TYPICAL WRIGHTIAN DETAIL OF THE INTERIOR OF FALLINGWATER.

Comments

  1. heloise says:

    Plant ivy?

  2. tom says:

    Decades ago, when I made pilgrimage thereto we removed our foot coverings before treading on the sacred stones.

    • von Hindenburg says:

      I absentmindedly rested my hand on one of the dining room chairs. The look of rage and horror that I saw pass over the docent’s face was a sight to behold.

  3. Antiplanner says:

    Client: “The roof is leaking.”
    Frank Lloyd Wright: “That’s how you know you have a roof.”

  4. von Hindenburg says:

    If you’ll forgive a rant, every time Fallingwater comes up on architectural forums, someone has to declare it to be a failure and Wright to be a charlatan because of the leaking, structural issues, and inaccessibility of the site. This seriously misses the structure’s purpose.

    Things Fallingwater isn’t (or wasn’t designed as):
    1. A commercial or public building
    2. A home for a regular family. (Go to Polymath Park, just up the road, to see Wright’s idea for that.)
    3. A primary home for a wealthy family (Go to Kentuck Knob for that.)

    These are all uses that require a building to be practical, accessible, affordable, and reliable. Fallingwater doesn’t have to have any of these qualities because it was:
    1. A weekend getaway home for a rich couple.
    2. A showpiece and statement.

    Is the roof leaking again? Does the plaster need replaced? Is there too much snow on Jumonville mountain to reach it this weekend? Oh well. The Kaufmanns could easily pay for maintenance and repairs and, if any of those issues prevented them from using the house for a few weeks? Oh well. Just have to stay warm and snug in their primary mansion.

  5. RepubAnon says:

    And nobody said that visiting a Frank Lloyd Wright building was on their bucket list?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *