Posting: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *A LIST OF ARCHITECTS * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I would like to suggest a fun, but dangerous enterprise - - - - that we devise an index of innovative architects, engineers, (and perhaps later, artists composers and others) who have contributed to the dissidence of the norms of their architectural milieu. Preferably, a list of individuals that have extensively built examples - or at least have contributed in some substantive way to the advance of architectural thought. It should be a group effort, since one or two persons can’t remember, or know all of the architects that might be included. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My own contribution follows, but it should be added to immediately and continuously, never to be entirely complete. I know already of several names that are missing. The present list is alphebetical and not broken into categories. I suppose that could follow as a subsequent development if anyone thinks it’s necessary. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obviously some have contributed more profoundly to what we may call "organic architecture" than others. However, it has become obvious over the years that there is no single definition of "organic" that satisfies all the architects we have published. Their early work, or later work, or some single work might cause you to consider an architect, or perhaps as the list grows, an artist.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What I propose (if anyone is interested) is a first attempt at such a list. It’s not meant to be static, but fittingly, organic. (However, I do not think the architecture should necessarily be limited to what we might think of as "organic.) It should be considered incomplete - a moving target to be supplemented on a continual basis. It should contain the names of men and women that have contributed to the creative aspects of architecture with which FOK is most identified. It will most likely not contain the names of the New York Five, the Whites and Greys, the postmodernists, the deconstructivists, contextualists, etc.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> These should be the names of architects we would want to publish sometime in the future (if we last that long). Please submit names you feel should be included to FOK.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Of course, it would be a dangerous enterprise to publish such a list - some will consider it presumptuous, mean spirited, etc., but that is not the intention and I think it can be a useful reference. However, I emphasize again, the list is not intended to exclude or grade those who have contributed! There will never be a definitive Kebyar inventory of "approved" architects! Many individuals have contributed to the "cause" and are not listed here - omitted inadvertently due to lack of knowledge and of course, the fog of memory.