of M o d e r n Art, 1982). T h e best analysis of this project has been done by François Albéra: see Sergei Eisenstein, with discussion by François Albéra, "Glass House: N o t e pour un film," Faces, no. 24 (summer 1992): 42ff. 17.

" I view the U S S R as a heroic endeavor to establish more genuine human values in a social

state than any existing before. Its heroism and devotion move me deeply and with great hope. B u t I fear that machine worship to defeat capitalism may become inverted capitalism in Russia itself and so prostitute the man to the machine." FLW, "First Answers to Questions by Pravda" (1933), in CW3, 18.

141-42. " I n organic architecture, composition, as such, is dead. We no longer compose. We conceive

the building as an entity. Proceeding from generals to particulars by way o f some appropriate scheme of construction we try to find the equation of expression best suited, that is to say most natural, to all the factors involved." FLW, " K a k ia rabotaiu," Arkhitektura SSSR

2 (February 1934): 70—71; pub-

lished in English as "Categorical Reply to Questions by 'Architecture o f the U S S R , ' " in C W3, 19.

145.

" T h e only way classical or modern architectural monuments can be helpful to us is to study

that quality in them which made them serviceable or beautiful in their day and be informed by that quality in them. As ready-made forms they can only be harmful to us today. What made them great in their day is the same as what would make great buildings in our own day. B u t the buildings w e should make would be very different, necessarily." Ibid. 20.

Arkhitektura sovremennogo Zapada (Moscow: O G I Z - I Z O G I Z , 1 9 3 2 ) . For the Wendingen arti-

cle, Arkin in fact used the 1 9 2 6 version published in Berlin: Frank Lloyd Wright, " F u r die Sache der Baukunst: Die dritte Dimension," in Heinrich D e Fries, Frank Lloyd Wright: Aus dem Lebenswerke eines Architekten (Berlin: Ernst Pollak, 1926). 21.

David Arkin, "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " in Arkhitektura sovremennogo Zapada, 88.

22.

David Arkin, Iskusstvo bytovoi veshchi (Moscow: O G I Z - I Z O G I Z , 1932), 4 2 - 4 3 .

23.

David Arkin, "Amerikanskaia arkhitektura i kniga M u m f o r d a , " preface to Lewis M u m f o r d ,

Ot brevenchatogo doma do neboskreba: Ocherk iz istorii amerikanskoi arkhitektury (Moscow: Izd. Vses. A k a demii Arkhitektury, 1936), 1 5 - 1 6 . Translated from the G e r m a n edition, Vom Blockhaus zum Wolkenkratzer (Berlin: B r u n o Cassirer, 1926); originally titled Sticks andStones ( N e w York, 1927), 185—202. 24. 2 4 2

NOTES

TO

PAGES

105-109

See H u g h D. Hudson Jr., Blueprints and Blood: The Stalinization of Soviet Architecture (Prince-

ton: Princeton University Press, 1994). 25.

FLW, "Address to the Architect's World C o n g r e s s — S o v i e t Russia 1 9 3 7 , " in An Autobiography

( N e w York: Horizon Press, 1977), 5 7 3 . This passage from Wright's talk is reprinted neither in lzvestia, which published selections from it on 26 J u n e 1 9 3 7 , nor in Arkhitektura SSSR

7 - 8 (1937):

4 9 - 5 0 , which likewise presented extracts o f his speech. See Donald Leslie Johnson's analyses of

these textual variants: "Frank Lloyd Wright in M o s c o w , " J S A H 4 6 (March 1987): 6 5 - 7 9 ; and Frank Lloyd Wright versus America: The 1930s (Cambridge, Mass.: M I T Press, 1990), 1 7 9 - 2 3 0 . 26.

" T h e U S S R must now construct buildings on a scientific basis, guided by c o m m o n sense and

making the most efficient use of high quality building materials. T h e left w i n g of the so-called 'new' architecture also advocated the principles of creating an organic architecture but, to all intents and purposes, did not proceed beyond plain wall panels, flat roofs, and ornamental corner windows; and the right w i n g of said 'new' architecture turned the buildings into ornaments. B o t h tendencies are generated by decaying old cultures. T h e correct path to the creation o f organic architecture consists o f the scientific organization of building activity and animating it with a genuine spirit o f humanity." FLW, in Arkhitektura SSSR

7 - 8 (1937): 4 9 - 5 0 ; translated in Johnson, Wright versus

America, 229. 27.

Boris Iofan, "Materialy o sovremennoi arkhitekture S S h A i Italii," Akademia arkhitektury, 1 9 3 6 ,

no. 4: 47. 28.

These remarks are reported by Simon Breines, a y o u n g American architect then present in

M o s c o w ; interview with the author, N e w York, 2 2 September 1 9 9 7 . 29.

FLW, "Architecture and Life in the U S S R , " Soviet Russia Today, October 1 9 3 7 , 1 4 - 1 9 , and

Architectural Record 82 (October 1937): 5 9 - 6 0 . 30.

F L W to David Arkin and Karo Alabian, 20 January 1 9 4 3 , in B r u c e Brooks Pfeiffer, ed., Let-

ters to Architects: Frank Lloyd Wright (Fresno: California State University Press, 1984), 1 0 1 - 3 . 31.

" W h e n w e shut our eyes and try to resurrect in m e m o r y the country in which w e spent four

months, w e see before us not Washington with its gardens, columns, and a full collection of m o n uments, not N e w York with its skyscrapers, its poverty and its wealth, not San Francisco, with its steep streets and suspension bridges, not hills, not factories, not canyons, but the crossing of two roads and a petrol station against the background of telegraph wires and advertising bill-boards." Ilya Ilf (pseud.) and Eugene Petrov (pseud.), Little Golden America (London: G. Routledge & Sons, 1944), 65. 32.

R o m a n Khiger, Planirovka poselkov v SShA (Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe Arkhitekturnoe Izd-

vo Akademii Arkhitektury, 1944); Maloetazhnye doma v SShA (Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe Arkhitekturnoe Izd-vo Akademii Arkhitektury, 1944). 33.

David Arkin to Harvey Wiley Corbett, Moscow, n.d. [1944], L o n b e r g - H o l m Archive, N e w

York. 34.

Architects' Committee, National Council of American-Soviet Friendship, News Bulletin, no.

1 1 (5 December 1945): n.p. and no. 1 4 (8 January 1947): n.p. See also "Architecture Exhibit Presented to Russia," Architectural Record 98 (December 1945): 1 3 4 ; " E x h i b i t for the U S S R , " Architectural Forum 81 (September 1944): 194. 35.

A portion of the following analyses have been published in Jean-Louis C o h e n , " W r i g h t et la

France: U n e découverte tardive," introduction to FLW, Ausgeführte Bauten und Entwürfe von Frank Lloyd Wright (Paris: Herscher, 1986). 36.

Lewis M u m f o r d , "Frank Lloyd Wright and the N e w Pioneers," Architectural Record 65 (April

1929): 4 1 4 . 37.

Jacques Gréber, L'architecture aux Etats-Unis: Preuve de laforce d'expansion du génie français (Paris:

Payot, 1920). 38.

" I n laying out the ground plans for even the more insignificant o f these buildings, a simple

axial law and order and t h e ordered spacing u p o n a system of certain structural units definitely established for each structure, in accord w i t h its scheme of practical construction and aesthetic p r o p o r t i o n , is practiced as an expedient to simplify the technical difficulties of execution, and, although the s y m m e t r y may n o t be obvious, always t h e balance is usually maintained. T h e plans are as a rule m u c h m o r e articulate than is t h e school p r o d u c t of the B e a u x - A r t s . " FLW, " I n t h e Cause of A r chitecture," Architectural Record (March 39.

1908),

r e p r i n t e d in CWi,

94.

Le Corbusier, i n t r o d u c t i o n to Willi Boesiger and O s k a r Stonorov, Le Corbusier et Pierre Jean-

neret: Oeuvre complète, 1910-1929

(Zurich: Girsberger Verlag,

1930),

10.

40.

Berlage, " N e u e r e amerikanische A r c h i t e k t u r " ; and FLW, Sonderheft.

41.

"It is around 1914 or 1915 (?) that I saw for the first time reproductions of W r i g h t ' s villas and

of an office building. Since then, I've seen n o t h i n g else. . . . This does not prevent m e f r o m stating that t h e sight of those f e w villas in 1914 had greatly impressed me. I was totally unaware that there could have b e e n in America so purified and so innovative an expression of architecture. W i t h W r i g h t ' s plans, o n e had the sense of 'learning the g o o d lessons' of t h e Ecole des B e a u x - A r t s here, that is to say, a t e n d e n c y toward order, toward organization, toward a creation that is of p u r e architecture. This was in great contrast at t h e time to the bouts of erratic regionalism, to that invasive and paradoxical malady of the m o d e r n m i n d to t e n d toward quaint or rotten old villages built in a haphazard fashion w i t h r u d i m e n t a r y tools. W r i g h t ordered, and he c o m m a n d e d respect as an architect. But, even further, his sections and his facades make p r o m i n e n t use of reinforced c o n crete. At that p o i n t in time, this was s o m e t h i n g of a distinction. Moreover, W r i g h t — o n e of the first, to m y k n o w l e d g e — i d e n t i f i e d the architectural solutions of reinforced concrete. O t h e r s used reinforced concrete w i t h o u t discovering its essential rhythm; h e asserted the h o r i z o n t a l — r e i n f o r c e d concrete's marvelous c o n t r i b u t i o n , and an architectural value of the first order. I was unaware of nearly all of W r i g h t ' s w o r k , but I nonetheless vividly recall t h e impact p r o d u c e d o n m e by these spiritual villas, smiling . . . with a Japanese laugh." Le Corbusier to H e n d r i c u s T h e o d o r u s W i j d e veld, 5 August 1929, Netherlands Architecture Institute, R o t t e r d a m ; reprinted in Paul V. Turner, "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t and t h e Young Le Corbusier," JSAH

4 2

(December

1983):

359.

42.

Charles J e a n n e r e t to Auguste Perret, 30 J u n e 1915, cited by Alofsin, Lost Years, 334.

43.

T u r n e r has stressed that certain m o d e s of g r o u p i n g volumes, the overhang of the roofing, and

the c o r n e r w i n d o w s have their origins in the Prairie houses. See Turner, " W r i g h t and the Y o u n g Le Corbusier." 44.

Jean Badovici, " L ' a r t de Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " Architecture vivante

2

(winter

1924):

2 6 - 2 7

and

pis- 3 4 - 3 545.

J. J. P. O u d , " T h e Influence of Frank Lloyd W r i g h t o n the Architecture of E u r o p e , " in H e n -

dricus T h e o d o r u s Wijdeveld, ed., The Life- Work of the American Architect Frank Lloyd Wright (Santp o o r t , N e t h . : C. A. Mees, 46.

1925),

87.

" W r i g h t , u n k n o w n yesterday still, even by professionals, will soon take u p his place in t h e

phalanx of the great creators. A n d his b o d y of w o r k will have an e n o r m o u s influence, as will that, 244

I

NOTES

TO

PAGES

112-115

moreover, of his colleagues w h o 'see' as he does. W r i g h t ' s architecture is h u m a n , it is true, and it will be u n d e r s t o o d and loved everywhere." R o b e r t Mallet-Stevens, " F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t et l'architecture nouvelle," in Wijdeveld, ed., Life-Work, 47.

92—93.

In the w o r k of the D u t c h m a n Piet Kramer, he identified, " i n a different f o r m , t h e same spirit,

the same assertion of horizontals, the same calmness of undeniable g r a n d e u r . " Mallet-Stevens, "Les raisons de ['architecture m o d e r n e dans tous les pays," lecture delivered at the C o l o s s e u m Hall in 1925,

Conferencia (1 D e c e m b e r

1928):

5 9 2 - 9 3 .

48.

O n the work o f this architect, see Jean-Louis C o h e n , André Lurçat (1904-1970):

Autocritique

d'un moderne (Paris: Institut Français d'Architecture; Liège, Bel.: Pierre Mardaga, 1995). 49.

" A m o n g the most striking figures in the architectural renewal, one must recognize the A m e r -

ican architect Frank Lloyd Wright, so poorly understood in his early years, and w h o today wields enormous influence. Along with Tony G a m i e r in France, Otto Wagner in Austria, Behrens in G e r many, Berlage in Holland, and Van de Velde in B e l g i u m , he is one of the great promoters of that architectural movement that, in seeking to match the modern spirit precisely, has recaptured the great principles that have governed the art o f building for all time." [André Lurçat], "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " Cahiers d'art 2, no. 9 (1927): 322fF. 50.

André Lurçat to FLW, Paris, 29 October 1 9 2 7 , FLWA; FLW to André Lurçat, n.d. [ 1 9 2 7 ] ,

Archives André Lurçat, Institut Français d'Architecture, Paris. 51.

Peter Smith van der Meulen, a friend of Hitchcock's, was at that time a draftsman with Lurçat;

Henry-Russell Hitchcock Jr., interview with the author, N e w York, 20 February 1 9 8 5 . 52.

Willi Boesiger, interview with the author, Z u r i c h , 2 2 October 1984.

53.

T h e G e r m a n captions from the Ausgeführte Bauten und Entwürfe are retained. O n l y the plans

for the Millard House had been published in Wendingen, and W r i g h t and Lurçat's correspondence bears in part on the subject o f the shipment o f photographs o f its completion. See Alofsin, " W r i g h t and M o d e r n i s m . " 54.

" W r i g h t is not only an architect, that is to say, an artist w h o draws and creates his construc-

tions, w h o is perhaps greater than his contemporary European colleagues—who are not always devoid of that lack o f restraint to which he occasionally abandons himself—but he is also a brilliant engineer and a brilliant technician." Henry-Russell Hitchcock Jr., Frank Lloyd Wright (Paris: E d i tions Cahiers d'Art, 1928), n.p. 55.

" T h a t there should be in his theory of a pure architecture a mixture of adoration o f nature,

of individualist and ecstatic expression in the manner of Whitman, and o f an Orientalism whose serious influence upon his ornamentation we have indicated—rather than literary influences, which no longer would be acceptable to the contemporary mind—all this does nothing but augment the lyrical value of this theory as poetry. Nevertheless, this tendency can diminish the artist's intellectual and logical mastery and cultivate in him a positive taste for ornament that is as dangerous for his doctrine as for his architecture." Ibid. 56.

Henry-Russell Hitchcock Jr., Modem Architecture: Romanticism and Reintegration ( N e w York:

Payson & Clarke, 1929). $7.

André Lurçat, Architecture (Paris: A u Sans-Pareil, 1929), 2 1 . Lurçat also published plates on

W r i g h t in Terrasses et jardins (Paris: Editions d'Art Charles Moreau, [1929]). 58.

Louis Gillet, "L'art au Canada et aux Etats-Unis," in Histoire de l'art depuis les premiers temps

chrétiens jusqu'à nos jours, ed. André Michel, vol. 8 (Paris: A r m a n d Colin, 1929), 1 1 6 8 . 59.

M y r o n Malkiel-Jirmounski, Les tendances de l'architecture contemporaine (Paris: Delagrave, 1930),

8 7 - 9 0 . A n art historian, Malkiel-Jirmounski pursued his career in Portugal beginning in 1940. 60.

" W r i g h t created works that are still fresh today because they carry the guarantee o f univer-

sal laws. H e saw beyond his time better than did Wagner, Berlage, or Peter Behrens. . . . Influenced by Asian temples, whose spirit he deepened without overly attaching himself to their formal appearance, he k n e w how to create empty masses, logical forms, devoid of ornamentation, volumes that proudly trace themselves out in light, architectures that respond in an absolute fashion to the laws laid down by the new means of construction. At first sight, Wright's works seem to us too re-

NOTES

TO

PAGES

115-117

|

2 4 5

mote, too cold, too measured, and too logical. However, upon close examination one discovers in them an exquisite sensibility. T h e mathematical rigor conceals a moving lyricism and a freedom that seize one w h o attentively studies [his] plans." Jean Badovici, "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , "

Cahiers

d'art i , no. 2 (1926): 30—32. 61.

" H e had achieved wisdom at a time when in general madness and disorder equally f o r m e d

the mind o f architects w h o attacked the staunch and time-worn hierarchies o f art. Thus, he was the leaven o f hope for all those w h o did not let themselves be fooled by the turbulent studies of false prophets. And all those w h o distanced themselves from nebulous endeavors, from c o m p r o mise and trickery, found in Wright the cherished guide to their artistic destinies. " H e led them to invention along the path o f probity, o f logic, and o f that proud modesty that makes the past combine with yet unrealized possibilities within a work. N u m b e r s o f Wright's fellow students have surpassed his lesson. That is the best proof o f his fecundity. This fecundity contained within it what his successors—I mean above all the young Dutch architects—would develop with admirable mastery." Ibid., 33. 62.

" I n a land without tradition, where he saw about him no f o r m from which he could derive

the elements o f a new style, in a setting all of whose preoccupations were exclusively of a practical, industrial, and commercial order, W r i g h t created an architecture o f an entirely new spirit and expression, of extremely modern lines and, at the same time, of an altogether classical purity. . . . Whether under Chicago's heavy sky or beneath the cheerier sky o f California, W r i g h t created by modern means works that are like natural products of the climate in which they are born; they e x press its character and soul at the same time as they express their o w n end, the character and habits of those w h o must live in them. Europeans will perhaps find that he sometimes forgets that we are beings of flesh and blood, that he lacks a bit of that intimate sense to which w e are accustomed. But Americans are different from us, and they rarely sense the need for those intimate nooks that we like to find in our homes." Jean Badovici, "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " L'Architecture

vivante,

spring-summer 1 9 3 0 , 50. 63.

Eugène Beaudouin, "Urbanisme et architecture en U S A , " L'Architecture d'aujourd'hui,

no. 9

(November-December 1933): 54-68. 64.

T h e article to which Giedion was responding is Frank Lloyd Wright, "An meine Kritiker!"

Schweizerische Bauzeitung ( 1 9 3 1 ) : 136flf. 65.

" L i k e every great architect, Lloyd W r i g h t [sic] had his imitators, especially in Holland, which,

after 1 9 1 0 , provided the immediate impetus for subsequent development. . . . B u t only those w h o profited from his impulses by joining them more securely to our n e w technical possibilities and to our modern way of seeing truly learned from Wright. . . . Wright's ideas are extended in the work of Le Corbusier, but one can scarcely tell this from the outside. N o architect o f his time has like Wright from the outset situated the problem of dwelling at the very center o f his work. H e showed for the first time how to break with the traditional rigidity of the plan, to link the various levels o f a house, to restore liberty to the elements o f the cubic mass, to destroy the notion of the facade, and to orchestrate the passage from house to landscape. It is not by chance that Le Corbusier's 2 4 6

I

NOTES

TO

PAGE

111

efforts bear upon the same matters. " N o t having been able to see in reality the curious constructions of Lloyd Wright's in recent years, we will not risk taking any distinct position. Certainly, there is, in the way he respectfully takes into account the slightest fold in the terrain—with which his constructions sometimes m e l d — a sort of renunciation of the notion o f architecture, a tendency to the cosmic that in the future will no doubt be called upon to play an important role. But it is equally possible that there be, in these

houses that purposely avoid any p r o n o u n c e d structure, a flight into solitude and individuality w i t h w h i c h w e w o u l d be unable to align ourselves." S i g f r i e d G i e d i o n , " L e s problèmes actuels de l'architecture: L ' o c c a s i o n d ' u n manifeste de Frank L l o y d W r i g h t aux architectes et critiques d ' E u r o p e , " Cahiers d'art 7, nos. 1 - 2 ( 1 9 3 2 ) : 7 0 - 7 2 . 66.

" H i s first years as an architect w e r e happy and hard ones. Like Balzac, W r i g h t fueled his ardor

f o r w o r k w i t h debts. H e attained originality; his houses, admired by some, m o c k e d by others, o c casionally frightened his clientele, w h o requested o f him concessions to traditional taste. H e e x plained to them, and he sometimes succeeded in realizing f o r them, his m o d e l f o r the Prairie H o u s e , his first original c r e a t i o n — a sort o f n e w standard m o d e l , capable o f b e i n g adapted d e p e n d i n g o n the site, and on the size o f the family. N o m o r e traditional house in the f o r m o f a cube: there was n o lack o f g r o u n d ; o n the flat prairie, the slightest rise indeed makes effect e n o u g h . All the interior layouts are calculated o n a h u m a n s c a l e — f i v e feet, eight inches, according to W r i g h t . To w i t h i n a half-inch, that is his o w n height. T h e y said that if he had been t w o inches taller, his houses w o u l d have been different. ' M a y b e , ' he replied, good-naturedly." J e a n Prévost, Usonie: Esquisse de la civilisation américaine (Paris: Gallimard, 1 9 3 9 ) , 1 5 4 . Prévost (1901—44) was a celebrated essayist, author o f such diverse w o r k s as Plaisirs des sports ( 1 9 2 5 ) and Eiffel (1929), a m o n o g r a p h on Gustave E i f f e l . H e died a hero o f the Resistance in the Vercors u n d e r g r o u n d forces. 67.

" T i n y masterpieces—Fallingwater, the K a u f m a n n H o u s e in B e a r R u n , Pennsylvania, w h i c h

expresses the affinity b e t w e e n the house, the forest, and the waterfall that the house has laid h o l d of; Wingspread, or the J o h n s o n Cottage, the n e w Prairie H o u s e , and Honeycomb, the H a n n a H o u s e in Stanford, C a l i f o r n i a , w h i c h speak o f the intimate u n i o n o f house and landscape, are o f a h u m a n scale, are capable o f instructing all minds. T h e y teach a pride m o r e intimate than the naive vanity o f the skyscrapers: the sense o f the present, the sense o f leisure. C r u e l enemies o f all routine, they are little temples f r o m man to p u r i f i e d man, to the n e w m a n . " Ibid., 1 5 7 . 68.

M a r c e l Lods, " V i s i t e à N e u t r a , " L'Architecture

d'aujourd'hui,

no. 6 ( M a y - J u n e 1 9 4 6 ) : 4 - 5 ;

A l e x a n d r e Persitz, " U n architecte d ' a u j o u r d ' h u i , " ibid., 9. 69.

A n d r é R e m o n d e t , " T r a n s f o r m a t i o n s de l'architecture a m é r i c a i n e , " Architecture française 7, no.

54 (January 1946): 2 9 - 3 3 . 70.

" F r a n k L l o y d W r i g h t , " special issue o f Architecture française 1 3 , nos. 1 2 3 - 2 4 ( 1 9 5 2 ) .

71.

L o u i s - G e o r g e s N o v i a n t , "L'architecture organique regarde l'architecture m o d e r n e , " ibid.,

71-72. 72.

FLW, "Massacre on the Marseilles W a t e r f r o n t " ( 1 9 5 2 ) , in CW5,

73.

This is notably the case w i t h H e r v é Baley, w h o after 1 9 6 8 taught at the E c o l e Spéciale d ' A r -

59.

chitecture. Gilbert Cordier's courses, based on abundant visual documentation, w o u l d likewise c o n tribute to the spread o f images o f W r i g h t ' s houses. 74.

J e a n Castex, Le printemps de la Prairie house (Liège, Bel.: Mardaga, 1987). See also Daniel Treiber's

short m o n o g r a p h Frank Lloyd Wright (Paris: Hazan, 1 9 8 6 ) . 75.

T h e exhibit, w h i c h included W r i g h t ' s drawings, was held f r o m 23 J a n u a r y to 1 5 A p r i l 1 9 9 7 .

S e e the catalog edited by J e a n - L o u i s C o h e n , Les années 30: L'architecture et les arts de l'espace entre industrie et nostalgie (Paris: Editions du Patrimoine, 1 9 9 7 ) . CHAPTER 7 I should like to thank Alan C r a w f o r d f o r many discussions and unstinting help in relation to this paper, and R i c h a r d M a c C o r m a c , Alan Powers, J o h n Sergeant, and G a v i n Stamp f o r suggestions and

Stimulation. I have relied also on reminiscences f r o m R o d e r i c k Gradidge, T o m Greeves, B i r k i n Haward, C o l i n Penn, G o d f r e y R u b e n s , and the late Sir J o h n S u m m e r s o n . 1.

J o h n S u m m e r s o n , The Unromantic Castle ( L o n d o n : T h a m e s & H u d s o n , 1 9 9 0 ) , 2 3 5 - 4 4 ;

first

published in Acts of the Twentieth International Congress of the History of Art ( N e w Y o r k , 1 9 6 3 ) . 2.

" S i r E d w a r d Lutyens: T h e M e m o r i a l Volumes, R e v i e w e d by Frank L l o y d W r i g h t , " Building

(July 1 9 5 1 ) : 3.

S u m m e r s o n , Unromantic Castle, 2 4 4 . F o r the M a r y Ward Settlement, see Adrian Forty, " T h e M a r y

Ward Settlement," Architects'Journal 4.

26

260-62.

1 9 0 ( 2 August 1 9 8 9 ) : 2 8 - 4 9 ;

an

D a v i d G e b h a r d , " C . F. A . V o y s e y — T o and f r o m A m e r i c a , " JSAH

d The Studio 1 6 ( 1 8 9 9 ) : 1 2 . 3 0 ( 1 9 7 1 ) : 3 0 4 - 7 . Notable

evidence f o r British interest in A m e r i c a n architecture d u r i n g the 1 8 8 0 s c o m e s also in the u n p u b lished diaries o f Harold Peto's travels in the U n i t e d States; kindly c o m m u n i c a t e d by Hilary Grainger. 5.

American Architect and Building News 38 (3 1 D e c e m b e r 1 8 9 2 ) : 2 1 1 , w i t h heliochrome illustration.

6.

S u m m e r s o n , Unromantic Castle, 2 4 4 ; also R i c h a r d Oliver, Bertram Grosvenor Goodhue ( N e w York:

Architectural History Foundation; C a m b r i d g e , Mass.: M I T Press, 1 9 9 3 ) , I 2 2 f f . 7.

G a v i n Stamp, in Architectural Design Profiles, vol. 1 3 : London igoo

8.

Alan C r a w f o r d , C. R. Ashbee ( N e w Haven: Yale University Press, 1 9 8 5 ) , 9 6 - 9 9 .

9.

See especially Eileen B o r i s , Art and Labor: Ruskin,

Morris,

(1978):

363.

and the Craftsman Ideal in America

(Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1 9 8 6 ) , 4 5 - 5 2 ; R i c h a r d G u y W i l s o n , " C h i c a g o and the I n ternational Arts and Crafts M o v e m e n t s : Progressive and C o n s e r v a t i v e Tendencies," in Chicago Architecture, 1872—1922: 208—27. F°r

an

C r a f t s , " JSAH

Birth of a Metropolis,

ed. J o h n Z u k o w s k y ( M u n i c h : Prestel Verlag,

1987),

older view, see H . Allen B r o o k s , " C h i c a g o Architecture: Its D e b t to the Arts and 30 (1971):

312-17.

