Thought there may be those who would like a walk thru

Page 2 of 3  


Wow...
It's not too commone but it does happen that two will be able to grow that closely together.

In a way, it's a form of natural selection, although it selects for trees that retain enough leaves, and/or enough energy reserves, to survive a defoliation event. Most can come back for being completely denuded, although twice is harder (the problem with Gypsy Moths a few years back was that they'd come back again and again, devouring the young leaves until the tree was exhaused and died). But any sort fo environemtnal pressure is a form of selection. Even with the Texas BLuebonnets (basically, wild native lunpines) in my fron planting beds - the seeds that survive teh "Winter" (such as it is here) and grow quickly, and flower, before the heat hits (about this time of year) are the ones that survive and make next year's seeds. A lot of the seedlings that sprouted never quite made it. Anyone with a garden (who doesn't automaticly pull up, or otherwise kill, any and all seedlings) can easily observe the process. You'll see it with oyur trees - the ones that can grow quickly enough so as to escape the shade of he larger/older trees will survive, andthen have the chance to flower and set seed.
It cracks me up when I hear or read people say that "natural selection no longer occurs" - what a crock of nonsense.

Prob., like most people, brainwashed from the day of birth with all sorts of crap as to how things like social climbing and owning the maximum possible amount of miscellaneous stuff are supposedly of Paramount Importance and supposedly constitute The Meaning Of Life. It seems to me that this is why gurus, for example, have such an aura/mystique about them - to most people, even the simplest idea that ignores social bullshit and mindless materialism is a completely new and revolutionary idea.
One of the *advantages* of being socially "retarded" is that I never "properly" learned how to shut out perceptions, and appreciation, of the "stupid little things" like nature and the environment. When I learned about things like Eastern Philsophies, Zen koans, and the like, it was not a new thing, but an affirmation of mcuh that was, to me, patently obvious. What society totally sucks at is teaching children (and adults ;) ) how to *balance* the different aspects of human nature (or at least, the *capabilities* of human nature). We are social beings, and we are material beings existing in a material universe, but we're also intellectual beings, natural beings, emotional beings, and, dare I say it, spiritual, or at least philosophical, beings. Cultures in general tend to emphasize the social first, and the matrerial second, with the emotional nature third in importance, and the intellectual, natural, and spiritual/philosophical aspects being lumped together into a very, *very* VERY distant third.
This is, it seems to me, also why so many people totally reject a statement such as "nature can teach us a lot" - the call it "mystical claptrap", because they reejct the science behind it, and reject the non- social and non-material parts even of their own being. Meanwhile, I think this is also why it takes many people a very long time to recognize, and then start to develop, these other aspects of their being: they basically have to come across these things, learn about them, by accident - the culture offers not one iota of guidance, because the majority of sociocultural institutions, including religion, are completely and totally anthropocentric, to the extent that tehy actually seek to divide humans from nature, and designate nature as "evil". In reality, nature is often hostile, and fundamentally indifferent, but not "evil", which includes a premeditated intent to do harm.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Damn right there was a lot of bad construction back then. I live in a house built as a summer cottage (2500 sf) in 1886. My grandfather bought it in 1891 and stuffed a fieldstone foundation and a furnace under it to make it "year round". However it is built poorly with studs being 2X3's at from 16 to 24 inches oc. I remodeled a couple years ago and basically rebuilt the rear structure of the house and then sheathed on the inside with plywood. My house in Boston was built in 1859 and was incredibly solid, built on piles. It was however a full time residence. BTW, the Victorian rowhouse worked very well as long as you have good legs for the stairs. I loved that house and am sorry I ever let it go.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[snip]

With older places, I think it might be that a lor of people just built their own shelters out of necessity, and simply dind't always know how to do it *well*.
In the end, for older structures (whetehr a house or a non-residential building), I think that each place is just individual, and any potantial buyer has to be sure to both (1) get a thorough inspection by someone who understands historic structures, and (2) be a hard realist about teh time and costs involved in restoration. Personally, I know I couldn't cope with an extensive restoration, having seen what can been involved, but of course different peopl eare different, and I also think it's very cool that other people do restore structures and, as a by-product, ina sense maintain that bit of history for the rest of us.
But going back to cosntruction quality, I think that mainly, the worst mistake is to *assume* that a structure is sound based upon its age (or newness). The thing is that, even if the building was well-built, factors ranging from perennial lack of maintenence, to poorly-done "renovations", to destructive inhabitants, will comprimise any structure. Plus, all builders simply were not, and are not, equal. So I don't think one can make accurate broad statements as to whether old is better or new is better...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think he just needed to separate teh two examples into separate paragraphs - I think the point was to contrast the two odler places, one built poorly contrasted with one built well...

Now *that* is impressive.