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ************************************************************************************************* Key to symbols: # = Living, * = FOK monograph. + = FOK reference. ************************************************************************************************* # + Valentino Agnoli, Alvar Alto, # * Anton Alberts, >>>>>>>>Francesc Berenguer, Otto Bartning, # * Steve Badanes (Jersey Devil). Peter Behrens, Max Berg, Hendrik Petrus Berlage, André Bloc, # Piet Blom, Dominikus Böhm, Gottfried Böhm, Etienne-Louis Boullee, # Robert Bowlby, # Renaat Braem, # * Robert C. Broward, # * William P. Bruder, # * Robert Bruno,>>>>>>> # Monografia Santiago Calatrava, Warren Callister, Felix Candella, # * Douglas Cardinal, # Michael Carmichael, Enrico Castiglioni, Eduardo F. Catalano, Iakov Chernikov, Ferdinand Cheval, Le Corbusier, # * Gyorgy Csete, # * Wallace Cunningham, >>>>>>>># + Charles Deaton, Michel de Klerk, Theo Van Doesburg, # * Günther Domenig, Aldon Dow, # Dan C. Duckham, Willem Marinus Dudok, # * Arthur Dyson,>>>>>>>>> Gustave Eiffel,>>>>>>>>>>> # * Robert Faust, # * Harvey Ferrero, + Hermann Finsterlin, # * James Howard Fox, Richard Buckminster Fuller,>>>>>>>>>>>> # * Antonio Gaudi, # + Nari Gandhi, # * Jacques Gillet, * Bruce Goff, # Aaron Green, Charles Greene & Henry Greene, # * Herb Greene, Walter Burley Griffin, Walter Gropius, Peter Grund, # Amancio Guedes, Hector Guimard, Guenzel & Drummond,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> # Augustin Hernandez, Jack Hilmer, Bernhard Hoetger, Josef Hoffmann, Fritz Höger, Hugo Häring, Victor Horta, # + Friedensreich Hundertwasser, # * James Hubbell, # + Christian Hunziker,>>>>>>>>>> # * Peter Jansen, # + Michael P. Johnson, # * Euine Fay Jones,>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> # Fredick J. Kiesler, # * Kendrick Bangs Kellogg, Peter Vilhelm Jensen-Klint, Henry John Klutho, Pieter Lodewijk Kramer, # Lucien Kroll, + Thaddeus Kusmierski,>>>>>>>> * John Lautner, + Claude-Nicolas Ledoux, Jean-Jacques Lequeu, # * Daniel B-H Liebermann, El Lissitzky, # Antti Lovag, Hans Luckhardt, Wassili Luckhardt, >>>> # * Donald MacDonald, * Charles Rennie Mackintosh, Robert Maillart, # * Imre Makovecz, Kasmier Malevich, Bernard Maybeck, Erich Mendelsohn, # * Will Miller, Mjelnikov, # * G. K. Muennig, >>>>>>>>>>>>>Pier Luigi Nervi, Richard Neutra, Oscar Niemeyer, # Edward R. Niles,>>>>>>>>> Hermann Obrist, # Victor Ogann, # Juan O'gorman, Joseph M. Olbrich, # * Robert Oshatz, Jacobus Johannes Pieter Oud, # * Robert Overstreet,>>>>>>>>>>>> # Alfred Browning Parker, Joseph Paxton, Auguste Perret, William Wesley Peters, # Reima Pietilä, Hans Poelzig, # * Bart Prince, William Gray Purcell & George Grant Elmslie,>>>>>> # Eugene Ray, Henry Hobson Richardson, Wilheim Riphahn, Simone Rodilla, # * A. Loris Rossi & Donatella Mazzolini,>>>>>>>>>>>> Eero Saarinen, Eliel Saarinen, # Fariburz Sahba, + Antonio Sant' Elia, Hans Scharoun, Rudolph M. Schindler, # Paolo Soleri, + Rudolf Steiner, # + Michael Szyszkowitz & Karla Kowalski, Louis Sullivan,>>>>>>>> # * Shin Takamatsu, Kenzo Tange, + Vladimir Tatlin, Bruno Taut, Max Taut, Eduardo Torroja, # * Kenneth Treister, >>>>>>>> # Jørn Utzon,>>>>>> Henri van de Velde, # + Carlos Páez Vilaró, # * Dean Bryant Vollendorf, Johan Melchoir van der Meij, Mies Van der Rohe, L. C. van der Vulgt,>>>>>>>>>> Otto Wagner, Philip B. Welch, # + Richard Whitaker, # Eric Lloyd Wright, * Frank Lloyd Wright, Lloyd Wright, Jopseph Wythe >>>>>>>>>>> # * Kimo Yokoyama, >>>>>>>>>>> Bruno Zevi, etc.>>>>>> ***********************************************Started -12/17/94-*********************************