10.

FLW, " T h e A r t and C r a f t o f the M a c h i n e " ( 1 9 0 1 ) , in CWi,

58-69.

11.

Ernest C r o s b y to Edith Lethaby, 1 M a r c h 1 9 0 5 ; kindly c o m m u n i c a t e d b y G o d f r e y R u b e n s .

12.

Forty, " M a r y Ward Settlement," 4 0 . Alan C r a w f o r d tells m e also that Smith and B r e w e r w e r e

connected w i t h Ashbee's first scheme f o r the Survey of London and intended in 1 8 9 5 to w r i t e up Whitechapel, w h e r e T o y n b e e Hall is situated. T h e y w i t h d r e w o n receipt o f a m a j o r commission, almost certainly the M a r y W a r d Settlement. 13.

As r e m e m b e r e d by G o d f r e y R u b e n s , t h o u g h the remark is not in the published introduction

to A . R . N . Roberts, William Richard Lethaby (London: Central S c h o o l o f Arts and Crafts, 1 9 5 7 ) . See also W i l l i a m J o h n s t o n e , Points in Time ( L o n d o n : B a r r i e & J e n k i n s , 1 9 8 0 ) ,

242-44.

14.

W i l s o n , " C h i c a g o and the International Arts and Crafts M o v e m e n t s . "

15.

Nikolaus Pevsner, Pioneers of the Modern Movement from William Morris to Walter Gropius

(Lon-

don: Faber & Faber, 1 9 3 6 ) , 3 0 . 16.

See, f o r example, the Alexander

Thomson Newsletter, no. 6 (January 1 9 9 3 ) : 3 ; no. 7 ( J u n e 1 9 9 3 ) :

6 - 7 ; no. 1 8 (February 1 9 9 7 ) : 6 and 1 1 . T h e T h o m s o n claim rests on the idea that his great villa o f H o l m w o o d at Cathcart, Glasgow, published in his Villa and Cottage Architecture ( 1 8 6 8 ) , may directly or indirectly have i n f l u e n c e d U n i t y Temple: " T h e route f r o m C a t h c a r t to O a k Park may be even m o r e direct than has often been supposed," proposes G a v i n Stamp, Alexander no. 1 8 (February 1 9 9 7 ) :

Thomson

Newsletter,

ri.

17.

FLW, " T h e Architect and the M a c h i n e " ( 1 8 9 4 ) , in CWi,

18.

B o r i s , Art and Labor; also W e n d y Kaplan, ed., The Art That Is Life: The Arts and Crafts Move-

ment in America,

1875-1920

25.

(Boston: M u s e u m o f Fine Arts, 1 9 8 7 ) .

19-

Undated entry, ca. December 1900, Ashbee Journals, King's College Library, Cambridge;

kindly communicated by Alan Crawford. 20.

FLW, " T h e A r t and Craft of the M a c h i n e " ( 1 9 0 1 ) , in CWi,

21.

FLW, " I n the Cause o f Architecture: T h e Third D i m e n s i o n " (1925), in CW1,

59, 64. 209. Further

embroideries of the Hull House occasion are given in " I n the Cause o f Architecture V I I I " (1928), in CWi,

3 0 5 - 9 ; and in the Princeton " M o d e r n Architecture" lectures of 1 9 3 0 , in CW2,

19-79,

which influenced Pevsner's view. 22.

Crawford, Ashbee, 1 5 4 - 5 5 ; Anthony Alofsin, Frank Lloyd Wright: The Lost Years,

1910-1922

(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993), 51—52, 6 1 - 6 2 . See also Alan Crawford, "Ten Letters from Frank Lloyd Wright to Charles Robert Ashbee," Architectural History 13 (1970): 6 4 - 7 3 . 23.

Crawford, Ashbee,

151-52.

24.

FLW to Ashbee, 31 March 1 9 1 0 , Ashbee Journals.

2 5.

Crawford, Ashbee,

26.

" L l o y d Wright in Britain, Mr. R . Furneaux Jordan's Radio Talk," The Builder 1 7 9 (24 N o -

154-55.

vember 1950): 540. Also see Furneaux Jordan, "A Great Architect's Visit to Britain," Listener 44 (28 September 1950): 4 1 5 - 1 6 . 27.

Crawford, Ashbee,

143-48.

28.

T h e quarrel is fully discussed by C r a w f o r d and by Alofsin, Lost Years, 3 4 o n . i 6 i . T h e text o f

Wright's letter of 26 September 1 9 1 0 to Ashbee is published in full in Crawford, " T e n Letters," 69-70. 29.

F L W to Ashbee, 9 February 1 9 1 6 , Ashbee Journals.

30.

Crawford, Ashbee, 164; H. Allen Brooks, Writings on Wright (Cambridge, Mass.: M I T Press,

1 9 8 1 ) , 3 - 4 ; Ashbee to FLW, 8 M a y 1 9 3 9 , and reply by FLW (text in Crawford, "Ten Letters," 7 1 ) . 3 1.

Regarding the possible stopover, see Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects 46 (9 M a y

1939): 64332.

A n d r e w Saint, Towards a Social Architecture (London: Yale University Press, 1987), 1 4 — i 6 ; J o h n

Allan, Berthold Lubetkin (London: R I B A Publications, 1992), 3 1 3 - 7 1 . 33.

J o h n Summerson, " B r e a d and Butter and Architecture," Horizon 6 (October 1942): 2 4 2 - 4 3 .

34.

Miscellaneous Papers of the Sulgrave M a n o r Board, Sulgrave Manor, Northamptonshire.

35.

W h e n S. E . Rasmussen first visited London in 1 9 2 7 , he discovered that nobody w h o wrote

about architecture k n e w any German. See Stein Eiler Rasmussen, "First Impressions of L o n d o n , " AA Files 20 (1990): 19; translation of an article f r o m Wasmuths Monatshefte für Baukunst 12 (1928): 304-I336.

C . H. Reilly, Scaffolding in the Sky (London: G e o r g e Routledge, 1938), 2 1 6 - 1 9 .

37.

A n d r e w Saint, "Americans in L o n d o n , " AA Files 7 (1984): 3 0 - 4 3 .

38.

See, for example, Robert Wojtowicz, Lewis Mumford and American Modernism (Cambridge: C a m -

bridge University Press, 1996), 84, 1 1 7 , 1 1 9 . 39.

Alvin Rosenbaum, Usonia: Frank Lloyd Wright's Design for America (Washington, D.C.: Preser-

vation Press, 1993), 6 8 - 7 5 , 1 1 7 - 1 8 . 40.

Howard Robertson, The Principles of Architectural Composition (London: Architectural Press,

1924), 1 1 2 , 1 1 9 ; and Modern Architectural Design (London: Architectural Press, 1932), vii, 65, 68—71, 7 3 , 196. M i d w a y Gardens is shown in Architect and Building News, 5 August 1 9 2 7 , 2 3 6 , in one of many articles by Robertson on American and European architecture in that magazine, 1 9 2 6 - 2 8 .

NOTES

TO

PAGES

1 2 6- 1 33

|

249

41.

Ashbee to FLW, 6 August 1934, FLWA.

42.

Architects' Journal 84 (16 July 1936): 7 6 - 7 8 ; (23 July 1936): 1 1 1 - 1 2 ; (30 July 1936): 1 4 1 - 4 2 ;

and (6 August 1936): 1 7 3 - 7 4 . F ° r the D o s Passos review, see New Republic, 3 J u n e 1936, 94—95. 43.

Pevsner, Pioneers, 1 7 7 - 8 1 . Later editions of this b o o k , retitled Pioneers of Modern Design, o m i t

the oath and radically revise the account of W r i g h t . 44.

Nikolaus Pevsner, "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t ' s Peaceful Penetration of E u r o p e , " Architects' Journal

89 (4 May 1939): 731-3445.

Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects 46 (9 May 1939): 643. T h e visit is also fully r e -

p o r t e d in The Builder 156 (28 April 1939): 789; (5 May 1939): 855; and (12 M a y 1939): 890, 9 0 9 - 1 0 . 46.

Crawford, "Ten Letters," 7 1 ; Minutes, May 1939, Art Workers' Guild, Q u e e n Square, London.

47.

Minutes of the Board, 12 July 1939, Sulgrave M a n o r , N o r t h a m p t o n s h i r e .

48.

AA Journal 66 (August—September 1950): 44—46. T h e lectures published in Britain as An Or-

ganic Architecture did not appear in the U n i t e d States until 1953, as pp. 2 2 2 - 3 1 8 of W r i g h t ' s The Future of Architecture. A precis of the texts w i t h s o m e questions and answers appeared in The Builder 156 (5 May 1939): 856; (12 May 1939): 9 0 7 - 9 ; (19 May ¡939): 9 5 3 " 5 4 49.

Peter Blake, No Place like Utopia ( N e w York: W. W. N o r t o n , 1993), 11.

50.

Ibid., 1 1 - 1 3 ; personal reminiscences o f T . A. Greeves and Birkin Haward to author; review

by Ernestine C a r t e r in Architectural Review 87 (April 1940): 148. Reaction f r o m an older architect, Percy M o r l e y H o r d e r , appears in Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects 46 (22 May 1939): 74351.

"Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " Journal of the Royal Institute of British Architects 46 (8 May 1939): 643.

52.

Ibid., 22 M a y 1939, 700.

53.

Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , An Organic Architecture (London: L u n d H u m p h r i e s , 1939), 35.

54.

"An O r g a n i c Architecture: Mr. W r i g h t ' s T h i r d Watson Lecture," The Builder 156 (19 M a y

!939) : 954; later reprinted in J o h n Sergeant, Frank Lloyd Wright's Usonian Houses ( N e w York: W h i t ney Library of Design, 1976), 197. 55.

"To the Fifty-eighth: Mr. Frank Lloyd W r i g h t Replies," Journal of the Royal Institute of British

Architects 47 (16 O c t o b e r 1939): 1 0 0 5 - 6 . 56.

Blake, No Place like Utopia, 12.

57.

" D i n n e r to Mr. and Mrs. Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " Architectural Association Journal 66 ( A u g u s t -

S e p t e m b e r 1950): 4 4 - 4 6 . 58.

Ibid., 54 (May 1939): 268-69.

59.

Personal reminiscence of R o d e r i c k Gradidge to author.

60.

" D i n n e r to Mr. and Mrs. W r i g h t , " 4 4 - 4 6 .

61.

The Builder 179 (14 July 1950): 5 1 .

62.

"Lloyd W r i g h t in Britain," 540; personal reminiscence of Peter M o r o to author.

63.

Personal reminiscences of t h e late Sir J o h n S u m m e r s o n and of C o l i n Penn to t h e author.

64.

"Broadside f r o m FLW," The Builder 1 9 1 (27 July 1956): 1 3 2 ; C l o u g h Williams-Ellis, Architect

Errant (London: Constable, 1 9 7 1 ) , 1 8 7 - 8 8 , 2 0 9 - 1 0 . 65.

K e n n e t h J. Robinson in Architects' Journal 124 (26 July 1956): 109—11.

66.

T h e s e paragraphs are based mainly o n unpublished researches by Alan Powers o n British p r i -

vate houses built b e t w e e n 1945 and 1970.

Ó7-

T h e W h i t e H o u s e , H y v e r Hill: researches o f D a v i d A t w e l l f o r the f o r m e r Greater L o n d o n

C o u n c i l and o f Steven B r i n d l e f o r English Heritage, L o n d o n R e g i o n . H o u s e at C a m b e r l e y ( " B e t terwords," 1 1 C r a w l e y Hill); i n f o r m a t i o n supplied by M a r g a r e t B u n t r o c k o f B r o w n s Estate Agents, Camberley, 1 9 9 4 . 68.

N e i l J a c k s o n , The Modern Steel House ( L o n d o n : E . & F. N . S p o n , 1996), 1 3 7 - 3 8 ; R e y n e r B a n -

ham, Theory and Design in the First Machine Age (London: Architectural Press, i960), 1 4 5 - 4 7 , 1 5 6 - 5 7 . 69.

C o l i n R o w e , " C h i c a g o F r a m e , " Architectural Review

120 (November 1956): 2 8 5 - 8 9 .

70.

J o h n Sergeant, Frank Lloyd Wright's Usonian Houses ( N e w Y o r k : W h i t n e y Library o f D e s i g n ,

1976). 71.

Richard M a c C o r m a c , " T h e A n a t o m y o f W r i g h t ' s Aesthetic," Architectural Review

1 4 3 (Feb-

ruary 1968): 1 4 3 - 4 6 , and " F r o e b e l ' s Kindergarten Gifts and the Early W o r k o f Frank L l o y d W r i g h t , " Environment

and Planning B, 1 9 7 4 , no. 1: 2 9 - 5 0 . F o r criticism, see E d g a r K a u f m a n n Jr., Nine

Com-

mentaries on Frank Lloyd Wright (Cambridge, Mass.: M I T Press, 1989), 4—5. 72.

Patrick H o d g k i n s o n , r e v i e w o f The Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright by N e i l L e v i n e , in Times

Higher Education Supplement,

10 January 1997, 27.

CHAPTER 8 Translated f r o m the Spanish. 1.

J o s é Luis R o m e r o , Latinoamérica:

2.

Graziano Gasparín, in his essay " C o l o n i a l Architecture in Venezuela," described the interac-

Las ciudades y las ideas ( M e x i c o C i t y : Siglo X X I , 1996), 64.

tion o f native and E u r o p e a n styles: " O n e should not forget that colonial B a r o q u e art was a p r o v i n cial art and, as such, had always to vary and m o d i f y the models o f the m o t h e r country, either s i m p l i f y i n g them or breaking the equilibrium via exaggeration, repetition, and e x u b e r a n c e . " G r a z i a n o Gasparín, La arquitectura colonial en Venezuela (Caracas: E d i c i o n e s A r m i t a n o , 1 9 6 5 ) , 2 4 6 . 3.

See Francisco Stasty, ¿Un arte mestizo? América Latina en sus artes ( M e x i c o C i t y : Siglo X X I , 1 9 7 4 ) ,

150-60. 4.

M a r i a n o Arana and L o r e n z o Garabelli, Arquitectura renovadora en Montevideo,

1915—1940:

Refle-

xiones sobre un período fecundo de la arquitectura en el Uruguay ( M o n t e v i d e o : Fundación de Cultura U n i versitaria, 1 9 9 1 ) . 5.

For m o r e on Smith, see M a r i o Pérez de A r c e A., Josué Smith Solar: Un arquitecto chileno del 900

(Santiago: Editorial Pontificia Universidad Católica de C h i l e , 1 9 9 3 ) . 6.

FLW, " R o o t s , " in Frank Lloyd Wright: Writings and Buildings,

ed. E d g a r K a u f m a n n and B e n R a e -

burn ( N e w York: M e r i d i a n , i960), 28. 7.

H e n r y - R u s s e l l H i t c h c o c k , In the Nature of Materials; Spanish version titled Frank Lloyd

Obras 1887—1941, 8.

R o b e r t o Dávila, " T é c n i c a y creación," Revista editada por la Facultad de Arquitectura y Urbanismo

jUniversidad 9. 10.

Wright

trans. Justo G . B e r e m e n d i (Barcelona: Editorial Gustavo Gili, 1 9 7 8 ) .

de Chile] 2 (n.d.): 84.

Q u o t e d in ibid. Also a student at the Catholic University, G e r m a n Lamarca Subercaseaux was a y o u n g archi-

tect o f great natural talent w h o w e n t to the U n i t e d States to study the w o r k o f Frank L l o y d W r i g h t in C h i c a g o and later in Wisconsin. H e died y o u n g (in 1 9 5 6 , at thirty-five years o f age), leaving us a small but interesting range o f w o r k that is to be f o u n d in groups in the residential n e i g h b o r h o o d " L o Castillo." His houses have a large amount o f m o d e l i n g and g e o m e t r y learned f r o m W r i g h t ;

notes to pages 142-154

|

251

some, t h o u g h preserved in an excellent state, are threatened dangerously by demolition, o w i n g to the appreciation in real estate prices in the area. 11.

Patricio S c h m i d t to author, personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n .

12.

J o s é C o v a c e v i c h to author, personal c o m m u n i c a t i o n .

13.

F o r m o r e on B r o w n e ' s domestic architecture, see Enrique Browne: Casas y escritos (Santiago:

Taller A m e r i c a , 1989). 14.

N e w generations came, and w i t h them n e w challenges; the city grew, and so began the p r o b -

lems inherent in its inorganic c o n f o r m a t i o n . F r o m this p e r i o d are the G a l l o H o u s e in the hills o f Los D o m i n i c o s and m y final project, the Pereyra Braz H o u s e , w h i c h in 1 9 9 7 was in the c o n s t r u c tion stage in the Santa Maria de M a n q u e h u e hills b e t w e e n centennial arrayanes (Chilean myrtles) and boldos (Chilean jalap), underlining the m a g n i f i c e n c e o f the metropolitan Santiago landscape. 15.

FLW, Testamento (Buenos Aires: Fabril, 1 9 6 1 ) , 1 8 9 - 2 0 9 .

16.

In preparing this essay, I f o u n d several v o l u m e s especially helpful. O n Frank Lloyd W r i g h t :

FLW, Elfuturo de la arquitectura, 2 d ed. (Barcelona: Poseidón, 1 9 7 8 ) ; FLW, Testamento. O n Latin A m e r ica and its colonization: Pedro Rojas, Historia general del arte mexicano, época colonial ( M e x i c o C i t y : H e r m e s , 1 9 6 3 ) ; Gianni C . Sciolla, VilleMedicee

(Novara, 1 9 9 2 ) ; R o m o l o T r e b b i d e l T r e v i g i a n o , Ar-

quitectura espontánea y vernácula en América Latina. (Valparaiso: E d i c i o n e s Universitarias de Valparaíso, Universidad Católica de Valparaíso, 1 9 8 5 ) . F o r m o r e on m y philosophy and w o r k , see A l b e r t o Sartori, Revista editada por la Facultad de Arquitectura y Urbanismo 2 (n.d.), 5; A l b e r t o Sartori,

Revista:

140 Años (privately published), 6 1 8 . CHAPTER 9 1.

N e a r the end o f his life, W r i g h t r e m e m b e r e d " h o w as a boy, primitive A m e r i c a n a r c h i t e c t u r e —

Toltec, Aztec, M a y a n , I n c a — s t i r r e d m y w o n d e r , excited m y w i s h f u l admiration. I w i s h e d I m i g h t someday have e n o u g h m o n e y to g o to M e x i c o , Guatemala and Peru to j o i n in excavating those long slumbering remains o f lost cultures; mighty, primitive abstractions o f man's nature." FLW, A Testament ( N e w York: H o r i z o n Press, 1 9 5 7 ) , 1 1 1 . W r i g h t also published a tribute to M e x i c o , " T o Espacios,"

Espacios, no. 1 3 ( 1 9 5 3 ) : n.p. O n W r i g h t and p r e - C o l u m b i a n architecture, see A n t h o n y

Alofsin, Frank Lloyd Wright: The Lost Years, 1910—ig2 2 (Chicago: University o f C h i c a g o Press, 1 9 9 3 ) , 2 2 1 - 6 0 ; and R o b e r t L. Sweeney, Wright in Hollywood:

Visions of a New Architecture ( N e w York: A r -

chitectural History Foundation; C a m b r i d g e , Mass.: M I T Press, 1994), 2 3 4 . 2.

For m o r e on these designers, see Carlos A l t e z o r Fuentes, Arquitectura urbana en Costa Rica:

ploración histórica, 1900-1950

Ex-

(Cartago: Editorial Tecnológica de Costa Rica, 1986); Samuel Gutierrez,

Arquitectura actual de Panamá, 1930—1980 Nechodoma, Architect 1877—192$:

(Panama C i t y : Gutierrez, i 9 8 o ) ; T h o m a s M a r v e l ,

The Prairie School in the Caribbean

Antonin

(Gainesville: University Press o f

Florida, 1 9 9 4 ) ; and J o h n L o o m i s , "Walter B e t a n c o u r t ' s Q u i e t R e v o l u t i o n , " Progressive Architecture 76 (April 1 9 9 5 ) : 4 1 - 4 4 . 3. 252

I notes TO pages 1 57- 1 67

Q u o t e d in Clive B a m f o r d Smith, Builders in the Sun: Five Mexican Architects ( N e w York: A r c h i -

tectural B o o k Publishing, 1967), 18. 4.

O n Villagrán and the early years o f M e x i c a n m o d e r n i s m , see V í c t o r J i m é n e z , ed ,,José

Villagrán

( M e x i c o C i t y : Instituto N a c i o n a l de Bellas Artes, 1986); and M a r i s o l Aja, " J u a n O ' G o r m a n , " Apuentes para la historia y crítica de la arquitectura mexicana del siglo XX,

vol. 2 ( M e x i c o C i t y : Instituto

N a c i o n a l de Bellas Artes, 1 9 8 2 ) , 1 1 - 1 2 . 5.

O ' G o r m a n , f o r one, claimed to have read Vers une architecture f o u r times d u r i n g his nineteenth

year, 1 9 2 4 - 2 5 ; Smith, Builders in the Sun,

18.

6.

Esther B o r n , " T h e N e w Architecture in M e x i c o , " Architectural Record 81 (April 1937): 12, 1 8 - 1 9 .

7.

Q u o t e d in Roberto Segre and Fernando Kusnetzoff, eds., Latin America in Its Architecture, trans.

Edith Grossman Holmes ( N e w York: Meier, 1 9 8 1 ) , 194. 8.

O n Cetto, see Suzanne Dussel Peter, "Investigación teórica sobre la vida y obra de M a x Cetto

y proyecto de administración del Hotel San José Purúa, M i c h o a c á n " (master's thesis, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de M é x i c o , 1990), esp. 171—81; Lilia G ó m e z and Miguel Angel Quevedo, "Entrevista con el arquitecto M a x Cetto," in Testimonios vivos (Mexico City: Instituto Nacional de Bellas Artes, 1 9 8 1 ) , 1 1 5 - 2 0 ; and Keith Eggener, "Expressionism and Emotional Architecture in M e x i c o : Luis Barragán's Collaborations with M a x Cetto and Mathias Goeritz," Architectura: Journal of the History of Architecture 25 (1995): 7 7 - 9 4 . 9.

In 1 9 3 2 Henry-Russell Hitchcock and Philip Johnson placed Wright among "the last repre-

sentatives of Romanticism. . . . more akin to the men o f a hundred years ago than to the generation which has come to the fore since the War." Henry-Russell Hitchcock Jr. and Philip Johnson, The International Style ( N e w York: W. W. N o r t o n , 1966), 2 7 . 10.

For Wright's views on the city at this time, see his Modern Architecture, Being the Kahn Lectures

for 1930

(Princeton: Princeton University Press for the Department of A r t and Archaeology o f

Princeton University, 1 9 3 1 ) . 11.

Q u o t e d in Smith, Builders in the Sun, 1 7 6 . For a contemporary overview of progressive M e x -

ican architecture during the 1930s, see Esther B o r n , ed., The New Architecture in Mexico ( N e w York: Architectural Record, 1937). This book, a slightly expanded version o f the special " N e w Architecture of M e x i c o " issue of Architectural Record published in April 1 9 3 7 , included statements by V i llagrán, Carlos Contreras, Justino Fernández, Beach Riley, and F. Sánchez Fogarty and illustrations and discussion o f work by Barragán, O ' G o r m a n , Villagrán, and many others. 12.

A n n Binkley H o r n , " M o d e r n M e x i c o , " Architectural Record 1 0 2 (July 1947): 7 1 .

13.

M a x Cetto, Modern Architecture in Mexico ( N e w York: Praeger, 1 9 6 1 ) , 2 2 .

14.

"Frank Lloyd Wright y M é x i c o , " Arquitectura México, J u n e 1 9 5 9 , 1 1 9 ; " N ú m e r o dedicado a

Le Corbusier," Arquitectura México, December 1 9 6 5 . T h e notice of Wright's death, appearing in the magazine three months after the fact, consisted primarily o f exaggerated claims for his borrowings from pre-Columbian architecture. 15.

Smith, Builders in the Sun, 16. O ' G o r m a n made related statements as early as 1 9 5 1 ; see E s -

ther M c C o y , "Juan O ' G o r m a n , " Arts and Architecture 68 (August 1 9 5 1 ) : 26, 46. 16.

Looking back in 1 9 6 2 , Barragán said, " I renounced the profession in 1940, and dedicated

myself to real estate speculation. . . . So went the years forty to forty-five, [taken up] with this kind o f speculation . . . [without] the freedom to do anything worth mentioning" ("Renuncié a la profesión en 1940. M e dediqué a especular con bienes raíces; dentro de esa especulación entró parte de construir en ellos para vender, entonces rodaron los años cuarenta a cuarenta y cinco, en ese tipo de especulación sin haber hecho algunos edificios o algunas residencias digamos ni en volumen, ni en libertad para algo que valiera la pena de mencionarse"); Alejandro Ramírez Ugarte, "Entrevista," in Luis Barragán: Clásico del silencio, ed. Enrique X . de Anda Alanís (Bogotá: Escala, 1989), 2 2 5 . 17.

This phenomenon was hardly unique to M e x i c o . Designers in many locales now paid in-

creased attention to psychological factors, local materials, and traditions, and the integration of architecture and site. Even such early proselytizers o f the International Style as Hitchcock and Sigfried Giedion called for a "regional approach" influenced by culture, climate, and vernacular building. See Henry-Russell Hitchcock, " U n i f o r m i t y and Variety in M o d e r n Architecture," Arts, no. 1 (1946):

4 1 - 4 7 ; a n d S i g f r i e d G i e d i o n , " T h e State o f C o n t e m p o r a r y A r c h i t e c t u r e : T h e R e g i o n a l A p p r o a c h , " Architectural Record 1 1 5 ( J a n u a r y 1 9 5 4 ) : 1 3 2 - 3 7 . 18.

Q u o t e d in M c C o y , " J u a n O ' G o r m a n , " 26, 46.

19.