I'm with you there. Whcih is why I hope that the last place I get will be custom - it wouldn't be large, but I would want it built well enough so that, when I can no longer do any maintenence work, it won't be a big deal because the place will remain sound.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Until 1980 I worked much of the time with a FLLW follower. However his built-in furniture was comfortable. Frankly I thought that many of his houses were not just good, but great. He was able to charge a fee of 18%. Many of his houses that I worked on were published. The plans worked and the details were worked out to the 1/16". WE drew full scale elevations of the kitchens and other important rooms. I worked on about 14 houses. It was fun, but harrowing. I really prefer commercial and municipal work. EDS
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
[snipped]

I'd like to see references to the publications, becasue I'd like to see that - if you don't want to post them here, you can send to (mirror image of) moc.niftorrapATscimorhcoretp
I think one thing that often is forgotten about FLW is that he did do a fari bit of experimentation. I'm not so sure thatit was, at that time, easy/straightforward to predict how some things would or wouldn't wrk, or stand the test of time. THat's just my impression, but it doesn't alter the fact that some of the ideas were, for lack of a better phrase, "human", in that they did try to address how people would feel in a particualr environment, based on the fact that poeple have a better quality of life (and also, do better work) if they're in a pleasing environment. Yeah, I knwo thre is more to it, but I'm talking about ideas that are worth taking to the next stage of development.
So, even if the cantilevered roof and balcony elements in Falling Water did need to be reinforced due to structural problems, the answer is not to simply NEVER use cantileverd roof and balcony elements; the answer is to use/adapt them where it is appropriate to do so, AND get the engineering correct.
So I don't go for either extreme (although all extreem\\ism is IMO too, well, extreme ;) ). I don't think FLW was a god, but I also don't think he was a villain or an inept boob. He was an architect who had some good ideas and some, well, not so good ideas - but at least his ideas make a person *think* ;)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Did he claim that?

Not going to do your work for you.

Please confine your criticism to the actual project.

Was wondering when you'd try that lack of tactic.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Hey, THAT isn't the walk I'm talking. THAT particular walk is into the woods from the house. I thought that as well in the beginning before I got a view of the whole complex. To the rear of the complex (opposite the "falling waters) is a 80' long walk or so attached to a fairly large building.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Do you mean the Guest House?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh! Ok.
I also figure that groceries weren't carried in from the road - which is why it'd be interesting to see the utility area. A covered walkway would IMO be a minimal requirement, best is some interior pathway (not carpeted...) allowing one to bring in groceries and take out the trash. But those things aren't popular "talking points" so to speak...they aren't "elegant", and poeple mostly want to see "elegant" rather than "utilitarian". Tho' I still don't think the two need be mutuially exclusive ;)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

When I saw it I was driving back with my boss (also a friend) from a job in West Virginia to Pittsburg. We took the tour and then asked to see the rear of the house. Because we were architects, they let us. The kitchen was large and blah. The owner's wife would not let FLLW do the kitchen, so it had standard St. Charles metal cabinets, I think red Formica counters, and was light yellow. That's why they don't show it, because it is bad 1940's! Regarding his furniture, Wright once said that he had a bad back because he had to sit in his own furniture. EDS
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The man was all about the interior.

"they don't show the back"
"I've heard it leaks"
(")The interior suffers from attention paid to the exterior(")
I have yet to see him actually point out any single item of this "LOAD of bad design."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Which is probably why FrankL provided a very short covered journey from car to entry.

You very seldom see a full tour of anything. Hell, even your semester final presentation on three boards had to edit.
"What is the big idea behind this design? What is the critical piece of interest?"
And they say Americans are growing up so "media savvy." pshaw.
It's Fallingwater. You've got one shot to present the outside and if you are lucky one shot to present the inside. Are you going to say "and here's the outside of the back wall which FLW used to anchor the focus towards the other side of the building"? "this is the sink"?
The next question is "if the back wall is used to focus away from itself why didn't you show what the focus is?" This is 101 stuff people.
Quick, without looking it up, where is Philip Johnson's guest house located in relation to the main Glass House? Had you ever bothered to care? To ask? Of course not. Big Idea.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Media inundated. DIfferent from "savvy". From the French (IIRC) for "to know", "savvy" implies some level of comprehension of what it is that one is seeing.

Ah, but it's so much easier to criticise someone else's Big Idea, than it is to come up with an original one, esp. an original one tha twill make enough of an impact upon enough poeple so as to make on famous and rich.
<Following said with tongue in cheek ;) > "Sour grapes", phrase derived from one of Aesop's Tales (from, what, 3000 yrs ago?): if you can't achieve a goal, rahte than continuing to try and/or admitting one's own shortcomings, it's so very much easier to instead assuage one's ego by convincing oneself that the goal is tainted, and/or anyone else who achieve the goal was just an inept boob.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, I meant what I said.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Huh? What does that have to do with the etymology of the word "savvy" and the difference between "not really media savvy" (your implication) and soemone saying "right, not media savvy, merely media inundated, because 'savvy' means having knowledge about something? You might as well have written, "No, breadfruit", for all the relation it has to what you're quoting as the statement to which you're replying. Why quibble even when someone agrees with you?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Nothing. If you think it should, that is clearly your own fabrication.
Simple sentences, both of them. I'll repeat myself and allow it to apply to both posts -
I meant what I said.
Though with people coming on and inventing lack of content (?!) to my words, it hardly seems worth trying to express myself. At least, not quite so plainly. That's one reason I don't post here much. Simple little post "No, I meant what I said" and I'm called upon to defend it against arguments other people are having with themselves? Yeah right.
It has nothing to do with etymology or tea in china or the full range of my beliefs or anything YOU might wish to project on it. I realize that this is the naughties and post-modernism is still pretty strong in the world and you are "allowed" to pretend stuff means whatever you think it means with no regard to what it says, but that's a game for leftists, academics and fools. Sometimes it can be fun and even get you a degree but it is, barring one critical piece of utility, utterly useless.
No, I meant what I said.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sounds to me like a self-description on your part.

Whatever, dood.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The walk from this building TO where?

One constantly hears that about buildings people are jealous of.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Why, Wal-Mat of course! <LOL!>

Criticism is easy; doing is hard.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.