Signed: Jack Golden

Posting: Morning Foks, If anyone missed me the last few days, plese contribute it to certain indiviuals of our governments law enforcement agencies who saw fit to arrest me, fingerprint me, and take my photo and jail me for the henious crime of drinking a beer inside the Sipsey Wilderness Area of Alabama. (i got no credit for packing out the litter i ran across nor for paying the 2 dollar honor system admittance charge. Please be warned that should you come to the wilderness area (which is very beautiful) that it is a dry county and such criminal behavior will not be condoned by the rednecks, fat boys with DEA caps and other such morons which inhabit the area. (Excuse me) Hopefully i will post a picture of the largest Tulip Popular in Alabama (they say the planet) shortly, when i check the film in my digital camera. Bob, we went to drive by your MG dealership last time at Auburn and I was dissapointed to learn it had been demolished. Sorry. (the good die young is once again given credibility. I hope, should philosophy remain/become an integral part of this FOK site, that all will respect each and others ideas and beliefs. Gotta call my lawyer. Bye FOKS! May everyone produce a piece of Archtiecture today.

Signed: Miles

Posting: To Bob Faust: ----- As a clarification, regarding mentioning of commercial projects, I mentioned your apartment complex because I know it to be an example of architect-developer-architecture.------ Your University Motors was a great building, and I am glad to have seen it before it was demolished. However, I understood that you designed and built that for a client. If you are now saying that you owned and developed that property and sold it or leased it to University Motors, then I am pleased to be corrected. ------I will mention that Winslow Wedin's eight unit condomium complex in Tallahassee, FL is another example of architect-developer which is successful. I recently had occassion to visit it and learn more about it. I will give Bob Faust some credit (in my opinion) since his Auburn Apartments probably provided Winslow some inspiration (since Winslow's units were built shortly after Winslow left Auburn.)

Signed: lwg

Posting: Hello out there!>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I have just visited Vicki's home page for James Hubbell for the second time. I think it's beautiful. If some of us are still reluctant to describe our work as "organic," perhaps Hubbell's poetic description of "The Architecture of Jubilation" is more apt. Vicki, your web page for Hubbell is great. Keep up the good work. Wish we could afford to hire you to do our web page - which we have been working on for over a year - so far we are still not on-line.

Signed: Jack Golden

Posting: To Jack Golden: ----- I will have to consider the intent of your list for a while. ------ Certainly, I will like the list much better when I see my name worthy of your consideration and included. My name is Larry Wayne Grantham, by the way, and it would be inserted right after yours, if in alphabetical order. ----Since you have not noticed, yours would fall right after Brcue Goff, and put us in some really good company. I suggest that you put your name on the list. -----Such is the danger of lists, and who should or not be included. ------ Do not worry about me, however, as long as my name is not on the list, then I can continue to critisize the makeup of the list. ----- Meanwhile, I have taken no offense. I seem to be the too "serious guy" of this site.---------------------------So to all of you relatives of the transcriber: The line of sarcasm is rambling on. :-) ;o) :o( ;-( :-) :o> :-] :o} :{] :o) :-[ :-} XXXXX

Signed: lwg

Posting: waaahhhhhhh! It didn't go my way! wahhhhhhhhhh!

Signed: illegitamate baby of the transcriber

Posting: Hello FOK Fellows, Well, we are back up to speed here in Atlanta. I've gotten some help in making this old wreck run for a while. Part of the problem, besides my limited cyber knowledge turned out to be the size of this page. Now that a purging has occured access is possible, for a while......Enough of that. >Jack Golden: The content of your list reminds me of some of the time line charts Bruce had, made by former students. The overlapping of the lives of different creative individuals is exciting. >LWG: Its good to see that you had the time to transcribe some of Phil's >Goff on GoffEarlier comments regarding satire bring to mind the movie >RidiculeAnother movie, now on video is >Surviving PicassoI read recently that at the MOMA in October is to be an show on Scheile. A lecture is also advertised. >On Monday, the 22nd, I will be traveling to Clemson to hear Kevin Nute's talk. I plan to go via Wright's house in Greenville, SC. Also, in years past I have hosted a small gathering of local architects and other interested individals at my home to continue the discussions of Architecture. I plan to resume them in the near future. Architecturally,