In 1 9 5 5 H i t c h c o c k called t h e U n i v e r s i t y C i t y " t h e m o s t spectacular e x t r a - u r b a n a r c h i t e c t u r a l

entity o f t h e N o r t h A m e r i c a n c o n t i n e n t , " o n e t h a t h a d " a c h i e v e [ d ] a peculiarly M e x i c a n i n t e n s i t y in w h i c h r e f e r e n c e s t o t h e I n d i a n h e r i t a g e . . . play a positive role." H e n r y - R u s s e l l H i t c h c o c k ,

Latin

American Architecture since 194} ( N e w York: M u s e u m o f M o d e r n A r t , 1 9 5 5 ) , 44. M e a n w h i l e , t h e p o p u l a r M e x i c o C i t y daily Hoy hailed El Pedregal as " a c o m i n g t o g e t h e r o f m o d e r n c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d d e s i g n e d landscape, so p e r f e c t l y resolved in p o i n t o f mexicanidad

t h a t f r o m any o f its aspects it

shouts t o t h e visitor: y o u are in M e x i c o ! " ( " L o esencial, d e s d e el á n g u l o d e n u e s t r o c o m e n t a r i o , es la realización, en M é x i c o , d e u n c o n j u n t o d e c o n s t r u c c i o n e s m o d e r n a s y a d a p t a c i ó n del paisaje, tan p e r f e c t a m e n t e resulto e n p u n t o a m e x i c a n i d a d q u e , d e s d e c u a l q u i e r a d e sus aspectos, le g r i t e al v i sitante: estás en M é x i c o " ) ; M a r g a r i t a N e l k e n , " E l a r q u i t e c t o y paisajista Luis B a r r a g á n , " Hoy,

26

April 1 9 5 2 , 45. F o r B a r r a g á n ' s c o m m e n t s o n El Pedregal, see his " G a r d e n s f o r E n v i r o n m e n t : J a r dines del Pedregal,"Journal of theAlA

i 7 ( A p r i l 1952): 1 6 7 - 7 2 . T h o u g h a b s o r b e d b y t h e idea o f m a k -

i n g a distinctly M e x i c a n m o d e r n a r c h i t e c t u r e , t h e aristocratic a n d elitist B a r r a g á n — s p e c u l a t i v e d e v e l o p e r a n d b u i l d e r o f h o m e s f o r t h e w e a l t h y — e x p r e s s e d little interest in t h e progressive social a g e n d a shared b y s u c h colleagues as O ' G o r m a n a n d Villagrán. 20.

C a r l o s G o n z á l e z L o b o , " L u i s B a r r a g á n , " Mimar, J u n e 1 9 9 2 , 59.

21.

F o r e x a m p l e , Architectural

Forum r e p o r t e d t h a t " M e x i c o has t u r n e d f o r a r c h i t e c t u r a l ideas al-

m o s t w h o l l y t o t h e F r e n c h l e a d e r Le C o r b u s i e r r a t h e r t h a n t o t h e A m e r i c a n W r i g h t o r o t h e r l e a d ers." " M e x i c o ' s A r c h i t e c t u r e , " Architectural

Forum 9 7 ( S e p t e m b e r 1 9 5 2 ) : 1 0 1 . S o m e w h a t c o n t r a -

dictory, t h e r e appears o n this s a m e p a g e o n e o f t h e f e w c o n t e m p o r a r y references t o W r i g h t ' s i n f l u e n c e in M e x i c o , m a d e in r e l a t i o n t o B a r r a g á n ' s " P e d r e g a l G a r d e n s " ( p o r t r a y e d o n t h e cover): " I n l a n d scape a r c h i t e c t u r e , t o o , t h e r e is a n e w i d e a l — h i t h e r t o p r e a c h e d systematically in m o d e r n t i m e s o n l y by F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t — m a k i n g t h e b u i l d i n g s p a r t o f t h e l a n d s c a p e t h e w a y t h e p y r a m i d s w e r e , ' o f it' instead o f ' o n i t . ' " 22.

C e t t o w r o t e t o W r i g h t f r o m Los A n g e l e s o n 1 S e p t e m b e r 1938; W r i g h t r e s p o n d e d o n 1 0

S e p t e m b e r f r o m S p r i n g G r e e n . T h e F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t A r c h i v e , G e t t y C e n t e r f o r t h e H i s t o r y o f A r t a n d t h e H u m a n i t i e s , Santa M o n i c a , Calif, ( h e r e a f t e r F L W A - G e t t y ) . In t r a c i n g t h e intellectual o r i g i n s o f regionalist a r c h i t e c t u r e in M e x i c o , it is w o r t h n o t i n g t h a t e v e n as C e t t o w o r k e d w i t h N e u t r a , N e u t r a was p r o d u c i n g articles s u c h as his " R e g i o n a l i s m in A r c h i t e c t u r e , " Architectural

Fo-

rum 70 ( F e b r u a r y 1 9 3 9 , " P l u s 2 " supp.): 2 2 - 2 3 . 23.

W h e n I visited his office in 1 9 8 9 , C r e i x e l l still h e l d o r i g i n a l s i g n e d plans f o r b u i l d i n g s t h a t h e

h a d w o r k e d o n w i t h C e t t o a n d B a r r a g á n ; i n t e r v i e w w i t h a u t h o r , M e x i c o City, 2 7 J a n u a r y 1989. 24.

See, f o r e x a m p l e , t h e special issue o f Architectural Forum d e v o t e d t o W r i g h t , J a n u a r y 1938, a n d

t h e issue o f Time p u b l i s h e d t h a t s a m e m o n t h f e a t u r i n g W r i g h t a n d F a l l i n g w a t e r o n its c o v e r (see Fig. 9.8), " U s o n i a n A r c h i t e c t , " Time, 254

I

NOTES

TO

PAGES

170-173

25.

17 January 1938, 2 9 - 3 2 .

T h e H o t e l San J o s e P u r ú a is discussed a n d illustrated in Dussel, " I n v e s t i g a c i ó n t e ó r i c a s o b r e

M a x C e t t o , " 226—68; a n d W i l l i a m A r t h u r N e w m a n , " G l i m p s e s o f A r c h i t e c t u r e in M o d e r n M e x ico," Architect and Engineer, S e p t e m b e r 1 9 4 5 , 2 8 - 3 0 , 46. 26.

A n t o n i o L u n a A r r o y o , e d , , J u a n O'Gorman:

Autobiografía,

antología, juicios críticos y

documentación

exhaustivo sobre su obra ( M e x i c o C i t y : C u a d e r n o s P o p u l a r e s d e P i n t u r a M e x i c a n a M o d e r n a , 1 9 7 3 ) , 137-38-

27-

Reportedly, this rejection was due to O ' G o r m a n ' s "critical portrayal o f U S charities and set-

tlement houses." James N o r m a n , " T h e Ten-Story Picture," Americas 7 (March 1 9 5 1 ) : 26. 28.

" E l edificio es de una belleza magnífica, probablemente es uno de los más bellos que hay en

el mundo. . . . Pensé que sería muy importante en M é x i c o hacer una casa, un edificio, aplicando los principios generales de la arquitectura orgánica de Frank Lloyd W r i g h t " ; Luna Arroyo, Juan O'Gorman: 29.

Autobiografía, antología, 137—38, 154.

Life called the house a "mosaic-mad grotto near M e x i c o City . . . the most bizarre o f all ar-

chitect's homes." "Houses Architects Live In," Life, 1 9 January 1959, 5 2 - 5 3 . 30.

Q u o t e d in Smith, Builders in the Sun, 33; and "Houses Architects Live In," 53.

31.

In 1908 Wright had said that "a building should appear to grow easily from its site and be

shaped to harmonize with its surroundings." H e expressed the social dimension of this belief w h e n he wrote in 1 9 3 6 that "organic architecture must come from the ground up into the light by gradual growth. It will itself be the ground of a better way o f life." In Frank Lloyd Wright on Architecture, ed. Frederick Gutheim ( N e w York: Grosset & Dunlap, 1 9 4 1 ) , 34, 190. 32.

See his comments regarding functionalism as quoted in M c C o y , "Juan O ' G o r m a n , " 26, 46.

33.

Luna Arroyo, ed.,Juan

O'Gorman,

154; and Juan O ' G o r m a n , " Q u é significa socialmente la

arquitectura moderna en M e x i c o ? " Espacios, M a y 1953, n.p. Also see O ' G o r m a n ' s "An Intent o f Realistic Architecture," Espacios, J u n e 1955, 3 1 . 34.

O ' G o r m a n , " Q u é significa socialmente la arquitectura moderna en M e x i c o ? " n.p.

35.

Quoted in Smith, Builders in the Sun, 18.

36.

Ibid. T h o u g h he does not specify, O ' G o r m a n was probably referring toTaliesin West;Taliesin

East contains no apparent M e s o - A m e r i c a n references. 37.

FLW, Testament, 1 1 1 .

38.

F L W to Carlos Lazo, 1 5 March 1 9 5 4 , FLWA-Getty.

39.

Lazo's invitation to Wright is dated 1 May 1 9 5 2 ; Wright's acceptance and his description of

the exhibition are found in a letter to Lazo dated 30 August 1 9 5 2 , FLWA-Gctty. 40.

F L W to Lazo, 15 N o v e m b e r 1 9 5 2 , FLWA-Getty.

41.

Rafael López Rangel, Diego Rivera y la arquitectura mexicana (Mexico City: SEP, 1986), 1 3 5 . A

1 9 5 2 photograph of the two men together in M e x i c o City, seated with Oskar Stonorov, appears in Diego Rivera: A Retrospective ( N e w York: Founders Society, Detroit Institute of Arts, in association with W. W. N o r t o n , 1986), 109. 42.

Along these lines see " D i e g o Rivera on Architecture and Mural Painting," Architectural Record

75 (January 1934): 4 - 5 . Adopting Corbusian language, the artist writes o f "true mural painting" as "necessarily a functional part o f . . . the machine which is the building." 43.

See Manuel Gamio, "Las excavaciones del Pedregal de San Angel y la cultura arcaica," Amer-

ican Anthropologist, no. 22 (1920): 1 2 7 - 4 3 ;

an

d B y r o n C u m m i n g s , " R u i n s o f Cuicuilco M a y R e v -

olutionize O u r History o f Ancient America," National Geographic 44 (August 1 9 2 3 ) : 202—20. In the nationalistic climate of the mid-twentieth century, this ancient heritage led to the region's being upheld as the cradle o f the Mexican nation. In 1 9 5 2 , for instance, one writer described it as the home o f "el H o m b r e del Pedregal," the "most remote ancestor" o f the Mexican nation, w h o "lived, loved, suffered, and died, leaving us his skeleton as a root o f M e x i c o , jealously guarded by the fire made stone" (" . . . donde el más remoto antepasado de nosotros los mexicanos—el ' H o m bre del Pedregal'—vivió, amó, sufrió y murió, dejándonos su esqueleto fosilizado c o m o raíz de

México, celosamente guardada por el fuego hecho piedra"); Raúl Carranca Trujillo, "Valoración de la Ciudad Universitaria," in México: Realización y esperanza (Mexico City: Editorial Superación, 1952), 3 1 8 . For further discussion along these lines, see Keith Eggener, "Luis Barragán's El Pedregal and the Making o f Mexican Modernism: Architecture, Photography, and Critical R e c e p t i o n " (Ph.D. diss., Stanford University, 1995), 4 6 - 5 2 . 44.

" S e g ú n los indios, el Pedregal está lleno de nahuales monstruosos y de terribles brujas, de

modo que pocos son los indios que de noche se atreverían a caminar por esos lugares. . . . El Pedregal de San Angel se puede llamar c o m o la escuela primaria de la brujería"; Francisco Fernández del Castillo, Apuntes para la historia de San Angel y sus alrededores: Tradiciones, historia, leyendas, 2d ed. (repr. M e x i c o City: Porrua, 1987), 149. 45.

O n the snakes and criminals, see " M e x i c o ' s Pedregal Gardens," House and Home, October

1 9 5 2 , 127; on the artists and writers, see Clementina Díaz y de Ovando, La Ciudad Universitaria de México: Reseña histórica, ig2g-ig^¡ 46.

(Mexico City: U N A M , 1979), 1 1 5 - 1 7 .

As early as 1 9 3 6 , the writer Joseph H e n r y Jackson told h o w Rivera took him, "through a pet

road of his own . . . through one of the most desolate regions of the world, the area k n o w n as the Pedregal—the Stony Place." Mexican Interlude ( N e w York: Macmillan, 1936), 1 6 5 - 6 6 . 47.

Q u o t e d in Andrea O. Dean, "Luis Barragán, Austere Architect of Silent Spaces," Smithsonian

1 1 (November 1980): 1 5 4 . 48.

For discussion o f El Pedregal's critical reception, see Eggener, "Luis Barragán's El Pedregal,"

136-94. 49.

I found Rivera's document, "Requisitos para la organización de El Pedregal," sealed among

Barragán's papers in the collection of the Fundación de Arquitectura Tapatía, Guadalajara, in J a n uary 1994. M y thanks to Sergio Ortiz and Juan Palomár o f the foundation for opening the collection to me at that time. Rivera's essay is discussed in more detail in Keith Eggener, " D i e g o Rivera's Proposal for El Pedregal," Source: Notes in the History of Art 14 (spring 1995): 1 - 8 , and "Luis B a r ragán's El Pedregal," 1 0 2 - 9 , 2 0 4 - 7 . N o t long before his death in 1 9 5 7 , Rivera would again refer to W r i g h t as "the greatest plastic genius in the world today." Q u o t e d in Selden Rodman, Mexican Journal: The Conquerors Conquered (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1958), 6 1 . 50.

T h o u g h separated by several kilometers, Anahuacalli and El Pedregal both stand within the

larger Pedregal region. 51.

Rivera, "Requisitos," 1 - 4 .

52.

Published as "Gardens for Environment," 1 6 8 , 170. In places Barragán's language here is b o r -

rowed directly from Rivera's text; see Eggener, " D i e g o Rivera's Proposal for El Pedregal," 8 n . i 9 . 53.

Barragán, "Gardens for Environment," 1 7 1 .

54.

See, for example, the modernist-revivalist hybrid Villaseñor House o f 1940, located near

O ' G o r m a n ' s house for Rivera in San Angel. 55. „ _,

2 5 6

i

I

NOTES

TO P A G E S

179-180

" T h i s architecture that is called M o d e r n . . . is the denial of what is Mexican, and its d o m i -

neering characteristic lies in its imitative condition of what is foreign. . . . It is only possible to u n °

O

1

r

derstand this architecture as a reflection of the interests o f a National Class for w h o m the industrialization of M e x i c o means the alliance with the International Capitalistic Class." O ' G o r m a n , " Q u é significa socialmente la arquitectura moderna en M é x i c o ? " n.p. 56.

Quoted in Esther M c C o y , "Jardines del Pedregal de San A n g e l , " Arts and Architecture 68 ( A u -

gust 1 9 5 1 ) : 2 3 . 57.

See my forthcoming " R e m a k i n g Modernism in Postwar M e x i c o : Luis Barragán and His C r i t -

ics of the 1950s," in The New Inside the New: Latin American Architecture and the Crisis of the International Style, ig3j-ig54,

ed. K . Michael Hayes (featuring papers adapted from a symposium of the

same title, Graduate School o f Design, Harvard University, 1 9 - 2 0 April 1996). 5 8.

R o g e r Bartra, The Cage of Melancholy: Identity and Metamorphosis in the Mexican Character, trans.

Christopher J. Hall ( N e w Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press, 1992), 5. Also see Eggener, "Luis Barragán's El Pedregal," 1 3 - 1 8 , 1 3 7 - 4 2 . 59.

Barragán, "Gardens for Environment," 1 7 1 . Neutra's presence in M e x i c o was significant. H e

was a frequent and much-respected visitor there, and by the late 1940s Spanish translations of his writings were widely available, published in Arquitectura México, Espacios, and elsewhere. Although his writings rarely address garden or landscape design per se, he, like Wright, maintained that the forms o f nature were best not altered too much, and that the house should be integrated with the preexisting landscape. See, for example, his 1 9 5 1 Mystery and Realities of the Site (Scarsdale, N . Y . : Morgan & Morgan, 195 1), of which Barragán o w n e d two first-edition, English-language copies. (In one o f these, pages describing "a house in the desert," followed by photos of the 1946 K a u f mann House in Palm Springs, California, are folded back and highlighted. As o f 1 9 9 4 these books were o w n e d by the Fundación de Arquitectura Tapada in Guadalajara.) With the widely publicized Kaufmann House, a minimized, cubic-form, glass and concrete pavilion open to the contrastingly rugged forms of its mountainous desert setting, Neutra provided an irresistible model for builders working at El Pedregal, especially Francisco Artigas, w h o built several Neutra-esque houses there. T h e Kaufmanns' Palm Springs house was first published in M e x i c o in Mauricio G ó m e z Mayorga, "Casa en el desierto, Richard Neutra, Arq.," Arquitectura México, February 1 9 5 0 , 2 7 6 - 8 0 . 60.

T h e Kahn House is illustrated in Arthur Drexler and T h o m a s S. Hines, The Architecture of

Richard Neutra ( N e w York: M u s e u m o f M o d e r n Art, 1982), 7 6 - 7 9 . 61.

Excélsior, 8 July 1 9 5 1 , 2 2 A - 2 3 A .

62.

Ramírez Ugarte, "Entrevista," 2 2 5 .

63.

See, for example, the statements by Mark M a c k in Diane Dorrans Saeks, " B i g Mack: A Bay

Area Architect's M a j o r M u s e u m Retrospective," San Francisco Chronicle, 6 October 1 9 9 3 , D - i ; and by Ricardo Legorreta in James Steele, "Interview: Ricardo Legorreta," Mimar, J u n e 1 9 9 2 , 62. 64.

"An Afternoon at the H o m e of Barragán," trans. Roberto Tejada, Artes de México, no. 23 (spring

1994): n o . CHAPTER 1 0 T h e author would like to acknowledge and thank the following individuals: Brian Hunter, A n thony Alofsin, M a r g o Stipe, B r u c e Brooks Pfeiffer, Tom Casey, Frances and Stephen N i m t o n , Indira Berndtsen, N i z a m and Shelly Amery, Rifat Chadirji, Kamal A m i n , Nizar and Ellen Jawdat, N a m e e r Jawdat, Fakri Bakr, and M a r y Daniels. 1.

"Frank Lloyd Wright Designs for Baghdad," Architectural Forum (May 1958): 8 9 - 1 0 1 . D u r i n g

Wright's lifetime and until shortly after his death there were a number of news articles, publications, and exhibitions on Wright's project: New York Times, 27 January 1 9 5 7 , 57; ibid., 28 January 1 9 5 7 , 22; " W r i g h t to Design Baghdad Opera," Architectural Forum, March 1 9 5 7 , 97; "Exhibition in N e w York at the Iraq Consulate," New York Times, 3 M a y 1 9 5 8 ; Drawings for a Living Architecture ( N e w York: Horizon Press, 1959); "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t , " Architecture aujourd'hui,

February i960,

5 6 - 5 9 ; Arthur Drexler, ed., The Drawings of Frank Lloyd Wright ( N e w York: Horizon Press, 1962). As with his other works, Wright never hesitated to use the public media to promote the project. M o r e recently the Baghdad drawings have been published in B r u c e Brooks Pfeiffer, Treasures of

Taliesin: Seventy-six Unbuilt Designs (Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1985); Terence Riley, ed., Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect ( N e w York: M u s e u m o f M o d e r n Art, 1994); and B r u c e Brooks Pfeiffer, Frank Lloyd Wright Drawings ( N e w York: Abradale Press, 1996), the catalog of a recent exhibition at the Phoenix Art M u s e u m that included Baghdad drawings. Despite the proliferation o f books on Wright and its similarities to other projects, relatively little has been published about the Baghdad project. See Stephen D. Helmer, " G r a d y Gamage Auditorium and the B a g h dad Opera Project: T w o Late Designs by Frank Lloyd Wright," Frank Lloyd Wright Newsletter 3 (1980): 1 0 - 1 7 . I would like to thank Anthony Alofsin, Taliesin Archives, and the Taliesin Associated A r chitects for their help, without w h o m this research would not have been possible. 2.

FLW, "Designs for Baghdad," 89.

3.

T h e captions on the drawings identified the plans for Greater Baghdad and dedicated them to

these ancient cities. 4.

Neil Levine's recent book The Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright (Princeton: Princeton U n i -

versity Press, 1996) dedicates pages 3 8 3 - 4 0 4 to the Baghdad project, providing valuable information and new research by students in his 1 9 9 2 Baghdad Seminar at Harvard, but in his final analysis he reduces the project to "architecture of fantasy." 5.

T h e Architects Collaborative ( T A C ) was the architectural firm founded by Gropius in 1945 in

Cambridge, Massachusetts. 6.

Taliesin Associates Architects is the name of the professional firm that succeeded Frank Lloyd

Wright. It was active in Iran until the 1 9 7 9 Islamic revolution that toppled the monarchy. Taliesin Associates Architects now sponsors the Frank Lloyd W r i g h t School of Architecture. 7.

For the history of Iraq in the twentieth century, see S. H . Longrigg, Iraq 1900-1950:

A Politi-

cal, Social, and Economic History (London: O x f o r d University Press, 1953); M . Khadduri, Independent Iraq, 1932-1958:

A Study in Iraqi Politics, 2d ed. (London: O x f o r d University Press, i960); E. M o n -

roe, Britain's Moment in the Middle East, 1914—1956

(London: Chatto & Windus, 1963); P. Marr,

The Modern History of Iraq (London: Longman, 1985); H. Batatu, The Old Social Classes and the Revolutionary Movements of Iraq (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1978); Lord Arthur Salter, The Development of Iraq: A Plan of Action (n.p., 1955). See also William Yale, The Near East: A Modern History, rev. ed. (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1968). 8.

" T h e country's revenues became such that it was possible to embark on new works according

to an order o f priority." Development Board Pamphlet, "Development of Iraq," Government o f Iraq Board of Development and Ministry o f Development, 1 9 5 6 . 9. 10.

"Development o f Iraq," 24. Second pamphlet published by the government of Iraq's Board o f Development and Ministry

of Development in 1 9 5 7 entitled "Development of Iraq." According to Secretary of the Development Board Fakri Bakr, the publication appeared separately in English and in Arabic. I am indebted to N a m e e r Jawdat for helping me locate Fakri Bakr, w h o m I interviewed on 2 1 October 1 9 9 7 . 11.

Ibid., 28. T h e only Western architects identified by name in the pamphlet were the Greek

firm o f Doxiadis Associates, under the " h o u s i n g " section. T h e proposal by Constantinos Doxiadis included a year-long study o f Iraq's housing problem. 12.

" T h e Master Plan for the City o f Baghdad 1 9 5 6 , " report prepared by Minoprio, Spencely,

and Macfarlane, architects and town planning consultants, London, 1 9 5 6 . T h e firm received the commission both for the master plan and for redevelopment plans for the city's four older quarters in December 1 9 5 4 . Doxiadis Associates replaced Minoprio, Spencely, and Macfarlane in 1 9 5 8 to produce a second master plan for Baghdad.

13-

This information is based on information obtained through my interviews with Nizar and

Ellen Jawdat in Washington, D . C . (June 1997), and with N a m e e r Jawdat (1 October 1997), Fakri B a k r ( 1 1 October 1997), and Rifat Chadirji (18 October and 1 1 D e c e m b e r 1997). 14.

T h e Jawdats were supported by other young Iraqi architects, among them Rifat Chadirji and

Qahtan A w m i . Noting that most public buildings, including "some large projects like Baghdad, C e n tral Station, the Parliament, and the Palace . . . were commissioned to British architects whose works were conventional and not m o d e r n , " Chadirji said, " w e decided to approach the authorities and state our concerns." T h e y met with the minister of planning, Dr. N a d e e m Pachachi, and submitted a list o f international architects. According to Chadirji, the list included Wright, Le Corbusier, G i o Ponti, Alvar Aalto, and Oscar Niemeyer (Gropius had already been selected). Rifat Chadirji to author, 24 October 1 9 9 7 . 15.

W h e n Nizar Jawdat, son of the Iraqi ambassador to the United States, graduated in 1946 he

married a fellow classmate, Ellen Bovie. W h e n he returned to Iraq with his wife, his father was the prime minister. T h e Jawdats were interviewed by the author in Washington, D.C., in J u n e 1 9 9 7 . 16.

T h e origin for the university commission to Gropius was traced back and credited to Nizar

and Ellen Jawdat in The Walter Gropius Archive, vol. 4: 1945-1

969: The Work of the Architects Collab-

orative, ed. J o h n Harkness ( N e w York: Garland, 1 9 9 1 ) , 189. I am grateful to M a r y Daniel at the Harvard Graduate School of Design Loeb Library for her assistance. 17.

She now goes by the name Frances N i m t o n , and was previously Frances Lockhart. I am grate-

ful to Frances N i m t o n for giving me the address of Ellen and Nizar Jawdat. 18.

Author's interview with Ellen and Nizar Jawdat, Washington, D.C., J u n e 1 9 9 7 . Although it

may have seemed odd for the stellar cast of Western architects to include G e r m a n , French, Finnish, and Italian nationals but no Americans, the absence of British names was deliberate, a response to the British monopoly in Iraq. 19.

According to T A C principal Louis M c M i l l e n , Gropius "was involved from the beginning of

1 9 5 7 until his death in 1 9 6 9 " and " t o o k a very active role as a design critic during the master planning and preliminary design phases." Harkness, ed., Gropius Archive: Work of the Architects Collaborative, 1 9 0 - 9 1 . 20.

Ibid., 190.

21.

Alvar Aalto: Projects and Final Buildings, ed. Elissa Aalto and Karl Fleig, 3 vols. (Zurich: E d i -

tions d'Architecture Artemis, 1990), 3 : 1 5 0 . 22.

Ibid., 2 : 1 4 4 - 5 1 .

23.

According to his own sketchbook, Le Corbusier was in Baghdad 8 - 1 3 N o v e m b e r 1 9 5 7 . H e

stayed at the Omar Khayyam Hotel and met with Akram Fahmy, Iraq's minister o f education and director of physical education. Le Corbusier Sketchbooks, vol. 3: 1954-5 7 ( N e w York: Architectural History Foundation and Fondation Le Corbusier; Cambridge, Mass.: M I T Press, 1 9 8 1 ) , L 5 0 , 1056-73. 24. Le Corbusier's design for the stadium was not completed until after his death. T h e site was , . . , , • j j • , , • • ^ r. • •L changed and the project was built in reduced size by his associate Georges Presenti, with construction by the local Iraqi firm of Rifat Chadirji ( 1 9 7 3 - 8 0 ) . It was named Saddam Hussein Gymnasium. Rifat Chadirji has discussed his association with Le Corbusier and the design o f the stadium in Baghdad in his book Al-Ukhaidar

and the Crystal Palace (in Arabic). Chapter 8 is about Doxiadis and

chapter 1 0 is about Le Corbusier's involvement in Baghdad. Chadirji was head of the Fifth Technical Section for Iraq from 1958 to 1 9 5 9 .

N0TES T0 PAGES

1 87

-1

89

2 59

25.

Lisa Licitra Ponti, Gio Ponti: The Complete Work, 1923-1978

(Cambridge, Mass.: M I T Press,

1990). T h e date mentioned for this project in The Complete Work is 1 9 5 5 , but this is erroneous, as confirmed by the Domus article of September i 9 6 0 (no. 370), which mentioned that "it is more than three years [ago] that G i o Ponti, his associates Fornatelli and Rosselli, together with Valtolina and DeH'Orto, have been called to design the new Development B o a r d Building to be erected in Baghdad." 26.

G. Ponti, " P r i m a e dopo la Pirelli," Domus, no. 379 ( 1 9 6 1 ) : 3 i f f .

27.

G. Ponti, "Progetto per l'edificio del Development Board in Baghdad," Domus, no. 370 (i960):

6 (English translation; errors in the original). 28.

Speech delivered to the Engineers and Architects of Baghdad, F L W A ms., FLWA 2 4 0 1 . 3 7 8 .

29.

Edward W. Said, Orientalism ( N e w York: Vintage B o o k s , 1979).

30.

For early contemporary Arab accounts o f Baghdad, see J o h n Alden Williams, ed., The Ab-

basid Revolution, vol. 27 o f The History of al-Tabari (Albany: State University of N e w York Press, x

985), i 5 4 _ 5 7 ; translation of M o h a m m e d ibn Janr al-Tabari, "Tarikh al-rusul wa al-muluk."

3 1.

Only eight buildings remain from the Abbasid period, which lasted five centuries before the

area was sacked by the Mongols. Fewer than thirty-four historic monuments remain that predate 1869, w h e n the Ottoman wali o f Baghdad began his modernization program. For a description o f contemporary Baghdad, see Ihsan Fethi, " C o n t e m p o r a r y Architecture in Baghdad: Its Roots and Transition," Process: Architecture (Tokyo) 58 (May 1985): 112—32. 32.

Roger Adebon interview with William Wesley Peters (who accompanied the Wrights to B a g h -

dad), 3 April 1984, FLWA. 33.

FLW, The Future of Architecture ( N e w York: Horizon Press, 1953), 5 4 - 5 7 .

34.

He was aware o f the Persian collections in the Oriental Institute in Chicago and in Philadel-

phia (the J o h n Frederick Lewis Collection) and had a Persian tile collection o f his own. O n e can only assume that he had read O m a r Khayyam's Rubaiyat and was aware of the symbolism of the nightingale and that to the Persian, poetry represented the sublime and the most spiritual of the arts. 35.

FLW, Future of Architecture, 5 6 - 5 7 .

36.

FLW to the Development Board, 24 January 1 9 5 7 , FLWA. H e mentioned in the same letter

his pleasure at the "building of opera especially since the building o f opera was my early training and I am now building a new theater for Dallas, Texas." T h e comment about the Orient was a reference to his experience in Japan. 37.

Development Board to FLW, 1 5 January 1 9 5 7 , signed by D. Jafar, Minister of Development,

FLWA. 38.

A copy of this report was deposited at the F L W A by N e i l Levine in 1993 after it was given

to him by his Harvard University student Thomas Doxiadis. 39. 260

|

NOTES

TO

PAGES

189-193

In his private correspondence he declared: " W e are o f f to I R A Q , invited by K i n g Faisal to

help spend the one billion four hundred eighty million public improvement fund. O u r assignment— opera on the Tigris and a world-resort in the Garden of Eden down at the tip o f Iraq. T h e king is a good ruler—wants the oil-increment to go to the people." F L W to Bettina Ray, 7 M a y 1 9 5 7 , FLWA. A n d again, with an inflated description of the commission: " W e are o f f to I R A Q — i n v i t e d by K i n g Faisal to help spend the one billion four hundred eighty million appropriation for public works. M y share I believe is the opera—(probably meaning civic-center and a world resort in the Garden of Eden) at the Southern tip o f Iraq." FLW to Fowler, M a y 1 9 5 7 , F L W A .

40.

W r i g h t spent t h e w e e k of 2 1 - 2 7 M a y in B a g h d a d , h a v i n g m a d e a r r a n g e m e n t s t o m e e t w i t h

A m e r y a n d t h e Jawdats t h r o u g h Frances Bovie ( N i m t o n ) . 41.

Transcript of a v i d e o interview c o n d u c t e d by Indira B e r n d t s o n and G r e g Williams w i t h William

Wesley Peters, 13 F e b r u a r y 1991, 3, FLWA. 42.

" M r . Lloyd W r i g h t in B a g h d a d , " Iraq Times, M a y 29, 1 9 5 7 .

43.

V i d e o i n t e r v i e w w i t h Peters, 3. Peters did n o t a t t e n d this final m e e t i n g b e t w e e n W r i g h t a n d

K i n g Faisal. Instead W r i g h t i n s t r u c t e d Peters t o go to Iran w i t h A m e r y t o "see w h y h e c o u l d n ' t get his palace built, that M r . W r i g h t had designed. It was largely a b i g house, b u t o n t h e drawings it said, 'Palace for N e z a m A m e r y . ' " For m o r e o n t h e A m e r y H o u s e , see below. A c c o r d i n g t o A m e r y , h e h a d invited t h e W r i g h t s and Peters to visit h i m in Iran, b u t Peters was t h e o n l y o n e w h o c o u l d m a k e t h e trip ( f r o m a u t h o r ' s i n t e r v i e w w i t h A m e r y in L o n d o n , M a r c h 1997). 44.

W h i l e h e had obviously t h o u g h t a b o u t (and h a d m e n t i o n e d in his p e r s o n a l c o r r e s p o n d e n c e )

a G a r d e n of E d e n resort c e n t e r p r i o r t o his visit to B a g h d a d , h e a t t r i b u t e d t h e selection o f t h e island site to his flight over t h e city. W r i g h t ' s a c c o u n t (see n o t e 45) indicates that h e saw t h e island o n his flight into B a g h d a d , w h e r e a s A m e r y r e m e m b e r s that w h e n W r i g h t was displeased w i t h t h e site originally p r o p o s e d , h e was given a plane t o fly over t h e city to f i n d a m o r e a p p r o p r i a t e site. 45.

F o r t h e full a c c o u n t in W r i g h t ' s words, see FLW, His Living Voice transcript, 16 J u n e 1 9 6 7 ,

5 1 - 5 2 , FLWA. 46.

Peters later recalled that W r i g h t started t h e B a g h d a d drawings in W i s c o n s i n , i m m e d i a t e l y u p o n

r e t u r n f r o m his trip. 47.

W h i l e t h e archival d o c u m e n t s d o n o t i n c l u d e t h e c o n t r a c t for t h e building, t h e drawings for

t h e P T T p r o j e c t w e r e a d v a n c e d t o a w o r k i n g d r a w i n g phase, c o n f i r m i n g that t h e b u i l d i n g was i n d e e d a s e c o n d c o m m i s s i o n . T h e Architectural Forum article " W r i g h t Designs f o r B a g h d a d " m e n t i o n e d this project, as did t h e Iraq Times (see n o t e 42). 48.

K a m a l A m i n a c c o m p a n i e d t h e W r i g h t s o n their visit t h r o u g h Cairo. H e eventually r e t u r n e d

to Taliesin Associates, t h e n later set u p his o w n practice in Scottsdale, A r i z o n a . T h e a u t h o r is i n d e b t e d t o h i m for all his i n f o r m a t i o n a n d assistance. 49.

Talk delivered to t h e Taliesin Fellowship, 23 J u n e 1 9 5 7 , transcript, 6—7, FLWA. W r i g h t did n o t

exactly c o m e at t h e tail e n d of things; his visit t o B a g h d a d p r e c e d e d Gropius's and Le C o r b u s i e r ' s visits b y m a n y m o n t h s . 50.

Talk delivered t o t h e Taliesin Fellowship, 16 J u n e 1 9 5 7 , transcript, 7, 8, FLWA.

51.

F L W ms., FLWA 2 4 0 1 . 3 7 8 , 3.

52.

F L W ms., FLWA 2 4 0 1 . 3 7 9 , EE, 3 - 4 .

53.

Ibid., 2.

54.

Ibid., 5 - 7 .

5 5.

" T o d a y instead of flood or invasion, B a g h d a d is t h r e a t e n e d by t h e increasing thousands o f m o -

t o r cars. ( T h e city n o w has 30,000 cars, six times as m a n y as ten years ago. M o s t are A m e r i c a n makes.) T h u s B a g h d a d is in danger, a n d I have h e r e h o p e d to see t h e M i d d l e East p u t first things first. . . . T h u s , fine buildings m a y b e built w i t h spirit and e n j o y e d w i t h o u t seeing t h e m flooded by acres of antipathetic m o t o r cars." Architectural Forum, M a y 1 9 5 8 , 9 1 . 56.

F L W ms., FLWA 2 4 0 1 . 3 7 9 , G G , 7.

57.

Ibid., 7 - 8 .

58.

F r o m W r i g h t ' s text s u b m i t t e d w i t h the drawings, Preface, 2, FLWA.

NOTES

TO

PAGES

193-199

|

261

59-

T h e o r i e n t a t i o n t o w a r d M e c c a a p p e a r s o n m o s t o f his d r a w i n g s , w i t h t h e o p e r a a n d t h e u n i -

versity m o s q u e b o t h o r i e n t e d t o M e c c a . 60.

F L W m s . , F L W A 2 4 0 1 . 3 7 9 , E E , 10.

61.

Ibid., JJ, 1 - 2 .

62.

Ibid., H H , 1.

63.

T h e e x a c t n u m b e r o f seats was n e v e r f i n a l i z e d . In o n e t e x t W r i g h t n o t e s 1 , 6 0 0 seats, w i t h a n

a d d i t i o n a l 7 , 5 0 0 seats possible. Ibid., 12. In a n o t h e r h e w r o t e , " T h e o p e r a is a b o u t 2 , 0 0 0 a n d t h e w h o l e t h i n g a b o u t 1 2 , 0 0 0 . " Talk d e l i v e r e d t o t h e T a l i e s i n F e l l o w s h i p , t r a n s c r i p t , 1 9 - 2 0 , F L W A . A plan f o r t h e g a r d e n level s h o w s 1 , 8 9 0 seats, w i t h a g r a n d total o f 8 , 8 0 0 seats possible. F L W m s . , FLWA 5 7 3 3 . 0 2 9 - 0 3 0 . 64.

S e e d o c . 5 7 3 2 . 0 0 1 , F L W A , r e p r o d u c e d in D r e x l e r , ed., Drawings of Wright,

54. T h e lattic d o m e

is also related t o t h e d o m e o f cast c o n c r e t e a n d lattice h e w a s d e s i g n i n g f o r t h e s a m e b u i l d i n g . 65.

F L W m s . , F L W A 2 4 0 1 . 3 7 9 , 3.

66.

Ibid., H H , 5 - 6 .

67.

D r e x l e r , ed., Drawings

68.

W r i g h t ' s c o n c e p t f o r this m u s e u m w a s r e l a t e d t o t h e gallery h e w a s d e s i g n i n g f o r t h e B a r n s -

of Wright,

160.

dall Estate in Los A n g e l e s , C a l i f o r n i a (doc. 5 4 2 8 . 0 0 6 , F L W A , r e p r o d u c e d in i b i d . , 156). W r i g h t m o d i f i e d t h e p l a n a n d e n l a r g e d it w i t h c i r c u l a r c o u r t s a l o n g t h e f r o n t a n d skylights t o h i g h l i g h t t h e g r a n d s c u l p t u r e s o n display. 69.

O t h e r p a r t s o f t h e B a g h d a d s c h e m e also r e a p p e a r e d in later designs. A smaller v e r s i o n o f t h e

o p e r a w i t h t h e c r e s c e n t arch r e v e r s e d in d i r e c t i o n ( d o c . 5 9 1 1 . 0 0 6 , F L W A , r e p r o d u c e d in i b i d . , 171) b e c a m e t h e 1 9 5 9 G r a d y G a m a g e M e m o r i a l A u d i t o r i u m . F o r a discussion a n d c o m p a r i s o n , see H e l m e r , " G a m a g e A u d i t o r i u m and the B a g h d a d Project." Originally, the opera plan was related t o t h e m u s i c b u i l d i n g f o r F l o r i d a S o u t h e r n C o l l e g e ( 1 9 4 3 ) ; d o c . 4 2 1 1 . 0 0 1 , F L W A , in D r e x l e r , ed., Drawings 70.

of Wright,

144.

F L W ms., F L W A 2 4 0 1 . 3 7 9 , II, 1. W r i g h t w a s critical o f t h e w o r k o f W e s t e r n a r c h i t e c t s in

B a g h d a d in g e n e r a l , b u t m a y h a v e w r i t t e n this s t a t e m e n t w i t h t h e k n o w l e d g e t h a t G r o p i u s h a d b e e n asked t o d e s i g n t h e university. W r i g h t w a s n o t c o m m i s s i o n e d t o w o r k o n t h e u n i v e r s i t y (as was p o i n t e d o u t in t h e 1958 Architectural 71.

Forum

article).

W r i g h t w a s already d e s i g n i n g a u n i v e r s i t y in t h e U n i t e d States, F l o r i d a S o u t h e r n U n i v e r s i t y ,

a n d h e h a d j u s t c o m p l e t e d a m u s e u m f o r t h e B a r n s d a l l Estate. W h i l e t h e u n i v e r s i t y c a m p u s h e p r o p o s e d w a s v e r y d i f f e r e n t , t h e m u s e u m w a s closely r e l a t e d t o t h e B a r n s d a l l M u s e u m . 72.

W r i g h t used the t e r m " c u r r i c u l u m " interchangeably w i t h "ziggurat." See FLW ms., FLWA

2 4 0 1 . 3 7 9 , II, 2 - 3 . 73.

T h i s w a s t h e first t i m e W r i g h t m e n t i o n e d c l i m a t e . L i v i n g in t h e s o u t h w e s t e r n U n i t e d States,

h e was v e r y f a m i l i a r w i t h a w a r m , a r i d c l i m a t e a n d d i d n o t use it as t h e o v e r w h e l m i n g d e s i g n p r i n ciple t h e w a y o t h e r W e s t e r n a r c h i t e c t s d i d . 262

I

NOTES

TO

PAGES

1

99-208

74

.

75.

F L W ms., F L W A 2 4 0 1 . 3 7 9 , II, 2 - 4 . A s e c t i o n o f W r i g h t ' s t y p e w r i t t e n t e x t a c c o m p a n y i n g t h e d r a w i n g s , m a r k e d " s e n t , " has b e e n

s t r u c k t h r o u g h , i n d i c a t i n g t h a t this p o r t i o n m a y n o t in fact h a v e b e e n s e n t (ibid.). 76.

A c c o r d i n g t o F a k r i B a k r , " W r i g h t w a s t o o a r r o g a n t , t o o g r a n d i o s e . T h e t i m e was n o t r i g h t

f o r that k i n d o f p r o j e c t . " U n l i k e W r i g h t , G r o p i u s s u r v i v e d t h e political e x i g e n c i e s t h a t befell Iraq. Although the coup occurred prior to completion of the project, TAC's contract had been arranged

with automatic payments; the architects thus continued to w o r k and presented their first phase to General Kassem. Harkness, ed., Gropius Archive: Work of the Architects Collaborative, 189. T h e Gropius project for Baghdad was widely publicized in architectural journals. See, for example, "Planning the University o f Baghdad," Architectural Record, February 1 9 6 1 , 1 0 8 - 2 2 ; and Casabella, no. 267 (September 1962). 77.

In the early decades of the twentieth century brick factories produced cast ornamental brick

of various dimensions for the construction of houses, especially for the well-to-do. 78.

T h e author would like to give a special thanks to Mr. A m e r y for sharing his story and draw-

ings, and to Mrs. Amery. Mr. A m e r y ' s recollections support the starting of the drawings for his house after the Baghdad trip, as the dates on the drawings themselves indicate. Interview with author, March 1 9 9 7 . 79.

A m e r y later included the open loggia wrapped around the courtyard in one of his o w n de-

signs. Many of the projects A m e r y designed in Iran were directly inspired by Frank Lloyd Wright. H e considered himself W r i g h t ' s — a n d after Wright's death, Taliesin's—representative in Iran. H e maintained close associations with Mrs. Wright and Taliesin for many years. 80.

T h e project was inspired by one o f Wright's own last palatial designs, one for M r . and Mrs.

Arthur Miller in 1 9 5 7 , and lasted several years (it was completed in 1 9 7 3 ) . O v e r time it grew into a complex of buildings, the central piece of which was an extravagant palatial dwelling complete with circular bedroom suites, a cinema, and a swimming pool in the living room. T h e c o m p o u n d also included an eighteen-hole golf course and numerous auxiliary buildings, from birdhouses to solitary retreats. William Wesley Peters was the designer, Mrs. Wright the interior designer, with Tom Casey (currently dean o f the Frank Lloyd Wright School) the project representative in Iran; Taliesin architects Frances and Stephen Nimton also spent several years in Iran working on the palace. See Effi Bantzeer, "Royalty's Exotic Residence," Progressive Architecture, J u n e 1 9 7 7 , 82—85; Arizona Living: Scottsdale Weekly, 2 9 j a n u a r y 1 9 7 1 ; W. W. Peters, "Taliesin in Tehran," Art in America, J u l y August 1969, 4 4 - 5 1 . 81.

Manfredo Tafuri and Francesco Dal Co, Modern Architecture, vol. 2 ( N e w York: Rizzoli, 1986),

328. 82.

Norris Kelly Smith, Frank Lloyd Wright: A Study in Architectural Content ( N e w York: American

Life Foundation, 1979), 1 7 2 .

NOTES

TO

PAGES

209-212

I

263

CONTRIBUTORS

A n t h o n y Alofsin is Martin Kermacy Centennial Professor of Architecture at the University of Texas at Austin. A professional designer and art historian, he has provided a new understanding of Wright's relationship to Europe, as seen in his Frank Lloyd Wright: The Lost Years, 191 0—1922 (1993). H e also was Consulting C u rator for " F r a n k Lloyd Wright, Architect," the major retrospective held at the M u s e u m of M o d e r n Art in 1994. His ongoing research investigates the nature of modernism, specifically as transferred f r o m E u r o p e to America, and its various expressions in Central Europe from 1867 to 1 9 3 3 . Maristella Casciato teaches architecture in the Department of Civil Engineering at the University of R o m e , Tor Vergata, and has taught at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. M u c h of her research has focused on Dutch modernist architects, and she is the author of numerous publications on D u d o k and on B i j v o e t and Duiker. Jean-Louis C o h e n is Professor at the Institute of Fine Arts, N e w York, and at the Ecole d'Architecture Paris-Villemin, as well as a prolific author. His works include Paris: A City in the Making (1989), Twentieth-Century Architecture and Urbanism (1990), Le Corbusier and the Mystique of the USSR

(1992), Scenes of the World to Come:

Eu-

ropean Architecture and the American Challenge, 1893—1960 (1995), and Russian Modernism: The Collections of the Getty Research Institute for the History of Art and the Humanities (1997). In 1998 he became Director of the Institut Français d'Architecture. Keith Eggener earned his Ph.D. from Stanford University and teaches American art and architectural history at the University of Missouri, Columbia. His articles on nineteenth- and twentieth-century Latin and N o r t h American architecture and art have appeared in Architectura, Winterthur Portfolio, American Art, Source, and other publications. A t present he is completing a b o o k on Luis Barragán's Jardines del Pedregal in M e x i c o City and conducting research on architecture and melancholia. M i n a Marefat is an architect and architectural historian with Design Research, a private agency in Washington, D.C., dedicated to research in architecture and

cultural heritage. As the former Architectural Education Director at the Aga Khan Trust and the former Senior Architectural Historian at the National Museum of American History, she designed many programs to promote public and professional understanding of architecture. She is a graduate of Tehran University and earned her Ph.D. from M I T with a dissertation focused on architecture in Tehran between the world wars. Andrew Saint is Professor in the Department of Architecture, Cambridge U n i versity. Formerly, he was the chief historian with the London Division of English Heritage and for many years the architectural editor of the Survey of London. His books include Richard Norman Shaw (1976), The Image of the Architect (1983), and Towards a Social Architecture (1987). He is the coauthor of many other works and a Fellow of the Royal Insitute of British Architects. Alberto Sartori is a practicing architect in Santiago and has taught at the Architecture School at the University of Chile, where he studied in the 1950s. He has also taught at universities in Italy, South Africa, and the United States and has traveled frequently to the U.S. to visit the works of Frank Lloyd Wright. In his work, which ranges from domestic projects to large sports arenas, he always remains true to his belief in the principles of organic architecture. Margo Stipe is Registrar at the Frank Lloyd Wright Archives in Scottsdale, Arizona. She plays a major role in the production of the Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation's publications and exhibitions. She earned an M.A. in art history from the University of Michigan, has lived and worked in Japan, and is fluent in Japanese. Mariette van Stralen is an independent scholar in the Netherlands. Her research focuses on the domestic architecture of the Dutch Modern Movement, and specifically on H. Th. Wijdeveld. Her publications include The Country Houses of H. Th. Wijdeveld (1994).

2 6 6

|

CONTRIBUTORS

Bruno Zevi was born in Rome in 1 9 1 8 and lived and studied there until he left Italy, in 1939, for political reasons. He continued his studies at the Architectural Association in London and at the Harvard Graduate School of Design, then returned to Italy in 1943 to fight in the antifascist underground. He subsequently was appointed Professor of Architectural History in Venice and later in Rome, where he taught until 1979. He was the foremost proponent of the architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright in the postwar period, and his publications include the seminal Towards an Organic Architecture, Frank Lloyd Wright, and numerous other monographs. He is editor of the journal Architettura, cronache e storia.

1 . 7 , i-9 — 1 . 1 2 , 1 . 1 4 , 2 . 1 , 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.8, 2 . 1 2 , 2 . 1 4 , 3.4, 3.6, 3 . 1 1 , 3 . 1 6 , 3 . 1 7 , 4.7, 4.9, 4 . 1 0 , 5.5, 5.6, 7.3, 7.11, 9 . 1 0 , 9.11

C o u r t e s y T h e Frank Lloyd W r i g h t Archives,

Scottsdale, A Z 1 . 1 5 , 3.8, 3 . 1 3 , 8.5, 8.11, 10.1, 1 0 . 2 , 1 0 . 5 - 1 0 . 1 5

C o p y r i g h t © 1998 T h e F r a n k Lloyd

W r i g h t F o u n d a t i o n , Scottsdale, A Z 1-5, 3.1—3.3, 3-5, 3 . 1 0 , 3 . 1 2 , 3 . 1 4 , 3 . 1 5

Courtesy Nederlands Architectuurinstituut,

R o t t e r d a m , and R e t i n a 2.5

C o u r t e s y Jos Biviano

2.7

C o u r t e s y T h e Frank Lloyd W r i g h t F o u n d a t i o n , Scottsdale, A r i z o n a , and Arata Endo

2.11, 2 . 1 3 , 2 . 1 5 2.16 3.7

Copyright Shozo Uchii

C o p y r i g h t Mitsui N o r i n C o u r t e s y N e d e r l a n d s Fotoarchief, C o p y r i g h t B e r n a r d F. Eilers

4.1—4.6,4.8

Courtesy B r u n o Zevi

5.1, 5.4

C o u r t e s y Ragghianti Archive, Archivio " s e l e A r t e , " F l o r e n c e

5.7, 5.8

C o p y r i g h t Rizzoli/Electa, N e w York

5.9, 5 . 1 0 5.11, 5 . 1 2

C o u r t e s y S a m o n a Archive, R o m e C o u r t e s y Figini and Pollini Archive, Milan, and M A R T , R o v e r e t o

6.1—6.6, 6 . 8 - 6 . 1 4 7.2

Courtesy Jean-Louis C o h e n

C o p y r i g h t M a r t i n Charles

7.4, 7.5

C o p y r i g h t Felicity A s h b e e

7.6

C o p y r i g h t G u i l d o f H a n d i c r a f t Trust

7.7

Copyright Greater London Record Office

7.8-7.10 7.12

7.13, 7.14 7.15 7.16 8.3

C o p y r i g h t English H e r i t a g e

Copyright Richard M a c C o r m a c C o p y r i g h t Lucinda L a m b t o n / A r c a i d Courtesy H u g o Gaggero

8.6,8.7 8.8

Copyright E M A P Group

C o p y r i g h t E M A P G r o u p , C o u r t e s y Library o f t h e Architectural Press

C o u r t e s y Sepp M i c h a e l i

Courtesy Enrique Browne

9.2

Copyright 1998 Artists Rights Society (ARS), N e w York/ADAGP, Paris/FLC

9.8

Courtesy Chicago Historical Society

9.9

Copyright 1998 Center for Creative Photography, The University of Arizona Foundation

2 6 8

I

PHOTO

CREDITS

10.3

Courtesy Rifat Chadirji and Ellen and Nizar Jawdat

10.4

Courtesy Kamal Amin

I

N

D

E

X

Italic page numbers denote illustrations.

Aalto, Alvar, 39, 93, 2361135, 2591114; Aalborg (Denmark) museum, 189; Baghdad art museum, 188, 189, 206;

See also Latin America; Wright, Frank American City Planning Institute, 69

on Metron cover, 81 ; Revel (Estonia)

"American civilization," Prévost on, 117—18

museum, 189; Shiraz (Iran) museum,

Americanism: British, 123; European notion

189

Arabian Nights, and Wright's Baghdad plans, 23, 184, 1 9 0 - 9 2 , 196, 1 9 9 - 2 0 1 , 208

Lloyd—works

of, 20, 100; French, 20, 120; Italians and,

Arana, Mariano, Arquitectura renovadora en Montevideo, 1915—1940,

149

archetypes: Wright and, 10, 3 1 , 2 0 1 . See also primitivism

Abbasids, Baghdad, 1 9 1 , 196, 2 1 2 , 26on3 1

7 9 - 8 3 , 234nni9,2o; Russian, 20, 1 0 1 ,

Architects'Journal,

Abdul Ilah, Crown Prince, 23, 208

109, 1 1 0 - 1 1 , 120

Architectural Association (AA), London, 130,

abstraction: in Dutch architecture, 48; in "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect" exhibition, 1 4 ; in Japanese architecture, 36— 38; O ' G o r m a n and, 1 7 5 , 180; Wright's

American Luxfer Prism project (Wright), 133

1 3 3 , 136,

1 3 3 , 139—40

137

Architectural Forum, 1 ¡8,

American Radiator Building, N e w York City, 152

159, 183, 184,

224n43 architectural press, 1; Boston, 5; Britain, 1 2 3 ,

obsession with, 9

Amerikaansche reisherinneringen (Reminiscences

Aburto, Alvaro, 167, 170

of an American journey), Berlage, 45,

78, 2 2 8 n n 2 3 , 3 i ; France, 112,

Académie Européenne Méditerranée, 61

226n2

1 1 7 , 1 1 8 - 1 9 , 120, 2 4 5 - 4 7 ; Germany,

1 3 3 , 134, 136, 139—40, 143; Dutch, 49, 1 1 3 , 1 ¡3,

Addams.Jane, 123

Das amerikanische Haus (Vogel), 100, 101

1 1 2 ; Italy, 19, 67, 75, 78, 79, 2 3 3 - 4 0 ;

Adler, Dankmar, 27, 1 3 7 , 1 4 3 ; Charnley

Amersfoort, De Wächter (Wijdeveld), 57

Mexican, 169, 170, 1 7 7 - 7 8 , 2 5 7 ^ 9 ;

Amery, Nezam, 1 9 3 - 9 4 , 208—9, 26inn40,43,

Russia, 1 0 1 , 106, 107, 109, 1 1 0 ; U.S.,

House, Chicago (Wright for Adler and Sullivan), 122, 122; Chicago Auditorium,

263 n79; "Pearl Palace" (Tehran), 2 1 1 ,

5, 1 1 , i n , 1 2 2 - 2 3 . See also Architectural

1 3 7 , 200

263n8o; Tehran house (Wright), 186,

Forum; Metron; publications; Wendingen

Adler, Leo, 2 1 7 m 5

2 0 9 - 1 1 , 210,

26in43

journal

Amin, Kamal, 194, 26in48

Architectural Press, London, 1 3 9 - 4 0 , 140

the Compañía Maderera Malva pavilion

Amin, Mohamad and Mrs. Mohamad, 195

Architectural Record, 1 1 , i l l , 170

(Smith Solar), 1 5 1

Amsterdam: National Park (Wijdeveld), 57,

Architectural Review (Boston), 5

Agricultural and Industrial Exposition for

Ahmedabad, India, Sarabhai Calico Mills Store (Wright), 22, 23

5 7 ; State Academy design (Duiker and Bijvoet), 52. See also Stedelijk Museum

architecture: Arts and Crafts movement, 2 0 - 2 1 , 75, 1 2 2 - 2 7 ; colleges of, 6 0 - 6 3 ;

Albini, Franco, 92

Amsterdam School, 20, 46, 5 1 , 52

Dâvila definition, 1 5 3 ; delight in, 1 1 ;

Alegría, Ricardo, 1 5 2

Anahuacalli Museum (Rivera and O'Gorman),

Hindu, 192; Japanese postwar, 3 5 - 4 3 ;

Alexander, Christopher, 144

Mexico City, 178, 1 78, 179—80

Latin American, 148; Mexican regional,

Alofsin, Anthony, 1 - 2 3 , 31

Ando, Tadao, 39

1 7 5 , 180; "universal standards of design,"

Ambaz, Emilio, 159

Anglo-American Society, 130—31

3 1 , 1 6 4 - 6 5 . See also American archi-

American Academy, Rome, 66, 74

"Les Années 3 0 " exhibition (Musée National

tecture; Beaux-Arts tradition; housing;

American Architect and Building News, 122

des Monuments Français, 1997), Paris, 120

industrial architecture; influence; Inter-

Ansderegg, Ernest E., 16

national Style; modernism; organic archi-

architects and, 5, 45—46; Iofan on, 109;

anti-Semitism, of Wright's Italian critics, 83

tecture; planning; traditional architecture;

Prague Modern Gallery exhibition, 5,

APAO. See Associazione per l'Architettura

American architecture: archetypal, 3 1 ; Dutch

2 i 6 n 6 ; pre-Columbian, 9, 27, 3 1 , 147, 148, 1 7 7 , 2 5 2 m ; Wright back in favor in, 1 3 1 ; Wright marginal in, 143, 2 1 7 i 8 n 2 i ; and Wright's Imperial Hotel, 30.

Organica Aprile, Nello, Fosse Ardeatine Memorial (Rome), 68 Arab architecture, Wright and, 192

Wright, Frank Lloyd—works Architecture (Lurçat), 1 1 6 L'architecture aux Etats-Unis: Preuve de la force d'expansion du génie français (Architecture in the United States: Proof of the

I

26 9

L'architecture aux Etats-Unis

(continued)

C h i c a g o visits, 1 2 3 - 2 4 , 1 2 5 , 1 2 7 ;

2 0 3 , 2 1 1 —12; m u s e u m f o r M e s o p o t a m i a n

expansive p o w e r o f French genius),

C h i p p i n g C a m p d e n (Cotswolds), 1 2 8 ,

sculpture (Wright), 202,

Gréber, 1 1 1

128;

opera house (Wright), 1 8 7 , 189—94, J 97>

G u i l d o f Handicraft, 1 2 3 , 1 2 7 , 1 2 8 ;

Architecture C l u b , C h i c a g o , 148

introduction to Frank Lloyd

L'Architecture

Ausgeführte Bauten, 26—27,

d'aujourd'hui,

117, 118

L'Architecture française, 1 1 8 — 1 9 ,

1 1

9

2 2 2 m 9; mother, 128;

" T h e Architecture o f the U . S . A . " exhibition vivante, 112,

113, ] 13, 117

L'architettura:

cronache e storia, 7 $

I

198,

31»

208,212, 213,

Survey of London, 133;

W r i g h t ' s quarrel

I94~95>

2 6 1 1 1 4 4 ; post office/Post

and Telegraph B u i l d i n g (Wright), 1 9 3 , 1 9 4 , 2 0 7 - 8 , 207,

2 6 i n 4 7 ; H a r u n al-

Rashid m o n u m e n t (Wright), 202,

visits, 2 1 , 1 2 7 - 2 9 , 1 3 3

2 1 3 ; sports facility (Le Corbusier), 1 8 9 ,

Architettura e Arti Decorative, 78, 2 3 3 m 1

Ashbee, Janet, 1 2 7 , 128, Asplund, E r i k Gunnar, 81

203,

2 5 9 n 2 4 ; Thartar D a m , 1 9 4 ; W r i g h t ' s

129

trip, 193—95, 2 6 i n n 4 0 , 4 9 B a g h d a d University: Gropius, 1 8 6 , 1 8 8 , 1 8 9 ,

Associazione per l'Architettura Organica

Architecture), 79—80

2 0 0 - 2 0 1 , 201,

2 6 o n n 3 6 , 3 9 , 2 6 2 n n 6 3 , 6 9 ; P i g Island,

with, 2 0 - 2 1 , 129, 2 2 2 n i 9 ; W r i g h t ' s

Architettura e democrazia ( W r i g h t ' s

Modem

9>

2 4 8 n i 2 ; and W r i g h t Autobiography, W r i g h t ' s photo o f , ¡25;

(1944), Moscow, i 11 L'Architecture

Wright: I2

203—5, 2 6 2 n 6 8 ;

(APAO)/Association for O r g a n i c A r c h i -

2 0 6 , 2 5 9 1 1 1 6 , 262TÌJ0;

americana riflessa nei caratteri dei suoi edifici

tecture, 1 9 , 6 7 , 9 5 , 2 3 5 ; " D e c l a r a t i o n

2 0 6 - 7 , 207,

(Architecture in A m e r i c a : N o r t h A m e r -

o f Principles," 80—82; and Masieri

Bakr, Fakri, 1 89,

ican civilization reflected in the character

M e m o r i a l , 90; S a m o n ä , 84, 2 3 5 ^ 0 ,

Banca Cattolica o f Tarvisio (Masieri), Friuli,

L'architettura in America: La civiltà nord-

o f its buildings), Carbonara, 79, 2 3 4 n 2 i Architettura organica: L'architettura della democrazia (Wright's An Organic Architecture), 80

2 3 9 n 5 9 ; Z e v i , 1 9 , 6 7 , 80, 2 3 5 - 3 6

B a n f i , Belgiojoso, Peresutti, and R o g e r s

Atalaya A p a r t m e n t B u i l d i n g (Stempel),

( B B P R ) , 9 2 ; M o n u m e n t to the D e a d in the Concentration C a m p s in G e r m a n y

Panama City, 1 6 6 Atkinson, R . Fello,

Argan, G i u l i o Carlo, " I n t r o d u z i o n e a

Atl, Dr. (Gerardo Murillo), 1 7 9

(Milan), 69, 69

140

B a n h a m , Reyner, 1 4 3 , 1 4 5 ; Theory and Design in the First Machine Age,

Ausgeführte Bauten und Entwürfe von Frank

W r i g h t , " 83, 2 3 7 n 4 0 Arizona: " F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t and Japanese A r t " exhibition (Phoenix, 1925), 2 2 i n i 4 ;

organica (Libel against organic architec-

Wasmuth folios Australia, B u r l e y G r i f f i n design ( 1 9 1 1 ) , 1 5 1

1 6 1 ; State Capital (Wright), 2 0 1 . See also

Austria, 7 , 1 6 , 17—18. See also V i e n n a

Taliesin West

Autobiography

f o r art department (Wright), 204, Arkhitektura

sovremennogo Zapada

205

(Modern

Western architecture), A r k i n , 1 0 7 , Arkhitektura

SSSR,

106,

107, 109,

A r k i n , D a v i d , 1 1 0 ; Arkhitektura Zapada

log

log

sovremennogo

( M o d e r n Western architecture),

1 0 7 , 1 0 9 , 10g;

ture), 83, 2 3 7 n 3 8 Barnsdall H o u s e (Wright), Los Angeles, 7 , 1 1 , 18

(Wright), 2 6 , 1 3 3 , 1 4 5

automobile, planning and, 1 0 5 , 1 1 0 — 1 1 , 164; Baghdad, 2 0 7 , 2 1 2 , 2 6 1 1 1 5 5

baroque: Latin A m e r i c a , 1 4 8 ; Venice, 73 Barragán, Luis, 2 1 , 1 6 6 , 1 7 0 - 7 2 , 1 7 9 - 8 3 ,

avant-garde: Britain, 1 3 0 ; Le C o r b u s i e r and,

2 5 3 m 6 ; C i u d a d Universitaria/University

2 1 ; Manes G r o u p , 5; before 1 9 2 2 , 1 1 ;

City, 1 7 0 - 7 2 , 1 7 7 , 2 5 4 n i 9 ; Creixell

ornament as decadent to, 1 4 ; Russia, 1 0 1 ,

w o r k with, 1 6 8 , 169,

105—6, 109; W r i g h t ' s influence on, 2,

Fuentes (El Pedregal), 1 8 1 - 8 2 ,

1 0 1 . See also m o d e r n i s m

Efrain G o n z á l e z Luna H o u s e (Guadala-

Iskusstvo bytovoi veshchi

( T h e art o f the everyday object), 1 0 7

143

Bargelli ni, Piero, Libello contro l'architettura

Lloyd Wright, 2, 1 3 1 , 2457153. See also

San M a r c o s - i n - t h e - D e s e r t (Wright), 1 1 ,

A r i z o n a State University, T e m p e , art gallery

2621176

240n73

Astengo, Giovanni, 92, 2 3 4 - 3 5 ^ 2 5

Arets, W i e l , 6$

Wright, 2 1 - 2 3 ,

212, 262n70

254n23; 140 181;

jara), 168; and N e u t r a , 1 7 9 , 1 8 1 , 2 5 7 1 1 5 9 ; Babylon, 184, 191

Parque Residencial Jardines del Pedregal

Aroztegui, Ildefonso, 1 4 9

Badovici, Jean, 1 1 3 , 1 1 7 , 245—46nn6o,6i,62

subdivision, 1 7 0 - 7 2 , 171,

Arquitectura Mexico,

B a g h d a d , 2 1 - 2 3 , 1 8 4 - 2 1 3 , 2 5 7 - 6 3 ; Abbasid

1 8 2 , 2 5 4 1 1 1 1 1 9 , 2 1 ; Plaza M e l c h o r O c a m -

169, 170, 2 5 7 ^ 9

Arquitectura renovadora en Montevideo, ¡940

1915—

(Arana and Garabelli), 1 4 9

" T h e A r t and C r a f t o f the M a c h i n e " (Wright), 1 0 7 , 1 2 4 , 1 2 6 - 2 7 Artes de Mexico,

183

buildings/al-Mansur plan, 1 9 1 , 1 9 6 , 2 1 2 ,

181,

p o ( M e x i c o City), 1 6 8 , 169; Prieto L ó pez houses, 1 7 0 ; Pritzker Prize, 1 8 3

2 6 0 1 1 3 1 ; art gallery (Wright), 2 0 3 - 5 , 204;

179-83,

art m u s e u m (Aalto), 1 8 8 , 1 8 9 , 206;

bridges (Wright), 1 9 9 - 2 0 0 ; cultural

Barta, R o g e r , 1 8 0 Basaldella, M i r k o , Fosse Ardeatine M e m o r i a l

center (Wright), 2 1 - 2 3 , 1 9 3 , 1 9 4 , 1 9 6 -

Artigas, J u a n Bautista Vilanova, 1 4 8 - 4 9

2 0 5 , 198,

2 1 2 ; esplanade (Wright), 199—

A r t Institute (Chicago): Hiroshige prints e x -

200, 2 0 5 ; Garden o f E d e n a (Wright), 2 0 3 ;

hibition (1906), 26; Imperial Hotel aerial

geography/climate, 1 9 1 , 208, 2Ö2n73;

perspective ( 1 9 1 4 ) , 2 2 i n i 3 ; W r i g h t lec-

G r a n d Bazaar (Wright), 1 9 9 , 2 0 5 ,

ture (1908), 26

205;

sculptures (Rome), 68 Bauhaus, 1 1 , 6 3 ,

l

S 1 5 7 ; "new," 87-88.

See also Gropius, Walter; Mies van der Rohe, Ludwig Bayón, Damián, 179

Greater B a g h d a d plan (Wright), 1 85;

B B C , W r i g h t ' s interview, 1 4 0

art n o u v e a u , 1 0 0

history, 1 8 6 , 1 9 1 , 1 9 6 , 2 1 2 ; Isle o f E d e n a

B B P R . See B a n f i , B e l g i o j o s o , Peresutti, and

Arts and Crafts m o v e m e n t , 20—21, 7 5 ,

(Wright), 1 9 6 - 9 7 , 1 9 7 , 198,

199-200,

2 0 3 - 5 , 2 1 1 ; Master Plan ( M i n o p r i o ,

122-27 A r t Workers' G u i l d , 1 3 3

Spencely, and Macfarlane), 1 8 7 , 187,

Arup, Ove,

1 9 4 , 1 9 9 , 2 5 8 n i 2 ; M e m o r i a l Garden o f

140

Ashbee, Charles R o b e r t , 121—33 passim;

A d a m and E v e (Wright), 198—99,

193, 198,

Rogers B e a r R u n , Pennsylvania. See Fallingwater House Beaudouin, Eugène, 1 1 7 B e a u x - A r t s tradition: British and A m e r i c a n ,

capitalism: E n g l i s h / A m e r i c a n views, 1 2 6 ;

1 3 1 , 1 4 3 ; French and A m e r i c a n , 66,

bridges (Wright), 1 9 9 - 2 0 0

1 1 1 — 1 2 , 1 2 0 ; Le C o r b u s i e r on W r i g h t

Britain. See Great Britain

O ' G o r m a n and, 1 8 0 , 2 5 ó n 5 5 ; and

in, 2 4 4 U 4 I

B r i v i o , Peppo, 1 6

Russia, W r i g h t and, 2 0 , 1 0 7 , 1 0 9 , 1 1 1 ,

B e h n e , A d o l f , 16; Der moderne I

Broadacre C i t y model, 56, 57—59; British

Zweckbau,

and, 1 3 1 ; Koolhaas and, 65; L e C o r -

1-12

Behrens, Peter, 1 2 , 1 6 , 1 1 2 , 2 i ( j n 4 0 , 2 4 5 n 4 9

busier's Ville Radieuse c o m p a r e d with

B e i r u t stadium, French-designed, 1 8 9

(Carbonara), 2 3 4 n 2 i ; M e x i c a n architects

B e l g i o j o s , L u d o v i c o B a r b i a n o di, 92; M o n u -

120, 2 4 2 n i 7 El Caracol de los Leones (Villaroel), Santiago, Chile, 1 5 4 - 5 7 ,

'55

Carbonara, Pasquale, L'architettura in America:

and, 168—69, 1 76; Parisians and, 1 2 0 ;

La civiltà nord-americana rißessa nei caratteri

ment to the D e a d in the Concentration

Russians and, 1 0 5 , 1 0 9 , 1 1 0 , 110;

dei suoi edifìci (Architecture in A m e r i c a :

C a m p s in G e r m a n y (Milan), 69, 69

Years o f Living A r c h i t e c t u r e " exhibition,

N o r t h A m e r i c a n civilization reflected

i g , 70, 7 7 , 86, 87, 1 / 6 ; W r i g h t ' s M i d d l e

in the character o f its buildings), 79,

Berlage, H e n d r i k Petrus, 1 1 2 , 2 4 ^ 4 9 ; Amerikaansche

reisherinneringen

(Reminis-

"Sixty

Eastern plans and, 2 3 , 1 8 4

234n2i

cences o f an A m e r i c a n j o u r n e y ) , 4 5 ,

B r o o k s , Van W y c k , 13 1

2 2 6 n 2 ; G e m e e n t e n m u s e u m ( T h e Hague),

B r o w n e , E n r i q u e , 1 5 9 ; Casas Parrón (Santi-

2 2 6 n 3 ; and H a g u e S c h o o l , 5 1 ; as " N e s -

ago), 158,

Cardelli, A l d o , Fosse Ardeatine M e m o r i a l

159

(Rome), 68 Caribbean, 166

t o r " o f m o d e r n D u t c h architecture, 45;

B r u n n e r , A r n o l d William, 1 5 1

C a r l o n i , Tita, 1 6

O u d factory design and, 49; and sachlich

Brusatin, Manlio, 92, 9 5 , 2 3 8 ^ 9

Carter, E . J . (Bobby), 1 3 4 , 1 3 5

plan, 1 1 ; U.S. trip ( 1 9 1 1 ) , 6, 4 5 , 1 0 0 ,

brutalists, British, 1 4 6

Casabella, 6 7 , 7 8 , 79, 2 3 3 m 1

2 i 7 n i 3 ; Wils w o r k i n g for, 50; on W r i g h t

B r y n m a w r R u b b e r Factory, Wales, 1 3 7

Casa del Fascio (Terragni), C o m o , 66—67

as romantic, 2 2 6 n 9 ; W r i g h t ' s ideas dis-

B u d d h i s m , "mutability," 38

Casa de Piedra (Ravazzani), Laguna de Sauce,

seminated by, 6, 1 6 , 45

B u f f a l o : William R . Heath H o u s e (Wright), 1 3 3 ; D a r w i n M a r t i n H o u s e (Wright), 6,

Berlin: Prussian A c a d e m y o f Fine Arts's " F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t , A r c h i t e c t " e x h i -

2 3 3 n 12. See also Larkin C o m p a n y A d -

bition ( 1 9 3 1 ) , 1 4 - 1 5 , '4', supposed

ministration B u i l d i n g (Wright)

W r i g h t exhibition ( 1 9 1 0 ) , 3, 4, 1 3 ;

The Builder,

Wasmuth Verlag, 2—4

Bunin, Andrei, 1 1 0

Berliner Tageblatt, 217n

15

13 6

B i j v o e t , B e r n a r d , 51—52; State A c a d e m y

C h u r c h (London), 1 4 1 ,

Casciato, Maristella, 1 9 , 7 6 - 9 9 , 2 2 g n 3 4

Frank

Bless, Frits, 2 2 6 n i o

Lloyd Wright m o n o g r a p h , 1 1 5 — 1 6 ,

Bloc, André, 1 1 7

2 i 9 n 4 9 ; " L e s maitres de l'architecture

B l o e m e n d a a l , E n d y m i o n country house, 5 3 ,

c o n t e m p o r a i n e " (Masters o f c o n t e m p o -

ii¡,

rary architecture), 1 1 5 - 1 6

54

Cairo, W r i g h t in, 1 9 4 - 9 5 , ' 9 5 , 2 6 i n 4 8

Boesiger, Willi, 1 1 6

Calcaprin, G i n o , 2 3 4 n 2 5 , 2 3 5 n 2 7 ; Fosse

B o f i l l , Ricardo, 75

158,

159

141

Cahiers d'art, 1 1 5 - 1 6 , 1 1 7 , 2 4 5 - 4 7 ;

Blake, Peter, 1 3 4 , 2 i 8 n 3 7

'56, 157 Casas Parrón (Browne), Santiago, C h i l e ,

C a c h e m a i l l e - D a y , N u g e n t F., St. M a r y ' s

design (Amsterdam), 52

1 60

'54 Casa Habitación (Michaeli), Santiago, C h i l e ,

(1911), 151

Bettini, Sergio, 7 4 , 90, 2 4 0 n 6 8

150

Casa G a g g e r o (Gaggero), Santiago, C h i l e ,

B u r l e y G r i f f i n , Walter, 1 5 4 ; C a n b e r r a design

B e t a n c o u r t , Walter, 1 6 6

Punta del Este, Uruguay, 1 5 0 ,

Casa Figueroa (Sartori), Santiago, C h i l e , 1 5 9 ,

Borgheresi, H o r a c i o , 1 5 4

Ardeatine M e m o r i a l (Rome), 68

B o r r o m i n i , Francesco, 7 4

California: Barragán lecture (Coronado),

Case Study houses, 1 4 3 Castellazzi, M . , R o m e Railway Station, 68 Castex, J e a n , 1 2 0 Catholicism, o f Italians, 7 3 , 83, 2 3 3 n i 3 C a t h o l i c University (Chile), Architecture School, 1 5 3 - 5 4 , 2 5 i m o Cavroix

Villa (Mallet-Stevens), C r o i x , 1 1 4 ,

115 C e c c h i , Emilio, 2 3 4 m 9 Cederna, Antonio, 9 0 - 9 2

Borthwick Cheney, Mamah, 76, 127

1 8 0 ; British architects, 1 4 3 ; C h i l e a n

C e n t e r for Architects, M o s c o w , n o ,

B o s t o n : Spaulding art collection, 2 6 , 2 2 1 m 1 .

geographical similarities, 1 5 2 ; Hanna

Central A m e r i c a , 1 6 6 , 1 7 6 . See also M e x i c o

H o u s e / H o n e y c o m b House, Palo Alto

C e n t r e for Land U s e and Built F o r m ,

See also Harvard University B o t t o n i , Piero, 2 3 8 ^ 5

(Wright), 158,

B o u r g e o i s , Victor, 1 0 7

works (general), 1 0 5 , 1 1 6 , 1 4 2 , 209. See

C e r n y , Frantisek, 1 6

also Los Angeles; San Francisco

Cetto, M a x , 2 1 , 1 6 6 , 1 7 0 , 1 7 2 , 1 8 3 ; Creixell

Bouwkundig

weekblad, 63—64

B o z a , Christian, s u m m e r house (Los Vilos), 157 Brazil, 1 4 8 - 4 9 ; Ministry o f Education and Public Health, 1 4 8 ; W r i g h t ' s visit, 2 1 , 1 4 8 - 4 9 , 14g,

2 2 o n 5 o ; W r i g h t vs. Le

Corbusier, 2 1 , 148

Fuentes (El Pedregal), 1 8 1 - 8 2 ,

C a m b e r l e y (Surrey), D o d g e - d e s i g n e d house,

Hotel San J o s é Purüa (Michoacän),

142 and Built F o r m , 1 4 4 ; H o d g k i n s o n , 1 4 6

4>

248ni2 B r i d e o f D e n m a r k , L o n d o n , 139—40,

w o r k with, 1 6 8 , 1 69, 2 5 4 n 2 3 ; 1 4 0

C a l v i n o , Italo, 2 3 4 n 2 0

C a m p d e n , A s h b e e G u i l d o f Handicraft, 1 2 8 , I2

128 C a n b e r r a , Australia, B u r l e y G r i f f i n design

140

Cambridge, 144

Calini, Leo, R o m e Railway Station, 68

C a m b r i d g e , England: C e n t r e for Land Use

B r e w e r , C e c i l , 1 2 3 , 2 4 8 n n ; M a r y Ward Settlement (London), 1 2 2 - 2 3 ,

159, 247n67; Wright's

111

(1911), 151

172,

181;

1 7 3 ; and K a h n H o u s e , 1 7 2 , 1 8 1 ;

with N e u t r a , 1 7 2 , 2 5 4 M 2 ; Plaza M e l c h o r O c a m p o ( M e x i c o City), 1 6 8 , 16g C h a d i r j i , Rifat, 2 5 9 n n i 4 , 2 4 Chalabi, A b d u l Jabbar, 1 8 9 Challus villas ( T A A ) , 2 1 1

C h a n d l e r , A l e x a n d e r , 161

C o h e n , J e a n - L o u i s , 2 0 , 100—120

Charnley H o u s e ( W r i g h t for Adler and

c o l d war, 111

Sullivan), C h i c a g o , 122, 122 La C h a u x - d e - F o n d s h o m e (Le C o r b u s i e r ) ,

C u b i s m , 8 - 9 , 117; D u t c h architects, 4 9 - 5 0 , 51, 2 2 8 n 3 0 ; Italian a r c h i t e c t s a n d , 7 8 - 7 9 Cuicuilco, 178-79

c o l l e c t i v i s m : British a n d , 20—21, 129, 143; Le C o r b u s i e r a n d , 2 0 ; W r i g h t ' s

C u r a n u r i n Restaurant (Fernández), Curacaví,

i n d i v i d u a l i s m vs., 2 0 - 2 1 , 79, 129

112-13

157

C h e n e y , E d w i n , 127

colleges, a r c h i t e c t u r e , 60—63

C u z c o , P e r u , cathedrals, 148

C h e n e y , M a m a h B o r t h w i c k , 7 6 , 127

c o l o n i a l o r i e n t a l i s m , eclectic, 212

Czechoslovakia: architects influenced by

C h i c a g o , 1; A r c h i t e c t u r e C l u b , 148; Arts a n d

c o l o n i z a t i o n : M e x i c a n , 170, 180; S o u t h

C r a f t s m o v e m e n t , 123—24, 12$, 126; A s h b e e visits, 1 2 3 - 2 4 , 1 2 5 , 127; C h a r n ley H o u s e ( W r i g h t f o r A d l e r a n d S u l livan), 122, 12 2 \ C h i c a g o A u d i t o r i u m ( A d l e r a n d Sullivan), 137, 2 0 0 ; R o b e r t W . E v a n s H o u s e ( W r i g h t ) , 144; H u l l H o u s e , 1 2 3 - 2 4 , 125, 126—27, 2491121; T h e "Illinois'VMile High Project (Wright), ¡ 8 , 59, 6 4 - 6 5 , 2 2 y n 4 i ; I n d u s t r i a l A r t

W r i g h t , 7, 1 6 - 1 8 ; G e r m a n m o v e i n t o ( I 9 3 9 ) , 130; m o d e r n i s m , 5, 16—18;

American, 147-48, 2 5 i n 2

p u b l i c a t i o n s o n W r i g h t , 5. See also

C o l u m b u s M e m o r i a l (Brazil), d e s i g n

Prague

c o m p e t i t i o n , 2 1 , 148 C o m m u n i s t P a r t y : Italy, 84; Russia, 106; van 't H o f f , 48

D a a l e n B e r g c o m p l e x (Wils), T h e H a g u e , 228n30

c o m m u n i t y p l a n n i n g , 5 7 - 5 8 , 105. See also

D a h i n d e n , Justus, 16

decentralization; planning C o m o : Casa del Fascio (Terragni), 66—67;

Dal C o , Francesco, 93, 240—4in74; Architecture,

S a n t ' E l i a b i r t h p l a c e , 78

Modern

9 3 , 211

L e a g u e , 126, 127; R o b i e H o u s e ( W r i g h t ) ,

c o m p o s i t i o n , W r i g h t o n , 107, 2 4 2 m 8

D a m a v a n d C o l l e g e ( T A A ) , T e h r a n , 211

¡ 4 , 4 9 , 102, 105,

c o n c r e t e , i n n o v a t i o n s in use of, 2 0 , 116,

Susan L a w r e n c e D a n a H o u s e ( W r i g h t ) ,

1 1 4 - 1 5 ; " S i x t y Years o f

L i v i n g A r c h i t e c t u r e " e x h i b i t i o n , 18;

S p r i n g f i e l d , Illinois, 54

244n4i

W o r l d ' s C o l u m b i a n E x p o s i t i o n (1893),

C o n d o r , Josiah, 2 2 i n 6

D á v i l a , R o b e r t o , 153

2 4 , 86. See also A r t I n s t i t u t e ; M i d w a y

C o n f e r e n c e o f A r c h i t e c t s , M o s c o w , 107—9,

D e B a r k c o u n t r y h o u s e (Staal), B e r g e n ,

G a r d e n s ; O a k Park C h i c a g o A r t s a n d C r a f t s Society, 123—24 C h i c a g o f r a m e , R o w e o n , 143 C h i l e , 21, 148, 1 5 0 - 6 3 ; e a r t h q u a k e (1939), 151. See also S a n t i a g o ; S a n t o D o m i n g o C h i n a : J a p a n e s e a r c h i t e c t u r e a n d , 31 ; J a p a n v i c t o r y o v e r (1895), 25 Chipping Campden, Ashbee Guild of H a n dicraft, 128,

225m

1 09

128

D e B o u w ( W i j d e v e l d ) , H i l v e r s u m , 57

Congrés Internationaux d'Architecture

D e Carlo, Giancarlo, 77, 92; Zigaina H o u s e

M o d e r n e ( C I A M ) , 7, 172, 2 3 6 ^ 5 C o n g r e s o P a n a m e r i c a n o de Arquitectos, 21, 148, 177

136, 196

c o n s t r u c t i v i s m , 9, 102, 105, 107, 116,

"Deconstructivist Architecture" exhibition

195-96 c o n t e x t u a l i s m : o f W r i g h t ' s B a g h d a d plans,

W r i g h t c r i t i c i z e d for, 9 - 1 0 . See also

architecture

ornament

C h r i s t i a a n s e , Kees, 65

"conventionalization," W r i g h t and, 9

C h r i s t i a n i t y : S o u t h A m e r i c a , 147, 148. See

C o o n l e y H o u s e ( W r i g h t ) , Riverside, Illinois, 54; chairs, 4 6 ; d r a w i n g o f i n t e r i o r , 54,

also C a t h o l i c i s m Christian

Science Monitor,

30

C h u r c h o f t h e M a d o n n a dei P o v e r i (Figini a n d Pollini), M i l a n , 9 7 , 98 C1AM (Congrès Internationaux d'Architect u r e M o d e r n e ) , 7, 172, 2 3 6 ^ 5

( M u s e u m o f M o d e r n A r t , 1988), 75 decorativism: U s o n i a n houses and, 95;

190—91. Sec also p l a n n i n g ; t r a d i t i o n a l

C h o l u l a , P u e b l a , c h u r c h a n d p y r a m i d , 148

( D e r v i g n a n o , Friuli), 95 d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n , W r i g h t a n d , 36, 57, 135,

54; G i n z b u r g a n d , 102; M e n d e l s o h n

D e D u b b e l e Sleutel c a f é - r e s t a u r a n t - h o t e l (Wils), W o e r d e n , 51, 3 1 d e Fries, H e i n r i c h , 8; Frank Lloyd

visit, 2171113; in R a d i n g essay, 2 1 7 m 5

Aus dem Lebenswerke

Copilco, 178-79

eines

Wright:

Architekten

( F r o m t h e life w o r k o f an architect),

C o r b e t t , H a r v e y Wiley, i l l , 131

10—11, 10, 2171115, 2 3 3 n i 5

C o r b u s i e r , Le. S e e L e C o r b u s i e r

de Klerk, Michel, 46

C i a m p a g l i o , G a l i a n o , 149

C ó r d o b a C a t h e d r a l , 148

cities. See u r b a n p l a n n i n g

" c o s m o p o l i t a n i s m , " Russians a c c u s e d o f ,

"città nuova," 78

C o s t a , L u c i o , 149

" C i t y o f t h e F u t u r e " ( W r i g h t lecture), 17

C o s t a Rica, 166

1 5 1 - 5 2 ; Italian r e n e w a l o f , 6 9 , 7 1 , 7 6 ,

Ciudad Universitaria/University City

C o t s w o l d s , A s h b e e G u i l d o f H a n d i c r a f t , 128,

82, 84, 85, 2 3 5 n 2 8 ; J a p a n e s e c o n v e r s i o n

(Barragán), 1 7 0 - 7 2 , 2 5 4 n i 9 ; Rivera m o s a i c , 177 class: M e x i c a n a r c h i t e c t s a n d , 2 5 4 n i 9 ,

d e l i g h t , in a r c h i t e c t u r e , 11 no

to, 36; W r i g h t a n d , 11, 19, 2 7 , 7 6 , 84,

128 c o u n t r y h o u s e s : E n g l i s h , 47—57; W i j d e v e l d ,

D e Stijl, 2 0 , 4 6 - 5 2 , 7 5 , 2 2 6 n 9

2 5 6 n 5 5 ; W r i g h t ' s social c o n s c i o u s n e s s

C o v a c e v i c h , J o s e , 152, 1 5 7 - 5 9 C o v e n t r y , Yorke, H a r p e r , a n d H a r v e y h o u s e s ,

Russians a n d , 107, i l l ; W i j d e v e l d a n d , 53; W r i g h t o n , 107, 2 4 2 m 9

141 C r e i x e l l , J o s é , 168, 172, 2 5 4 n 2 3 ; Plaza M e l c h o r O c a m p o ( M e x i c o City), 168, 169

C o c a - C o l o n i z a t i o n , 170

C r o s b y , E r n e s t , 124

C o c c i a , F r a n c e s c o , Fosse A r d e a t i n e

C r y s t a l H e i g h t s ( W r i g h t ) , 23, 81,

M e m o r i a l sculptures (Rome), 68

C u b a , 166

85, 136, 1 5 1 - 5 2 Desert H o u s e (Wright), 64

4 7 , 5 3 - 5 4 , 55, 57; W r i g h t , 65

and, 10-11 classical a r c h i t e c t u r e : Italians a n d , 75, 9 2 ;

del M o r a l , E n r i q u e , 167, 170 d e m o c r a c y : B r i t a i n a n d , 136; C h i l e a n d ,

De Stijl m a g a z i n e , 4 9 , 7 8 , 2 2 8 n n 2 3 , 3 i " d e - u r b a n i s t s , " 105 D e W ä c h t e r ( W i j d e v e l d ) , A m e r s f o o r t , 57 D e x e l , G r e t e , 11 D e x e l , W a l t e r , 11

197

di C a m b i o , A r n o l f o , 72 Disney, W a l t , 1 1 7 - 1 8 , 199

D o d g e , David, 1 4 2 D o h e n y Ranch (Wright), Los Angeles, 1 0 , 11,

13

D ' O l i v o , Marcello, 77; T h e Villaggio del Fanciullo (Villa Opicina), 9 5 - 9 7 D o m - i n o projects (Le Corbusier), 1 1 3

Robert W. Evans House (Wright), Chicago,

2 3 5 n 3 o ; Wright and, 1 3 3 . See also World War II

'44 Evpatoria, C r i m e a , Lokshin Villa (Ginzburg and Kopelyovich), 1 0 2 , Excelsior, 1 8 2 - 8 3 ,

Fascist National U n i o n o f Architects, 79 Fasola, Giusta N i c c o , 83, 87, 2 3 8 - 3 9 ^ 7

102

Fenollosa, Ernest, 2 2 0 n 2

182

exhibitions: American architecture (Prague

Fernandez, Christian, 1 5 7 ; Curanurin

Dos Passos, J o h n , 79, 1 3 3

M o d e r n Gallery), 5, 2 i 6 n 6 ; " L e s Années

Doxiadis Associates, 2 5 8 n n i 1 , 1 2

3 0 " (Musée National des Monuments

Feuerstein, Bedrich, 16

D u d o k , Willem Marinus, 52, 65, 1 3 1 ,

Français, 1997), 120; Architecture C l u b

Figini, Luigi, 7 7 , 2 3 4 n 2 5 ; C h u r c h of the

229n34

(Chicago, 1900), 148; " T h e Architecture

Restaurant (Curacavi), 1 5 7

Madonna dei Poveri (Milan), 97, 98;

Duhart, Emilio, 153—54

o f the U . S . A . " (Moscow), i n ; " D e c o n -

Olivetti social services complex (Ivrea),

Duiker, Johannes, 5 1 - 5 2 ; State Academy

structivist Architecture" exhibition ( M u -

97, 98

design (Amsterdam), 52 " D u t c h C o n n e c t i o n " : with Wright, 6, 20, 4 5 - 6 5 , 1 1 3 - 1 4 . See also Holland Dvorak, M a x , 5, 2 i 6 n 6

seum o f M o d e r n Art, 1988), 75; exclusive Wright (Museum o f M o d e r n Art, 1940), 2 i 8 n 3 3 ; "Frank Lloyd W r i g h t and Japanese A r t " (Phoenix, 1925), 2 2 i n i 4 ;

Fiorentino, Mario, 2 3 5 n 2 7 ; Fosse Ardeatine Memorial (Rome), 68 Fischer, R a y m o n d , 1 0 7 Florence: A P A O , 67; Railway Station ( M i -

"Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect" (Europe

chelucci), 66—67; Wright's honorary

Eames furniture, 1

and U.S., 1 9 3 0 - 3 1 ) ,

citizenship, 66, 7 1 , 85; Wright's visits,

earthquake: Chile (1939), 1 5 1 ; Kanto (1923),

"Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect" (Madi-

30, 3 5 , 2 2 3 n 2 7

13-15,63-64;

son State Historical Library, 1930),

earthquake resistance, Imperial Hotel, 28, 30

1

12,

3 ; "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect"

66, 7 0 - 7 1 , 7 1 , 76, 77, 8 5 - 8 8 , 86. See also Palazzo Strozzi Flores, Samuel, Poseidon House (Laguna del

eclecticism: architectural, 99, 100, 109, 1 5 9 ,

(Museum o f M o d e r n Art, 1994), 1 8 -

2 1 2 ; Latin American multiethnic, 148

19; "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect"

Ford, Henry, 1 0 5 , n o

(Prussian Academy o f Fine Arts, 1 9 3 1 ) ,

formalism: Fasola vs. Wright's, 2 3 9 n 5 7 ;

E c o l e des Beaux-Arts, 1 1 1 - 1 2 , 1 1 8 , 2 4 4 n 4 i .

Diario), 1 5 0

1 4 - 1 5 , 14; "Frank Lloyd Wright,

in "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect"

Architect" (Stedelijk M u s e u m , 193 1),

exhibition, 14 ; in French reading

1 3 0 ; Great Depression, 1 0 6 ; housing, 9,

1 3 - 1 4 , 14, 62, 6 3 - 6 4 , 63; Hiroshige

of W r i g h t , 1 0 1 ; Usonian houses

1 1 , 43; Iraqi, 186, 188, 1 9 3 , 196,

prints (Chicago A r t Institute, 1906),

and, 95; Wright's warning against new,

1 9 8 - 9 9 , 2 0 1 , 208, 26on39; and M i d w a y

26; Imperial Hotel aerial perspective

Gardens, 199; recession (Japan), 43;

(Chicago A r t Institute, 1 9 1 4 ) , 2 2 1 m 3 ;

See also Beaux-Arts tradition economics: British wartime students and,

117 formal language: broad adaptability of, 21—

Russia, 1 0 1 ; " S i x t y Years o f L i v i n g

Milanese Triennale, 78, 99, çç;

Architecture" exhibition, 84, 2 3 7 n 4 7 ;

Architecture: International E x h i b i t i o n "

Taliesin School of Art, 20; o f Wasmuth

(Museum of M o d e r n Art, 1932), 1 5 ,

Fortes, Miguel, 1 4 9

1 1 7 ; postwar, 18; Werkbund (Stuttgart),

Fosse Ardeatine Memorial (Aprile, C a l -

folios, 3. See also capitalism Ecuador, Quito convent o f San Francisco, 148

"Modern

22; ideas vs., 2 1 ; Wijdeveld classical, 53

9, 2 i 7 - i 8 n 2 i ; after Wright's death, 18;

caprina, Cardelli, Fiorentino, and Peru-

Wright's purported (Berlin, 1 9 1 0 ) , 3, 4,

gini): R o m e , 67—69, 68; sculptures (Ba-

Eggener, Keith, 2 1 , 1 6 6 - 8 3

1 3 . See also " S i x t y Years o f Living A r -

Ehrenberg, Paul, 166

chitecture" exhibition; Venice Biennale

Fragner, Jaroslav, 1 6

expressionists, architectural: Dutch, 46, 52;

frame, Chicago, 143

Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule (ETH), Zurich, 16 Einstein Tower (Mendelsohn), Potsdam, 8

G e r m a n , 14; W r i g h t , 8, 1 4 . See also

Frampton, Kenneth, 46—47, 1 5 1 , 1 7 9

ornament

France, 20, 1 0 0 - 1 0 1 , 1 1 1 - 2 0 , 2 4 3 - 4 7 ; Académie Européenne Mediterranée,

Eisenstein, Sergei, 105—6; Glass House, 106 Elckerlyc (Wijdeveld), Lage Vuursche, Holland, 6 1 - 6 2 , 63 Endo, Arata, 3 5; J i y u Gakuen (Tokyo), 3 5; Koshien Hotel (Kobe), 3 5 , 3 6 ; Wright's assistant on Imperial Hotel, 3 5 , 224n48 E n d y m i o n houses, Wijdeveld's, 5 3 , 54, 57

saldella and Coccia), 68

Fabiani, Marco, 84

6 1 ; and Beirut stadium, 189; Chilean

Fadigati, V., R o m e Railway Station, 68

architecture from, 1 5 2 ; publications on

Faisal I, 186

Wright, i n , 1 1 5 - 1 8 , 2 1 9 1 1 4 9 , 245—47;

Faisal II, 2 3 , 1 9 1 , 194—95, 208, 2 6 o n 3 9 ,

Wright's visit (1952), 1 1 8 . See also Ecole des B e a u x - A r t s ; Paris

26in43 Fallingwater House (Wright), Bear R u n , r,

Francke, K u n o , 3, 4, 2 1 6 - 1 7 m 3

engineering. See machine; technology

2 1 2 - 1 3 ; British architects and, 1 3 5 ;

Frank, Josef, 1 0 7

England. See Great Britain

Mexicans and, 166, 172,

Frankfurt, "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect"

English country-house architecture, 4 7 - 5 7

180, 1 8 1 - 8 3 , ' S2; Prévost on, 2 4 7 ^ 7 ;

English garden-city movement, 13 1

as "strange" house, 64; Z e v i b o o k cover,

"English house," 1 2 4 - 2 5 English-Speaking U n i o n , 1 3 3 Ennis House (Wright), 13 3 Esposizione Universale de R o m a (EUR), 92

1 7 3 - 7 4 , I79>

67, 67 fantastic designs: Wijdeveld, 59; W r i g h t , 10, 2

3> 30. 59. 2 1 1 - 1 3 , 258n4

fascism: Italy, 6 6 - 6 7 , 69, 79, 82, 9 3 , 2 3 3 m l ,

exhibition (193 1), 1 5 Frankfurt am Main, Wright's low-cost housing, 9 Frankfurter Zeitung,

11

Frank Lloyd Wright (Cahiers d'art), 1 1 5 — 1 6 , 115,21yn49

Frank Lloyd Wright (Zevi), 82, 1 1 9 , 2 1 8 1 1 3 7 , 2361135 "Frank Lloyd Wright, Architect" exhibitions: Europe and U.S. ( 1 9 3 0 - 3 1 ) ,

13-15,

geography/climate: Baghdad, 1 9 1 , 208,

Gropius, Walter, 62, 1 5 1 ; Baghdad (general),

2Ó2n73; Chile, 1 5 2 ; Iran, 209; Uruguay,

184, 2 5 9 n n i 4 , i 9 , 2 6 i n 4 9 , 2 6 2 - 6 3 n 7 6 ;

150

Baghdad University, 186, 188, 189, 206,

geometric qualities: Imperial Hotel, 3 1 ;

2 5 9 1 1 1 6 , 2ó2n70; Berlin exhibition o f

6 3 - 6 4 ; M u s e u m o f M o d e r n Art (1994),

M i d w a y Gardens, 1 1 4 - 1 5 ; W r i g h t -

Wright ( 1 9 1 0 ) , 4; collaborative design

18-19

Masieri work, 95

approach, 38; Harvard, 2 3 4 n 2 3 ; Japan

Frank Lloyd Wright: Aus dem Lebenswerke eines Architekten (From the life work of an architect), de Fries, 1 0 - 1 1 , 2

10,217ms,

33nI5

Frank Lloyd Wright: Ausgeführte Bauten, 2—4;

A . D. G e r m a n Warehouse, 13

and, 3 5 , 36, 38; on Metron cover, 8 r ,

Germany: modernism, 2—3, 6, 8, 1 1 , 14; publications on Wright, 2—4, 6, 8, 10— 1 3 , 1 1 2 , 2 1 7 - 1 9 ; World War I, 1 3 1 ;

3; Wright comparing Wijdeveld to, 62;

World War II, 6 7 - 6 9 , 70, 1 3 0 , 2 3 0 -

Wright rude to, i 5 ; W r i g h t ' s influence

American distribution, 3—4, 3; Ashbee

3 inÓ7; Wright's influence, 9, 12, 15—

introduction, 2 6 - 2 7 , 129, 1 3 1 , 2 2 2 m 9;

16, 100. See also Berlin; Frankfurt;

Sonderheft edition (for European distribution), 3 - 4 , 3, 47, I 12, 129, 1 3 1 . See

Munich; Stuttgart Giedion, Sigfried: Cahiers d'art article, 1 1 7 , 246—47n65; O u d writing to, 2 2 7 n 2 i ,

also Wasmuth folios "Frank Lloyd Wright and Japanese A r t " e x hibition (Phoenix, 1925), 2 2 i n i 4 Frank Lloyd Wright Day ( 1 6 October 1956), 18

2 2 8 n 2 3 ; and regionalism, 2 5 3 n i 7 ; Z e v i polemic to, 2 3 6 n 3 5

"Frank Lloyd Wright Residential Style" homes, Mitsui N o r i n , 42, 4 3 , 2 2 5 n 5 9

168; Efrain González Luna House (Barragán),

168

Guggenheim Museum (Wright), N e w York City, 1 , 2 3 , 65, 1 4 3 , 2 1 2 - 1 3 ; " C a r a c o l " inauguration

(1959), 154; and " S i x t y Years o f L i v i n g

(Evpatoria, Crimea), 1 0 2 , 102; mennaia arkhitektura 2, 1 0 2 , 102,

237n46

on, 12 Guadalajara: Barragán plans and buildings,

imitation, 154—57, ¡55'>

Gillet, Louis, 1 1 6 Ginzburg, Moisei, 1 0 1 - 2 , 109; Lokshin Villa

Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation, 1 4 2 ,

O u d and, 2277117; Pérsico and, 66; T A C founded by, 2 5 8 n s ; and Wasmuth folios,

Sovre105;

Zhilishche, 1 05 Glass House (Eisenstein), 106

Friuli: Banca Cattolica o f T a r v i s i o (Masieri),

Wijdeveld's Hall o f Life compared with, 59 Guild of Handicraft, Ashbee's, 1 2 3 , 1 2 7 , 128

Giolli, Raffaello, 79, 2 3 4 m 8

Freeman House (Wright), 1 0 5 , i o ¡

Architecture" exhibition, 1 8 , 87;

Gutheim, Frederick, 2 3 7 n 4 2

G o f f , Bruce, 1 4 3 , 1 7 5

Haarlem, National Park (Wijdeveld), 57, ¡ 7

2 4 0 n 7 3 ; Villa Bortolotto at Cervignano

Gonzalez Lobo, Carlos, 1 7 2

T h e Hague: Daal en B e r g complex (Wils),

(Masieri), 95; Zigaina House at D e r -

Efrain González Luna House (Barragán),

vignano (De Carlo), 95

Guadalajara,

2 2 8 n 3 0 ; Gemeentenmuseum (Berlage), 2 2 6 n 3 ; tower design for congress

168

building (Oud), 2 2 8 n 2 4 , 2 3 i n 7 4

Froebel " g i f t s , " 145

G o o d h u e , Bertram, 123

Fry, M a x w e l l ,

G o o k i n , Frederick, 2 2 i n 12

T h e Hague School, 20, 5 1 , 52, 2 2 8 n 3 2

G o r d o n Strong Planetarium (Wright), M a r y -

Hall o f Life (Wijdeveld), 59, 60, 2 2 g n 4 3

140

functionalism: Chilean, 1 5 1 ; Dutch, 46, 5 1 , 64, 65; French, 1 1 8 ; Italian, 82, 87,

Hanna H o u s e / H o n e y c o m b House (Wright),

land, 199

2 3 8 n 5 5 ; Japanese, 39; Mexican, 166,

Graves, Michael, 75

167, 170, 175

Great Britain, 20—21, 121—46; Arts and Crafts

furniture: built-in, 12; C o o n l e y House chairs, 46; Eames, 1; as spatial interior element, 2 2 6 n i o

Palo Alto, 158,

movement, 20—21, 126—27; Barlow C o m mission, 1 3 5 ; Chilean architecture from, 1 5 2 ; English country-house architecture,

159, 247n67

Harrington, Dennis T., White House (Hyver Hill, Barnet, London), 1 4 1 - 4 2 ,

¡42

Harvard University: Graduate School o f Design, 66, 188; Z e v i , 1 9 , 2 3 4 n 2 3

The Future of Architecture (Wright), 1 9 1

47 — 57; English garden-city movement, 1 3 1 ; influence of Wright, 1 2 3 , 1 4 1 - 4 6 ;

Abdul Ilah, 2 3 , 208; Faisal I, 186; Faisal II,

Gaggero, Hugo, 1 5 4 ; Casa Gaggero

influence on Wright, 1 2 4 - 2 9 ; and Iraq,

2

Hashemite family, 186, 208; C r o w n Prince 3. 191, 194-95,

26on39, 2 6 i n 4 3

186, 188, 189, 2 5 9 n n i 4 , i 8 ; postwar,

Haskell, Douglas, 1 1 1

Gale House (Wright), O a k Park, 5 0 , 5 1

1 4 1 , 1 4 4 - 4 5 ; publications, 1 2 3 , 1 2 5 , 1 3 3 ,

Hastings, Corbett, and H o o d , N e w York

Garabelli, Lorenzo, Arquitectura renovadora en

1 3 4 , 1 3 6 , 1 3 9 - 4 0 , 1 4 3 , 1 4 5 ; World War

(Santiago),

154

City, 1 3 1

I, 1 3 1 ; World War II, 1 3 0 - 3 6 ; Wright's

Hayashi, Aisaku, 35, 2 2 i n i 2 , 2 2 2 n 2 4

García Moreno, Sergio Larraín, 153—54

lectures, 80, 1 2 9 - 3 1 , 1 3 3 - 3 4 ; Wright's

William R. Heath House (Wright), Buffalo,

Gardella, Ignazio, 92

visits, 1 2 7 - 4 0 , 1 3 7 , 138,

Montevideo, 1915—1940,

149

139

garden-city movement, English, 1 3 1

Great Depression, 106

Gasparin, Graziano, 2 5 i n 2

Gréber, Jacques, L'architecture aux

133 Hedrich, William, 183 Etats-Unis:

Hefferlin Villa (Lurfat), Ville d'Avray, 1 1 6

Gatto, Alfonso, 80, 2 3 5 n 2 8

Preuve de la force d'expansion du génie fran-

Hegemann, Werner, 2 1 7 n 15

Gaudi, Antonio, 1 7 5

çais (Architecture m the United States:

A. B. Henny country house ( v a n ' t H o f f ) ,

Gebhard, David, 1 2 2

Proof of the expansive power o f French

Geddes, Patrick, 13 1

genius), 1 1 1

Huis ter Heide, 48, 48 " H e u r t l e y " home (Mitsui Norin), 43

Gellner, Edoardo, 7 7

Greve, W., 12

Arthur Heurtley House (Wright), 1 0 2

Gemeentenmuseum (Berlage), T h e Hague,

Groningen, design for a pavilion in the

Highland Park, Illinois, Ward W. Willits

22ón3

municipal park (Wils), 6, 7

House (Wright), 27, 28

Hillside, W i s c o n s i n : S c h o o l of A r t / T a l i e s i n

n o m i c a l middle-class, 11; W r i g h t ' s l o w -

Fellowship, 20, 60—61, 62, 2 3 0 0 5 3 . See

cost G e r m a n , 9; W r i g h t ' s t e x t i l e - b l o c k ,

also Taliesin

135, 1 4 2 , 209. See also c o u n t r y houses; Prairie Style; U s o n i a n houses; W r i g h t ,

H i l v e r s u m , D e B o u w (Wijdeveld), 57 H i n d u architecture, W r i g h t o n , 192

Frank L l o y d — w o r k s

India, 2 3 ; H i n d u architecture, 1 9 2 ; Sarabhai C a l i c o Mills Store, A h m e d a b a d ( W r i g h t ) , 22, 23 individualism, W r i g h t , 79; British architects a n d , 2 0 - 2 1 , 129, 146; H i t c h c o c k o n ,

Hiroshige, A n d o , prints exhibited, 26

H o w a r d , E b e n e z e r , 131

2

history, B a g h d a d , 186, 1 9 1 , 196, 2 1 2

H u b b a r d , E l b e r t , 127

nese o n , 34, 36; a n d m o d e r n i s t role, 14

H i t c h c o c k , H e n r y - R u s s e l l , Jr., 1 3 3 , 2 i 6 n 3 ,

H u e t , B e r n a r d , 93

2 4 5 n n 5 i ,54,55; and Barragán works, 1 7 9 , 2 5 4 n i 9 ; Frank Lloyd Wright (Cahiers d'art), i n , 1 1 6 , 2 i 9 n 4 9 ; In the Nature of Materials,

152; " M o d e r n Architecture:

I n t e r n a t i o n a l E x h i b i t i o n " ( M u s e u m of M o d e r n Art, 1932), 1 1 7 ; Modern ture: Romanticism

Architec-

and Reintegration,

industrial architecture, 70; Olivetti f a c t o r y

H u i s ter H e i d e : A. B. H e n n y c o u n t r y h o u s e

(Pozzuoli), 70, 7 1 ; P u r m e r e n d f a c t o r y

( v a n ' t HofF), 48, 4 8\ Verloop Villa (van

design ( O u d ) , 49, 49, 2 2 7 n 2 i , 228n23 Industrial A r t League, C h i c a g o , 1 2 6 , 1 2 7

't HofF), 46, 4 7 - 4 8 , 4 7 Hull House, Chicago, 1 2 3 - 2 4 , 125, 1 2 6 - 2 7 ,

alism, 2 5 3 n i 7 ; a n d r o m a n t i c i s m of Wright, 253n9 H o d g k i n s o n , Patrick, 1 4 6 Hoffman, Donald, 229n44 H o f f m a n n , Josef, 16 H o l l a n d , 12, 4 5 - 6 5 , 100, 2 2 5 - 3 1 ; and A m e r ican architecture, 5, 45—46; British architects a n d , 131; " D u t c h C o n n e c t i o n , " 6, 20, 45—65, 1 1 3 - 1 4 ; Loosdrechtse Plassen i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m u n i t y , 60; a n d m o d e r n i s m , 6, 20, 45—46, 5 1 - 5 2 ,

avant-garde, 2, 1 0 1 ; in Brazil, 1 4 8 , 149;

ties," 5 7 - 5 8 ; M e x i c a n , 1 6 7 ; W r i g h t -

in Britain, 1 2 3 , 1 4 1 - 4 6 ; in C h i l e , 1 5 1 ;

W i j d e v e l d , 20, 59—60. See also u t o p i a n -

in C z e c h o s l o v a k i a , 7, 16—18; in E u r o p e

ism

(general), 2, 1 1 , 12, 27, 4 6 - 4 7 , 1 0 7 , 1 1 3 , 1 1 6 - 1 7 ; in France, i l l , 1 1 2 - 1 3 ; in G e r -

Ilf, Ilya, n o — 1 1 , 2 4 3 ^ 1 Illinois. See C h i c a g o ; H i g h l a n d Park; O a k Park; River Forest; Riverside; Springfield T h e "Illinois'VMile High Project (Wright), C h i c a g o , 58, 59, 6 4 - 6 5 , 2 2 9 n 4 i !

i m i t a t i o n : " C a r a c o l , " 154—57, 55 \ G i e d i o n

lications, 6, 8, 10, 45, 49, 52, 5 4 - 5 5 ,

9, 16, 146; o f J a p a n e s e (by Westerners),

6 3 - 6 4 , 78, 2 i 7 n i 9 , 2 2 8 n n 2 3 , 3 1; U.S.

2 2 2 n 2 3 ; surface, 9, 146; W r i g h t vs., 142

2 2 8 n n 2 3 , 3 1; W o r l d W a r II, 2 3 0 - 3 i n 6 7 ;

I m p e r i a l C o l l e g e of E n g i n e e r i n g , Japan, 22infi Imperial H o t e l (Tokyo), 24, 26, 2 8 - 3 4 , ¿ 9 ,

W r i g h t ' s ideas disseminated, 6, 20, 6 3 -

39; aerial perspective e x h i b i t e d ( C h i c a g o

64, 225—26; W r i g h t ' s i n f l u e n c e in, 12,

A r t Institute, 1914), 2 2 1 m 3; A m e r i c a n

4 6 - 6 5 , 1 0 0 , 1 1 7 , 1 3 1 , 2 2 5 - 3 I, 246n65.

m a n a g e r ( p o s t w a r O c c u p a t i o n ) , 30—31;

See also A m s t e r d a m ; Berlage, H e n d r i k

d e m o l i t i o n (1968), 24, 28, 2 2 3 n 2 5 ; E n d o

Petrus; T h e H a g u e ; R o t t e r d a m

as W r i g h t ' s assistant o n , 3 5 , 2 2 4 ^ 8 ; in

H o l l y h o c k h o u s e ( W r i g h t ) , 116

Frank Lloyd Wright (Cahiers d'art), 116;

" H o m e in Prairie T o w n " ( W r i g h t ) , 57

G o o k i n suggesting W r i g h t for, 2 2 i n i 2 ;

H o n e y c o m b H o u s e / H a n n a House (Wright),

Hayashi as m a n a g e r , 3 5 , 2 2 i n i 2 , 2 2 2 M 4 ;

Palo Alto, i}8,

159, 247n67

H o o d , R a y m o n d , 131; I d e a l / P a l l a d i u m H o u s e (London), 132 h o r i z o n t a l i s m , 11, 5 1 , 5 3 - 5 4 , 164,

in K a n t o e a r t h q u a k e , 30, 2 2 3 n 2 7 ; K o t e r a w o r k i n g w i t h W r i g h t o n , 7; Peacock R o o m b a n q u e t hall, 34, 3 4 ; plan, 31, 3 2 ; plan in R o b e r t s o n ' s The Principles of Architectural Composition,

2 4 4 n n 4 i ,47 H o t e l San José P u r ú a ( C e t t o and R u b i o ) ,

on Wright

i n f l u e n c e o f W r i g h t : in Austria, 16; o n

industrial, 46; "ideal living c o m m u n i -

o n , 2 4 6 n 6 5 ; i n f l u e n c e processed as, 2,

Doesburg, 9 - 1 0 , 217—18111119,21,

2, 1 6 . See also i n f l u e n c e o f W r i g h t ; i n fluence

Jeeves), L o n d o n , 132

57, 2 1 7 — 1 8 1 1 2 1 , 2 2 7 n i 7 , 2 2 8 n 3 2 ; p u b -

trips by architects, 45, 47, 2 2 6 n i 2 ; van

tation, 2, 9, 16, 146; processed as parallelism, 2, 16; processed as t r a n s f o r m a t i o n ,

Ideal H o u s e / P a l l a d i u m H o u s e ( H o o d w i t h idealism: A r g a n ' s w r i t i n g s a n d , 83; D e Stijl

Hitler, A d o l f , 1 3 0

industrial ideal: D e Stijl, 46. See also m a c h i n e i n f l u e n c e : m o d e s of, 2, 16; processed as i m i -

249n2i h u m a n i s m , 1 1 9 ; organic, 83, 88

116;

a n d o r n a m e n t , 116, 2 i 9 n 4 9 ; a n d r e g i o n -

4 5 n 5 5 ; Italians a n d , 79, 2 3 9 ^ 7 ; J a p a -

1 3 3 ; relief detail at

M a d i s o n State Historical Library's " F r a n k

many, 9, 12, 15—16, 100; in H o l l a n d , 1 2 , 4 6 - 6 5 , 100, 1 1 7 , 1 3 1 , 2 2 5 - 3 1 , 246n65; in Italy, 19, 67, 7 6 - 7 8 , 88, 9 3 - 9 7 , 99, 2 4 0 n 7 4 ; in J a p a n , 24, 3 4 - 3 5 , 39, 4 2 44, 2 2 4 n n 4 3 , 4 5 ; o n Le C o r b u s i e r , 1 2 , 22on49; in M e x i c o , 1 8 1 - 8 3 ; in Russia, n o — 1 1 ; in S w i t z e r l a n d , 6, 7, 12, 16; in U.S., 2 1 7 - 1 8 1 1 2 1 . See also o r g a n i c architecture i n f l u e n c e o n W r i g h t , 27; British, 124—29; Japanese, 19, 24, 2 6 - 3 4 ,

2

33nH;

W i j d e v e l d , 60, 6 1 , 2 2 g n 4 4 i n t e r i o r designs: "Pearl Palace," T e h r a n ( O l g i v a n n a W r i g h t ) , 263n8o; W r i g h t ' s i n f l u e n c e o n W i j d e v e l d in, 5 4 - 5 5 . See also f u r n i t u r e International Congress of Architecture, R o m e , 79 I n t e r n a t i o n a l E x h i b i t i o n of M o d e r n A r c h i t e c t u r e , Fifth M i l a n e s e T r i e n n a l e (1933). 78 "An I n t e r n a t i o n a l G u i l d " / " N a a r e e n internationale" werkgemeenschap" ( W i j d e v e l d ) , 20, 60, 6 1 - 6 2 I n t e r n a t i o n a l Style, 151; Aalto m u s e u m s ,

Lloyd W r i g h t , A r c h i t e c t " e x h i b i t i o n

189; B a g h d a d U n i v e r s i t y (Gropius), 189;

House and Garden, 1

(1930), 1 3 ; Seidensticker o n , 2 2 3 n 2 5 ;

British a r c h i t e c t u r e a n d , 1 3 0 ; C h i l e a n d ,

House Beautiful, 1

" t r a n s i t i o n b u i l d i n g , " 33; W r i g h t o n i n -

151; in " F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t , A r c h i t e c t "

h o u s i n g : b o o m (postwar), 1; b o o m (1980s—

dividuality of, 2 2 3 0 3 0 ; W r i g h t ' s M i d d l e

e x h i b i t i o n , 14; J a p a n and, 3 5 , 36—38, 39;

Eastern plans a n d , 184

Le C o r b u s i e r , 20; M e x i c a n s a n d , 1 6 6 ,

M i c h o a c á n , 172,

173

1990s), 43; C a s e Study, 143; E n d y m i o n , 53. 54, 57; goal of, 2 1 7 m 5; Japan, 4 2 43; mass, 11; split-level, 1; S u n t o p , 150; W e r k b u n d e x h i b i t i o n , 9; W r i g h t ' s e c o -

Imperial M u s e u m (Watanabe), Tokyo, 3 5 , 3 7

1 6 7 , 1 7 9 , 180; in M i d d l e East, 2 1 2 ;

impressionism, Italians and, 7 8 - 7 9 , 2 3 3 n i 4 ,

M o d e r n M o v e m e n t c o n f u s e d w i t h , 75;

238-39n57

M u s e u m of M o d e r n Art exhibition on

International Style (continued) (1932), 1 J, 1 1 7 ; Neutra, 224J147; and

Jafar, Dhia, 193

Kaufmann House (Neutra), Palm Springs,

Japan, 9, 19, 2 4 - 4 4 , 2 2 0 - 2 5 ; Imperial C o l -

2571159

regional approach, 2 5 3 n i 7 ; tabula rasa,

lege of Engineering, 2 2 i n 6 ; influence

Kent State University, Amery at, 193, 209

2 1 2 ; Tsuchiura, 224^47; Wright's Bagh-

of Wright in, 24, 3 4 - 3 5 , 39, 4 2 - 4 4 ,

Khazaal, Sheikh, 209

dad plans and, 199. See also Gropius,

224nn43,45; influence on Wright by,

Khrushchev, Nikita, 1 1 1

Walter; Mies van der Rohe, Ludwig

19, 24, 2 6 - 3 4 , 2 3 3 n i 4 ; Kanto earth-

Kief-Niederwohrmeier, Heidi, 15—16,

In the Nature of Materials (Hitchcock), 1 5 2

quake (1923), 30, 35, 223n27; Kurashiki

Iofan, Boris, on Broadacre City, 109, 1 1 0

City Hall (Tange), 38, 38; ma, 3 2 - 3 4 ,

Kiesler, Frederick, 1 1 1

Iofan, Gelfreikh, and Shchuko, Palace of the

223n40; Meiji period ( 1 8 6 8 - 1 9 1 2 ) ,

Klaarhamer, Pieter Jan Christopher, 46

25, 38, 2 2 i n 5 ; Metabolist movement,

Klee, Paul, 2 4 0 - 4 in74

Iran, 23, 2 0 8 - 1 1 ; Aalto museum design

3 8 - 3 9 , 2 2 4 n 5 i ; militarization, 25, 35;

Klumb, Heinrich/Henry, 62, 166

(Shiraz), 189; Amery, 193, 208—11,

modernization/westernization, 25—26,

Kobe, Koshien Hotel (Endo), 3 5 , 3 6

2 6 i n 4 3 , 263n79; geography/climate,

33, 34, 35, 43, 2 2 5 n 6 i ; oriental scrolls,

Koolhaas, Rem, 65

209; Minou Island Resort (TAA), 2 1 1 ;

24; Perry's Black Ships (1853), 2 2 i n 4 ; postwar, 30—31, 35—43; Raymond, 7,

Kopelyovich, N . A., Lokshin Villa (Evpa-

oil discovered (1908), 186; revolution (1979), 2 1 1 , 2 5 8 n 6 ; T A A , 23, 186, 209,

30; Scarpa-Wright enthusiasm, 93;

2 1 1 , 2$8n6; traditional masonry crafts-

Showa period (1926-89), 38;Taisho

manship, 209. See also Persians; Tehran

era ( 1 9 1 2 - 2 6 ) , 38; traditional architec-

Soviets, 109

Iraq, 1 8 6 - 8 9 , 2 5 7 - 6 3 ; Development Board,

ture, 9, 24—39, 42, 225n57; Tsuchiuras,

1 8 6 - 9 3 , 198, 206, 208, 26on25; eco-

7, 8, 2 2 i n i 4 , 224n47; woodblock prints,

nomics, 186, 188, 1 9 3 , 196, 1 9 8 - 9 9 ,

24, 26, 22on2, 2 2 i n n 1 1 , 1 5 ; World War

2 0 1 , 208, 26on39; independence (1932),

II defeat, 35—36; and Wright's oriental-

186; Minou Island Resort and, 2 1 1 ; oil,

ism, 93, 1 9 0 - 9 1 . See also Kobe; Kyoto;

186, 26on39; revolution (1958), 186,

Tokyo Japan Advertiser, 30

family

Japanese Print: An Interpretation (Wright), 26

Iskusstvo bytovoi veshchi (The art of the everyday object), Arkin, 107 Islam, Wright's Baghdad plans and, 1 9 1 , 196, 199, 2 0 0 - 2 0 1 Isozaki, Arata, 33, 224n42 Italian Institute of Architecture, 75

toria, Crimea), 102 Korn, Arthur, 1 3 7 Koshien Hotel (Endo), Kobe, 3 5 , 3 6 Kotëra, Jan, 5, 7 Kramer, Piet, 46, 244n47 Krasnaia niva, 1 0 1 Krejcar, Jaromir, 16 Kurashiki City Hall (Tange), 38, 38 Kurokawa, Kisho, 38, 39, 42; Nakagin Capsule building (Tokyo), 224n51

208, 2 1 1 . See also Baghdad; Hashemite Iraq Times, 193, 2 6 i n 4 7

2i8n36

Kyoto: capital shifting from, 25; Katsura

Jawdat, Ellen and Nizar, 1 8 8 - 8 9 , >88, 193,

Rikyu Imperial Residence, 27, 2 8, 3 1 ; Sutra Library, Chion-In, 2 ¡

2 5 9 n n i 4 , 1 5 , 1 6 , 1 7 , 26in40 Jeanneret, Charles. See Le Corbusier

Ladovskii, Nikolai, 109

Jeanneret, Pierre, Amedee Ozenfant house

Laguna del Diario, Poseidon House (Flores), 150

and studio (Paris), 167, ¡67 Jeeves, C. Gordon, Ideal/Palladium House (London), 1 3 2

Lake Tahoe development (Wright), 10, 1 1 , 95, 199

Italian Institute of Art History, 84-85

Jiränek, Milos, 2 i 6 n 5

land-reform theories, George, 13 1

Italian Renaissance, 66, 147

Jiyu Gakuen (Endo), Tokyo, 3 5

Lao-tzu, 32, 190,

Italy, 19, 4 1 , 66-99, 2 3 1 - 4 1 ; APAO, 19, 67,

Johnson, Philip, 75, 1 1 7 , 2 2 7 n i 7 , 253n9

Larkin Company Administration Building

80-82, 84, 90, 95; architectural publi-

Johnson Wax Administration Building

2241142

(Wright), Buffalo: in Arkin book, l o g ;

cations, 19, 66, 67, 75, 78, 79-80, 83,

(Wright), Racine, 2 1 2 - 1 3 ; British archi-

Berlage lectures on, 6; in "Frank Lloyd

2 3 3 - 4 0 ; fascism, 6 6 - 6 7 , 69, 79, 82, 93,

tects and, 1 3 3 , 1 3 5 , 1 4 1 , 141;

Wright, Architect" exhibition (Prussian

2 3 3 m l , 235n3o; influence of Wright,

attention to, 1 1 8 , 1 1 9

French

Academy of Fine Art, Berlin), 14 ;

19, 67, 7 6 - 7 7 , 88. 9 3 - 9 7 , 99, 240n74;

Johnstone, William, 124

French architects and, 100, 1 1 2 ,

Luce ambassador to, 84; Ministry of For-

Richard Lloyd Jones House (Wright), 1 3

1 1 6 ; Mendelsohn visit, 2 1 7 m 3; in

eign Affairs, 84, 85; Ministry of Urban

Jordan, Robert Furneaux, 136—37, 138

Pevsner book, 1 3 3 ; Russians and, 100,

Kahn, Louis, 35, 2i9n44; Biennale, 75

Latin America, 21, 1 4 7 - 6 5 , 2 5 1 - 5 2 . See also

Planning, 2 3 6 ^ 7 ; and modernism, 19, 74, 75, 78—79, 80; and organic architecture, 19, 67, 69-70, 7 6 - 9 9 , 2 3 2 - 4 0 ; postwar reconstruction, 69-70, 7 6 - 7 7 , 82, 84, 86; World War II, 67, 83, 2 3 4 3 5 n n i 8 , 3 5 ; Wright on spirit in, 76, 85, 240n67; Wright's critics, 19, 83, 9 0 - 9 2 , 238—39 See also C o m o ; Florence; Friuli; Ivrea; Masieri, Angelo; Metron; Milan; Naples; Rome; Turin; Venice Ivrea, Olivetti social services complex (Figini and Pollini), 97, 98 Izvestia, 109

113,

1 09; v a n ' t H o f f visit, 47 Kahn House (Neutra), San Francisco, 1 7 2 , 181 Karim Kassem, Abdul, 208 Katsura Rikyu Imperial Residence, Kyoto, 27, 28, 31

Central America; Mexico; South America Lauweriks, J. L. M . , 45 Laymen and the New Architecture (Robertson), 131

Kaufmann, Arthur C., 84, 237nn42,47

Lazo, Carlos, 1 7 7

Kaufmann, E., garage (Wright, 1949), 85

Lea, David, 144

Kaufmann, Edgar, Jr., 1 7 3 - 7 4 , 236n35,

League of Nations, 186

239n58 Kaufmann, Edgar, Sr., 166, 1 7 3 - 7 4 . See also Fallingwater House

Le Corbusier, 2 1 , 1 1 1 - 1 2 , 170; L'Architecture française on, 1 1 8 ; Badovici and, 1 1 7 ; Baghdad (general), 184, 188, 208,

25911114. 2 3> 2611149; B a g h d a d sports

Ragghianti and Z e v i , 237—38n48; Royal

r a i n e " (Masters of c o n t e m p o r a r y

facility, 189, 2591124; Brazil a n d , 21, 148;

Festival Hall, 1 3 6 - 3 7 ; Royal Institute o f

architecture), Cahiers d'art, 115—16

British a r c h i t e c t u r e a n d , 130; La C h a u x -

British Architects (RIBA), 1 3 3 - 3 4 , 136;

M a k i , F u m i h i k o , 33

d e - F o n d s h o m e , 112—13; and C h i l e , 151,

St. M a r y ' s C h u r c h (Cachemaille-Day),

Malcolm H o u s e (Wright), 47

153; and collective identity, 20; D o m - i n o

i 4 i ; T o y n b e e Hall, 123, 2 4 8 n i 2 ; W h i t e

projects, 113; Italy a n d , 75, 87, 93, 97;

H o u s e ( H a r r i n g t o n ) , 141—42,

J a p a n and, 35, 36, 38, 39; Lurçat's

W r i g h t o n , 135; W r i g h t ' s lectures, 80,

2 4 4 n 4 6 ; Cavroix Villa (Croix), 114, 115;

Architecture a n d , 116; " m a c h i n e for

129—31, 1 3 3 - 3 4 ; W r i g h t ' s visits, 1 2 9 - 4 0 ,

"Les raisons d e l ' a r c h i t e c t u r e m o d e r n e

living," 38, 2 i 9 n 4 9 ; M e n d e l s o h n o n ,

137,

dans t o u s les pays" ( T h e reasons for

2 1 7 n 15 ; o n Metron cover, 81 ; M e x i c a n s and, 21, 166—70, 175, 177, 178, 2 5 4 n 2 i ; Oeuvre complète, 112, 116; A m é d é e

142;

138

m o d e r n a r c h i t e c t u r e in all countries),

L o n g h e n a , Baldassare, Santa M a r i a della Salute (Venice), 73 L o o s d r e c h t s e Plassen i n t e r n a t i o n a l c o m m u -

O z e n f a n t h o u s e and s t u d i o (Paris), 167, 167; p o s t w a r U.S. a n d , 151; p r o d u c t i o n t e c h n i q u e s , 167; " r e g u l a t o r y lines," 97;

M a l k i e l - J i r m o u n s k i , M y r o n , 116—17 Mallet-Stevens, R o b e r t , 107, 113 —15,

nity, H o l l a n d , 60

i14-15 Manes Group, 5 a l - M a n s u r , Abbasid caliph, 191, 196

Los Angeles: Barnsdall H o u s e ( W r i g h t ) , 7,

Manuale deli-architetto,

236^7

11, 18; D o h e n y R a n c h ( W r i g h t ) , 10, 11,

M a r c h , Lionel, 143, 144

Russians a n d , 105, 106, 110; Savoye Villa

13; F r e e m a n H o u s e ( W r i g h t ) , 105, 105;

M a r e f a t , M i n a , 23, 1 8 4 - 2 1 3

(Paris), 168; S c h w o b H o u s e , 113; soft and

W i j d e v e l d visiting professor ( U S C ) , 62;

Markelius, Sven G o t t f r i e d , 81

gentle hospital, 75; Sonderheft copy, 4;

W r i g h t ' s houses (general), 168. See also

Marseilles, U n i t é d ' H a b i t a t i o n (Le

Stein Villa (Paris), 168; U n i t é d ' H a b i t a -

Pasadena

Corbusier), 119

t i o n (Marseilles), 119; u r b a n i s m , 36, 105;

Los Vilos, B o z a s u m m e r h o u s e , 157

"La M a r t e l l a " ( Q u a r o n i et al.), M a t e r a , 70, 70

Vers une architecture, 82, 101, 116, 167,

L u b e t k i n , B e r t h o l d , 130

M a r t i n , Leslie, 137,

2 i 9 - 2 o n 4 9 ; Ville Radieuse, 2 3 4 n 2 i ;

Luce, Clare B o o t h e , 84

D a r w i n M a r t i n H o u s e ( W r i g h t ) , Buffalo, 6,

W e i s s e n h o f - S i e d l u n g houses (Stuttgart),

L u n d H u m p h r i e s , 134

168; o n W r i g h t , 1 1 2 - 1 3 , 114, 2 4 4 n 4 i ;

Lur^at, A n d r é , 107, 1 1 5 - 1 6 , 2 4 5 n n 5 i , 5 3 , 5 7 ;

Wright compared with, 246n65; Wright

Architecture, 116;

receptive to, 2 i 9 n 4 9 ; W r i g h t ' s i n f l u e n c e

d'Avray), 116

o n , 12, 2 2 0 n 4 9 ; W r i g h t vs., 20, 21, 119,

138

233ni2 M a r t i n e z d e Velasco, J u a n , M a i n Library, Universidad Nacional A u t ò n o m a de

HefFerlin Villa (Ville

M e x i c o ( M e x i c o City),

171

Lutyens, Sir E d w i n , 57, 1 2 1 - 2 2 , 130, 133

M a r x i s m : British architects and, 130, 134.

ma, Japanese, 32—34, 223 n 4 0

Maryland, G o r d o n Strong Planetarium

148, 2 i 9 - 2 o n 4 9

See also C o m m u n i s t Party

Legarreta, J u a n , 167 Lenin statue, Palace o f t h e Soviets, 109 Leonidov, Ivan, M a g n i t o g o r s k plan, 105,

105

Lethaby, W . R., 124, 126

M a c C o r m a c , R i c h a r d , 144, 1 4 5 - 4 6 ;

( W r i g h t ) , 199 M a r y W a r d S e t t l e m e n t (Smith and Brewer),

Sainsbury B u i l d i n g ( O x f o r d ) , 145 m a c h i n e : " T h e A r t a n d C r a f t of t h e

Levi, Carlo, 73

L o n d o n , 1 2 2 - 2 3 , 123, 124, 2 4 8 n i 2 Masieri, Angelo, 77, 88—89, 2 4 0 n 7 3 ; B a n c a

M a c h i n e " ( W r i g h t ) , 107, 124, 1 2 6 -

Libello contro I'architettura organka (Libel against o r g a n i c architecture), Bargellini, 83, 2 3 7 n 3 8

27; D u t c h a n d , 2 2 6 n i o ; English

Cattolica o f Tarvisio (Friuli), 2 4 0 n 7 3 ;

a n d , 126, 127, 135; Le C o r b u s i e r ' s

Veritti t o m b (Udine), 95; Villa B o r -

" m a c h i n e f o r living," 38, 2 i 9 n 4 9 ;

t o l o t t o at C e r v i g n a n o (Friuli), 95; Villa

Life magazine, 1

Russia a n d , 2 4 2 m 7; Sullivan a n d , 126;

G i a c o m u z z i (Udine), 95. See also M a s i e r i

The Life- Work of the American Architect Frank

W r i g h t o n , 46, 126, 127, 135, 2 1 9 -

Memorial

Lloyd Wright. See Wendingen/ The Life-

2 o n 4 9 , 2 4 2 m 7. See also rationalism;

Masieri, Savina, 8 8 - 8 9 , 9 2

Work of the American Architect Frank Lloyd

technology

Masieri M e m o r i a l ( W r i g h t ) , Venice, 74, 74,

M a c k i n t o s h , C . R., 121

8 8 - 9 2 , 90; Metron a n d , 80, 2 4 0 n 6 8 ;

Lindsay, Sir R o n a l d , 13 1

M a c L a r e n , James, 123

rejected, 7 4 - 7 5 , 9 0 - 9 2 , 239n62; Rogers

Lissitzky, El, 101, 109

M a d i s o n , W i s c o n s i n : M o n o n a Terrace Civic

Wright ( W i j d e v e l d )

L i v e r p o o l school of architecture, 130, 131

C e n t e r ( W r i g h t ) , 199; State Historical

L o k s h i n Villa ( G i n z b u r g and Kopelyovich),

Library's " F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t ,

E v p a t o r i a , C r i m e a , 102,

A r c h i t e c t " e x h i b i t i o n (1930), 12,

102

L o n d o n : A m e r y , 211; A r c h i t e c t u r a l Association (AA), 130, 133, 136,

137;

Architectural Press, 1 3 9 - 4 0 , 140;

M a i n Library, U n i v e r s i d a d N a c i o n a l

Hastings, C o r b e t t , a n d H o o d

c o m m i s s i o n s , 131; Ideal H o u s e / P a l l a d i u m H o u s e ( H o o d w i t h Jeeves),

132;

M a r y W a r d S e t t l e m e n t (Smith and 3>

124, 2 4 8 n i 2 ;

M a t t h e w , R o b e r t , 137, 138 May, Ernst, 172

M a e k a w a , K u n i o , 35, 38

137, ¡38;

M a t e r a , "La M a r t e l l a " ( Q u a r o n i et al.), 70, 70

Pollini), M i l a n , 97, 98 Bride

M a g n i t o g o r s k plan (Leonidov), 105,

12

13;

M a d o n n a dei Poveri, C h u r c h o f (Figini and

o f D e n m a r k , 139—40, 140; C o u n t y Hall,

Brewer), 1 2 2 - 2 3 ,

( W r i g h t ) , 119 13,

Unitarian church (Wright), 97

L o m b a r d o , Agostino, 2 3 4 m 9

o n , 92, 2 4 0 n 7 0 "Massacre o n t h e Marseilles W a t e r f r o n t "

Mayakovsky, Vladimir, 101, 105 105

Mayans, W r i g h t a n d , 9, 27, 31, 2 5 2 m Mazzariol, Giuseppe, 239n62

A u t ó n o m a de M é x i c o ( O ' G o r m a n ,

M c C o y , Esther, 179

Saavedra, and Martínez), M e x i c o City,

M e d i a l u n a d e C h i l e (Sartori), R a n c a g u a , 161,

170-72, ì j i "Les maitres d e l ' a r c h i t e c t u r e c o n t e m p o -

162, 1 63 Meister, Lieber, 2 7

Mendelsohn, Erich, 12, 62, 2 1 7 0 1 5 ; Acadé-

M i e s van der R o h e , L u d w i g , 1 5 1 ; Berlin

modernization/westernization: Iraq, 1 9 0 ;

m i e E u r o p é e n n e Méditerranée, 6 1 ; de-

exhibition o f W r i g h t ( 1 9 1 0 ) , 4; British

f e n d i n g W r i g h t , i 5; Einstein T o w e r

architects and, 1 4 3 ; Lissitzky on, 1 0 1 ; on

M o h r i n g , B r u n o , 4, 2 1 6 - 1 7 m 3

(Potsdam), 8; on Metron cover, 81; U.S.

Mctron cover, 8 1 ; Taliesin, 1 5 ; Venetian

M o n d r i a n , Piet, 4 9 - 5 0

trip, 8, 2 i 7 n i 3

school and, 9 3 ; and Wasmuth folios, 3;

M o n o n a Terrace C i v i c C e n t e r (Wright),

W r i g h t ' s influence on, 12

Mesa project (Wright), 47

Madison, 1 9 9

Milan: A P A O , 67; Brera Academy, 1 0 1 - 2 ;

Messel, A l f r e d , 1 1

Japan, 2 5 - 2 6 , 3 3 , 34, 3 5 , 4 3 , 2 2 5 n 6 i

M o n t e degli Ulivi (Ricci), 87

Metabolist m o v e m e n t , 38—39, 2 2 4 ^ 5 1

C h u r c h o f the M a d o n n a dei Poveri

Montes Rega, J. C., 149

Metron, 1 9 , 8 0 - 8 2 , 81, 9 5 , 2 3 4 - 3 5 , 2 3 8 0 5 5 ;

(Figini and Pollini), 97, 98; International

M o n t u o r i , E u g e m o , R o m e Railway Station,

Argan's " I n t r o d u z i o n e a W r i g h t , " 83,

E x h i b i t i o n o f M o d e r n Architecture at

2 3 7 0 4 0 ; and Masieri M e m o r i a l , 80,

F i f t h T r i e n n a l e ( 1 9 3 3 ) , 78; M o n u m e n t to

2 4 0 n 6 8 ; on Pavilion o f the B o o k o f Art,

the D e a d in the C o n c e n t r a t i o n C a m p s in

95; and W r i g h t ' s exhibition, 85, 2 3 2 n 4

G e r m a n y ( B B P R ) , 69, 69; rationalism,

Mexicanness, 1 8 0

2 3 4 n 2 5 ; Venetian School o f Architecture

M e x i c a n Society o f Architects, 1 7 7

recruits f r o m , 92; W r i g h t ' s exhibition at

M e x i c o , 2 1 , 1 6 6 - 8 3 , 2 5 2 - 5 7 ; influence of

Triennale (i960), 99, 99

W r i g h t , 181—83; modernist discourse, 2 1 , 1 6 6 - 6 7 , 170, 183, 256n55; preC o l u m b i a n architecture, 9, 2 7 , 3 1 , 1 4 7 , 1 4 8 , 1 7 7 , 2 5 2 m ; regionalism, 1 7 5 ,

M i l e H i g h Project (Wright), C h i c a g o ,

58,

and O ' G o r m a n ) , 1 7 8 , 1 78,

179-80;

69, 69 Nathan G . M o o r e H o u s e (Wright), O a k Park, 1 2 4 M o r r i s , William, 7 5 , 1 2 5 , 1 2 6 - 2 7 , 1 3 3 M o s c o w , 1 2 0 ; " T h e Architecture o f the

59, 64—65, 2 2 9 n 4 i Millard house (Wright), Pasadena, C a l i f o r n i a ,

B a g h d a d Master Plan, 1 8 7 , 187,

U . S . A . " exhibition (1944), i n ; C e n t e r for Architects, 1 1 0 , i l l ; C o n f e r e n c e o f Architects, 107—9, 1 0 9 ; Le C o r b u s i e r on,

M i n o p r i o , Spencely, and Macfarlane,

M e x i c o C i t y : Anahuacalli M u s e u m (Rivera

tion C a m p s in G e r m a n y ( B B P R ) , Milan,

Morasutti, B r u n o , 7 7 , 2 4 0 n 7 3

9, 1 1 6 , 209, 2 4 5 n 5 3

254n22

68 M o n u m e n t to the D e a d in the C o n c e n t r a -

193,

1 1 0 ; Lur^at stay, 1 1 6 Moser, Sylva, 8

194, 199, 2 5 8 n i 2

Barragán, 1 6 8 ; cathedrals, 1 4 8 ; M a i n

M i n o u Island Resort ( T A A ) , Iran, 2 1 1

Library, Universidad N a c i o n a l A u t ó n o m a

Mitla, Oaxaca, church, 148

J o n a p r i m a r y school plan, 1 6 , 1 7 ; " S i x t y

de M é x i c o ( O ' G o r m a n , Saavedra, and

Mitsui N o r i n : " F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t Resi-

Years o f Living A r c h i t e c t u r e " exhibition

Martínez), 1 7 0 - 7 2 , 1 7 1 ; National

dential S t y l e " homes, 42, 4 3 , 2 2 5 ^ 9 ;

A c a d e m y o f San Carlos, 1 6 7 ; O ' G o r m a n

" H e u r t l e y " h o m e , 43

A i r p o r t murals, 1 7 4 ; Plaza M e l c h o r

Modern Architectural Design (Robertson), 1 3 3

O c a m p o (Barragán with C e t t o and

Modern Architecture (Tafuri and Dal C o ) , 2 1 1

Creixell), 1 6 8 , 16g;

Modem Architecture (Wright), 7 9 - 8 0

D i e g o Rivera house,

San A n g e l ( O ' G o r m a n ) , 1 6 7 , 167,

178;

" S i x t y Years o f L i v i n g A r c h i t e c t u r e " exhibition, 1 8 , 176,

1 7 7 ; W r i g h t ' s visit,

1 7 6 , 1 7 7 , 1 7 7 . See also Pedregal, El

hibition" (1932), Museum of M o d e r n Art, 15, 1 1 7 Modern Architecture: Romanticism and Reintegration (Hitchcock), 1 1 6

M e y e r , Hannes, 1 0 7 Michaeli, Sepp, 1 5 7 ; Casa Habitación (Santiago), i}6,

" M o d e r n Architecture: International E x -

157

M i c h e l u c c i , G i o v a n n i , 83, 2 3 7 0 3 9 , 2 3 9 0 5 7 ; Florence Railway Station, 66—67 M i c h o a c á n , H o t e l San J o s é Purúa (Cetto and Rubio), 1 7 2 , 1 7 3 M i d d l e East, 21—23, 1 8 4 - 2 1 3 ; brise soleil

Der moderne Zweckbau

(Behne), 1 1 — 1 2

m o d e r n i s m , 8 - 1 1 , 1 7 - 1 8 , 1 3 7 ; Aalto museums, 1 8 9 ; British architecture and,

Moser, W e r n e r M . , 7, 8, 16; R a p p e r s w i l -

mounting/catalog, 1 8 , 2 i 8 n 3 7 Mullgardt, Louis Christian, 30 M u m f o r d , Lewis, 5 2 - 5 3 , 6 2 , i n , 1 3 1 ; Sticks and Stones, 1 0 7 M u n i c h , " S i x t y Years o f Living A r c h i t e c t u r e " exhibition, 18 M u n i c h agreement, Hitler's repudiation of, 130 M u r i l l o , Gerardo (Dr. Atl), 1 7 9 M u s e u m o f M o d e r n Art: "Deconstructivist A r c h i t e c t u r e " exhibition (1988), 7 5 ; exclusively W r i g h t ' s exhibition (1940), 2 i 8 n 3 3 ; " F r a n k Lloyd W r i g h t , A r c h i -

1 3 0 , 146; C z e c h , 5, 1 6 - 1 8 ; D u t c h

tect" exhibition (1994), 1 8 - 1 9 ; " M o d e r n

architects and, 6, 2 0 , 4 5 - 4 6 , 5 1 - 5 2 , 5 7 ,

Architecture: International E x h i b i t i o n "

2 i 7 - i 8 n 2 i , 2 2 7 n i 7 , 228n32; German, 2—3, 6, 8, 1 1 , 1 4 ; Italians and, 1 9 , 7 4 , 7 5 ,

(1932), 1 5 ,

" 7

Mussolini, Benito, 7 9

proliferations, 2 1 2 ; Cairo, 194—95, J P 3 ;

7 8 - 7 9 , 80; Japanese, 3 4 , 39; Latin A m e r -

oil, 1 8 6 , 2 6 o n 3 9 ; postmodern designs,

ican architects and, 1 5 7 - 5 9 ; Metabolist

2 1 2 ; traditional building, 1 8 4 , 190—

m o v e m e n t and, 39; M e x i c a n discourse,

92, 1 9 6 , 2 0 1 , 2 0 6 , 2 0 9 - 1 1 , 2 6 o n 3 i ;

2 1 , 1 6 6 - 6 7 , 1 7 0 , 1 8 3 , 2 5 6 n 5 5 ; Persico

W r i g h t ' s trip, 1 9 3 - 9 5 . See also Iran; Iraq;

on W r i g h t and, 66; postwar, 3 5 ; sachlich,

Persians

1 1 , 1 6 , 46; socially directed, 1 3 0 ; solitary,

Nara, Todai-ji temple, 3 1

2 3 ; Sullivan, 5; Swiss, 16; urbanist, 36;

National A c a d e m y o f San Carlos, M e x i c o

M i d w a y Gardens (Wright), C h i c a g o : architectural ambience o f leisure, 1 9 9 ;

W r i g h t as protomodernist, 1 3 3 ; and

decorativism, 9; French attention to,

W r i g h t ' s B a g h d a d plans, 1 8 4 , 1 9 6 , 2 0 8 ,

N a k a g i n Capsule building (Kurokawa), Tokyo, 2 2 4 n 5 1 Naples: A P A O , 6 7 , 2 3 5 ^ 2 ; Olivetti factory (Pozzuoli), 70, 7 1 ; Persico, 2 3 3 n i 3

City, 1 6 7 National Institute o f Arts and Letters, N e w

1 1 4 - 1 5 , 1 1 6 ; Japanese architecture and,

2 1 1 - 1 2 ; W r i g h t ' s fit in, 1 4 - 1 5 , 8 7 ;

35> 37\ M e n d e l s o h n visit, 2 1 8 n 1 3 ;

W r i g h t vs. Le Corbusier, 20, 2 1 , 1 1 9 ,

nationalism: Japanese, 3 5 ; M e x i c a n , 2 5 5 n 4 3

R o b e r t s o n illustration, 1 3 3 ; Scarpa w o r k

2 i 9 n 4 9 . See also avant-garde; objectivity;

nature: O ' G o r m a n and, 1 7 5 ; W i j d e v e l d and,

and, 95; v a n ' t H o f f visit, 47

postmodernism

York City, 8 9 - 9 0

5 5 - 5 7 , 59; W r i g h t and, 9, 1 0 , 5 5 ~ 5 7 .

87, l ö s ,

2

33nI4,

2

3&-39n57,

2

45n55-

See also organic architecture

W r i g h t ' s views, 12, 3 4 , 64—65. See also

1 2 6 ; van D o e s b u r g criticizing W r i g h t for,

rationalism

9—10. See also decorativism

Nechodoma, Antonin, 166, 176

O b r e g o n , Alvaro, 1 6 7

Nedeljikov, N i n a , 1 6 , 2 1 8 m 8

O b r t e l , Vit, 1 6

23 i n 7 i ; and Cahiers d'art's " L e s maitres

neoacademism, 75

Ocatillo Desert C a m p (Wright), 93

de l'architecture c o n t e m p o r a i n e " (Mas-

neoplasticisni: D e Stijl, 47; O u d , 49; van

Odnoetazhnaia

ters o f c o n t e m p o r a r y architecture), 1 1 5 ,

Doesburg, 9

Amerika

O u d , Jacobus J o h a n n e s Pieter, 48—50,

(Ilf and Petrov),

1 1 0 - 1 1 , 243n31

Netherlands. See Holland

1 1 6 ; correspondence with other m o -

O ' G o r m a n , J u a n , 2 1 , 1 6 6 , 1 6 7 , 170—75,

dernists, 2 2 7 n n i 7 , 2 i , 2 2 8 n 2 3 ; De Stijl

N e u f e r t , Ernst, 1 5

1 8 3 ; Anahuacalli M u s e u m ( M e x i c o

Neutra, Dione, 8

City), 1 7 8 , 178,

N e u t r a , Richard, 1 6 , 1 8 2 , 2 i ó n i 2 , 2 5 7 0 5 9 ;

Universidad N a c i o n a l A u t o n o m a de

in Russian architectural press, 1 0 7 ; and

and Barragán, 1 7 9 , 1 8 1 , 2 5 7 ^ 9 ; B e -

M e x i c o ( M e x i c o City), 170—72, 1 7 1 ;

" S i x t y Years o f L i v i n g A r c h i t e c t u r e "

tancourt with, 1 6 6 ; C e t t o with, 1 7 2 ,

M e x i c o C i t y A i r p o r t murals, 1 7 4 ; J u a n

exhibition, 64; tower design f o r congress

2 5 4 n 2 2 ; French and, 1 1 8 ; International

O ' G o r m a n H o u s e (El Pedregal), 174—75,

building ( T h e Hague), 2 2 8 n 2 4 , 2 3 i n 7 4 ;

1 7 9 - 8 0 ; M a i n Library,

statements, 49, 78; factory design (Purmerend), 49, 4 9 , 2 2 7 n 2 i , 2 2 8 n 2 3 ;

Style, 2 2 4 0 4 7 ; K a h n H o u s e (San Fran-

174', progressive social agenda, 2 5 4 n i 9 ;

Wendingen b o o k critique, 8—9; and

cisco), 1 7 2 , 1 8 1 ; K a u f m a n n H o u s e (Palm

D i e g o Rivera house (San A n g e l , M e x i c o

Springs), 2 5 7 0 5 9 ; on Metron cover,

City), 1 6 7 , 167,

W r i g h t ' s influence, 1 2 , 4 9 - 5 0 , 1 1 3 ,

81;

and regionalism, 2 5 4 n 2 2 ; Taliesin, 4, 7, 7, 8, 2 i 6 n i 2 ; Wie baut Amerika

(How

1 7 8 ; vs. U.S. charities

and settlements, 2 5 5 U 2 7 oil, M i d d l e Eastern, 1 8 6 , 2 6 o n 3 9 Okhitovich, Mikhail, 105

A m e r i c a builds), 1 0 5 N e w Deal, 79, 1 3 0

O k l a h o m a , Price T o w e r (Wright), 64, 1 6 6

" n e w liberalism," A m e r i c a n , 84

Olivetti factory (Pozzuoli), Naples, 70, 7 1

N e w Objectivity, 8, 46

Olivetti social services c o m p l e x (Figini and

newspapers: G e r m a n , 1 1 , 2 i 7 n i 5 ; Iraq Times, 1 9 3 , 26 i n 4 7 ; M e x i c o C i t y célsior, 1 8 2 - 8 3 ,

Pollini), Ivrea, 97, g 8 Ex-

Russian, 1 0 6 , 1 0 9

N e w York C i t y : A m e r i c a n Radiator Building,

"Frank Lloyd Wright,

A r c h i t e c t " exhibition ( 1 9 3 0 - 3 1 ) , 1 3 ; Hastings, C o r b e t t , and H o o d , 1 3 1 ; N a tional Institute o f Arts and Letters, 89— 90; St. M a r k ' s - i n - t h e - B o u w e r i e plan (Wright), 14, 57, 62, 1 0 6 , 1 4 3 ; " S i x t y Years o f L i v i n g A r c h i t e c t u r e " exhibition, 1 8 ; Twentieth International Congress o f the History o f Art, 1 2 1 - 2 2 . See also Guggenheim Museum; Museum of Modern Art New York magazine, 1 0 6 N i e m e y e r , Oscar, 1 8 8 , 2 5 9 0 1 4 N i m t o n , Frances B o v i e , 1 8 9 , 2 5 9 0 1 7 , 2 ó i n 4 0 , 2Ó3n8o

O m i y a , S h i m a m u r a residence (Uchii), 39, 40,41

organic architecture, 2 3 , 1 5 3 , 2 1 7 m 5 , 2 2 2 n 2 2 ; and B a g h d a d plans (Wright), 208; British architects and, 1 3 6 , 1 4 0 , 1 4 3 ; and composition, 1 0 7 , 2 4 2 m s ;

(Wright), 1 1 2 ; U n i t y Temple (Wright), 4 7 , 52, 9 5 , 2 2 ó n 3 , 2 4 8 n i 6 ; W r i g h t ' s children's playhouse mural " T h e Fisherman and the G e n i i , " 1 9 1 ; W r i g h t ' s

Pagano-Pogatschnig, Giuseppe, 6 7 , 7 8 , 233ni3 Pahlavi, Reza Shah, 209, 2 1 1

painting: and architecture, 49—50, 78—79, 1 1 7 ; Dr. Atl, 1 7 9 ; K a u f m a n n , 1 7 4 ; O ' G o r m a n , 1 7 0 , 1 7 4 ; Rivera, 1 7 7 - 7 8 Palace o f the Soviets (Iofan, G e l f r e i k h , and Shchuko), 1 0 9

D u t c h architects and, 46, 5 5 , 65; French

Palazzo Balbi, Venice, 88, 89, 90, 92

press and, 1 1 7 , 1 1 8 - 1 9 ; G e r m a n y and,

Palazzo Ducale, Venice, W r i g h t ' s visit, 66,

15—16; f r o m g r o u n d up, 2 5 5 ^ 1 ; Italy and, 1 9 , 6 7 , 6 9 - 7 0 , 7 6 - 9 9 , 2 3 2 - 4 0 ;

238n49 Palazzo Strozzi, Florence: " S i x t y Years o f

Japan and, 3 5 , 3 8 - 3 9 , 4 3 - 4 4 ; Latin

Living A r c h i t e c t u r e " exhibition, 1 8 ,

A m e r i c a n architects and, 2 1 , 1 4 9 , 1 5 3 ,

7 0 - 7 1 , 7 1 , 7 7 , 81, 8 3 - 8 8 , 86,

1 5 4 , 1 5 7 , 1 5 9 , 1 6 2 , 1 6 4 ; M e x i c o and,

2 3 7 n 4 2 ; Studio Italiano di Storia

2 1 , 1 6 6 , 1 6 9 , 1 7 4 - 8 3 ; and Persian

dell'Arte (Italian Institute o f A r t History)

architecture, 1 9 2 ; ranch style house and,

o f L i v i n g A r c h i t e c t u r e " exhibition), 1 8 ,

(Wright), 39, 1 0 2 ; H . J . U l l m a n H o u s e

1 67

Pahlbod, M e h r d a d , 2 1 1

belief in, 2 7 , 4 4 , 2 2 2 n 2 i

W r i g h t ' s last c o m m e n t s on ( " S i x t y Years

Frank T h o m a s H o u s e

studio (Le C o r b u s i e r and Jeanneret), 1 6 7 ,

Pahlavi, Shams, 2 1 1

La Nuova Città, 83, 2 3 7 0 3 9

(Wright), 124;

145 O z e n f a n t , A m é d é e , 6 1 ; Paris house and

order: British architects and, 1 4 3 ; W r i g h t ' s

1; and Russian projects, 1 0 9 , 243 n26;

5 0, 5 1 ; Nathan G . M o o r e H o u s e

3In74

Orage, A . R . , 1 3 1

numeracy, 1 4 4 - 4 5

O a k Park, Illinois, 1 ; G a l e H o u s e (Wright),

2

O x f o r d , Sainsbury B u i l d i n g ( M a c C o r m a c ) ,

86; Z e v i description, 82, 2 3 6 ^ 5 . See also nature An Organic Architecture (The Architecture of Democracy), W r i g h t , 80, 1 3 4 orientalism: eclectic colonial, 2 1 2 ; Scarpa, 9 3 ; W r i g h t , 9 3 , 190—91, 2 4 5 n 5 5 . See also Japan; M i d d l e East ornament: B e h n e seeing n o n e in W r i g h t , 1 2 ;

232n4,

headquarters in, 8 4 - 8 5 Palladium H o u s e / I d e a l House, ( H o o d with Jeeves), L o n d o n ,

132

Palma, O ' H i g g i n s , 1 5 2 Palo Alto, Hanna H o u s e / H o n e y c o m b H o u s e (Wright), 158,

159, 247n67

Panama, 1 6 6 Panama City, Atalaya A p a r t m e n t B u i l d i n g (Stempel), 1 6 6 P a n - A m e r i c a n C o n g r e s s o f Architects, 2 1 , 148, 177 Pani, M a r i o , 1 6 9

h o m e , 2 4 , 47; W r i g h t ' s studio, 4 , 5 , 5

as decadence, 1 0 , 1 4 ; H i t c h c o c k and,

Pantelejmon G o l o s o v project ( 1 9 1 2 ) , 1 0 1

objectivity: in Japanese architecture, 38; N e w

1 1 6 , 2 i g n 4 9 ; Imperial H o t e l , 3 0 , 3 1 ;

parallelism, influence processed as, 2, 1 6

Objectivity, 8, 46; sachlich, 1 1 , 1 6 , 46;

skyscraper, 1 0 1 ; Sullivan articulating,

Paris: " L e s Années 3 0 " exhibition (Musée

Paris

(continued)

N a t i o n a l des M o n u m e n t s F r a n ç a i s , 1 9 9 7 ) , 1 2 0 ; Dávila studying in, 1 5 3 ; k n o w l e d g e

1 1 2 , 1 1 5 , 1 1 6 , 1 2 0 , 2 4 7 n n 6 6 , 6 7 ; Italians

Piccinato, Luigi, 92, 2 3 4 n n 2 5 , 2 7 ; Sabaudia,

and, 78, 87; and Japanese architecture, 3 9 , 2 2 5 ^ 7 ; Latin A m e r i c a n architects

66-67

o f W r i g h t in, 1 1 3 - 1 6 , 120; A m é d é e

Pintonello, A . , R o m e Railway Station,

O z e n f a n t h o u s e and studio (Le C o r b u s i e r

Pioneers

and Jeanneret), 1 6 7 , 1 6 7 ; Savoye Villa (Le

of the Modern

125, 133.

Movement

and, 1 5 9 , 166; Russians and, 1 0 0 ,

68

Pravda,

135

Pirelli B u i l d i n g / " P i r e l l i T e a m , "

Architecture" exhibition, 18, Jp, 49,

Pittsburgh Point Park C i v i c C e n t e r (Wright),

168

P a r t i t o d ' A z i o n e , 83

106

press: o n I m p e r i a l H o t e l , 3 0 ; p o p u l a r , 1 .

189-90

See also a r c h i t e c t u r a l press; n e w s p a p e r s ; publications

199 planning: and automobile, 1 0 5 , i i o - n ,

Pasadena, California, M a i s o n Millard

164,

P r é v o s t , J e a n , 2 4 7 n 6 6 ; Usonie:

2 0 7 , 2 1 2 , 2 6 i n 5 5 ; British intellectuals,

la civilisation

américaine

1 3 1 ; Regional Planning Association o f

o f A m e r i c a n civilization),

A m e r i c a , 1 3 1 . See also c o m m u n i t y

247nn66,67

past: b i r t h p l a c e s o f h u m a n c i v i l i z a t i o n , 1 8 4 ;

planning; regionalism; town planning;

W r i g h t n o t r e j e c t i n g , 9, 1 9 6 . See also "pattern language,"

(Barragán and Cetto), 1 8 1 - 8 2 ,

i