Signed: Nelson Brackin

Posting: Hello to all......this is Lawrence, telneting from London. I don't know how you guys took up this collection, or how you got me on that damned plane, but here I am and my wife is really mad. I'll just go find a pub where there are lotz of british architects and tell them how messed up the Royal Academy of Architects must surely be. ....................BEWARE THE FOLLOWING CONTAINS LANGUAGE NOT SUITABLE FOR THE EARS OF ARCHITECTS ENAMORED WITH THERE OWN DESIGN ILLITERATI ..................But first, I feel personally obligated to turn over to JACK GOLDEN the rightful title for the longest and most verbose submittal to the FOK postings, previously held by myself, when wrested from the grasp of LWG with considerable effort. Jack, sometimes I fear we often presume our level of consciousness to exceed that of other animals erroneously. First I think we should solve the problem of communication. Wasn't that what Dr.Doolittle was all about.? Of ignorance, it can be said, we are ignorant. . ..................and yes, I do remember the Mills Brothers, and yes I would like "to set the world on fire", starting with the following somewhat foreshortened missive.....................THEREFORE; (since everyone is yelling at me) While I personally subscribe to the beautiful and eloquently stated (Jack Golden) precepts of FOK (hell, who wouldn't), I totally reject an approach to architectural practice which focuses totally and solely upon the notion of "architecture as art" (WOW! heathen! reprobate!) It is not so much that the practice of architecture continues to narrow its focus to design only, but rather that we simply can not survive if we continue to grow further and further from our roots as master builders. We must engage the entire process, or die. In order to retain our historical capacity as creators and designers, we simply must function in a multifaceted practice that will work to develop and reestablish our capacity as master builders. There should be no developers in america, only architects. ...............the major crime that is being perptrated as we speak, is that the very death of the practice of architecture is imminent, and rather insidiously upon us today, while the practicing illiterati continue to tromp reality in the face, and irresponsibly cloak themselves in the irrelevent words of past dead and dying masters.........each of whom would sound a great deal like Gehry if they were with us today. .............In honesty, (HERE COMES THE BAD PART, GLAD I'VE ALREADY BEEN SAFELY INVOUNTARILY EXPATRIATED) todays architects are woefully unprepared and literally incapable of any form of practice which reachs beyond facade design. ...Architects don't know structural, electrical, mechanical, or plumbing design. (only very generally), Architects don't understand real estate finance, or general business financial management. Architects have no idea of actual real building costs, Architects have very poor experience with the actual process of constructing larger buildings, which is common to the general contractor. As such, architects are solely a distanced artists, who must approach their own media through the jaundiced eys of the general contractors, who make hay from our ignorance, with our own clients. Architects can't accurately calculate the mortgage value of a project of their own design. Architects can't put together a total project budget, or even a accurate realiable construction budget, without lotz of help from the enemy. Architects are unfamiliar with debt and equity ratios, or typical every day real estate finance. Architects aren't generally familiar with proper ratios of gross to net building areas in different types of buildings, which is required first grade reading for any developer. Architects don't really know how to deal with most of the processes that drive a new building to successful completion...............Clients have a greatly overvalued perception of the knowledge and preparation of architects..........but this is rapidly changing, because the developers, brokers, lenders, general contractors, engineers, interior designers/decorators, and others are gradually educating the public to our deficiencies. While we pathetically moan and groan about continueing education efforts. Gimme a break..........................In short, todays architecture and todays architects are respectfully, repetitive facades, and frauds, both the men and their buildings. Neither, nor the other able to survive in the 21st century.......Behind each deficiency lurks a monstrous modern disaster of historical proportion........HERE LIES ARCHITECTURE, DEAD FROM IRRELEVANCE. REPLACED BY TBAE STATE BOARD OF DESIGN OLIGARKS ( a committee comprised of interior decorators (6), landscape architects (3), and a single over-weight design architect)............Yet, here they come, the design illiterati, they still gather in groups, meetings, on the internet, and do homage to design as the SAVIOR OF THE PROFESSION, while they slap each other on the back, in mutual admiration, and in concerted agreement that all is well. Either totally blind to reality, or self indulgent beyond any possible comprehension............................I, for one, pray Gods blessing on this magnificent poverty and all the magnificient men of different times past, who gave us the gifts of architecture, which we now so callously and carelessly abrogate and abandon by our blind subservience to "architecture only as art". Our irrelevance increases, and our effectiveness decreases, each day we continue to abandon our historical role as master builders, and the total of all processes required by the dictates of the 21st century of architectural history....................Unlike sculpture, architecture is a functioning entity, a working organism comprised of many unseen, invisible elements, all required to nourish and give birth to the visual reality. Artful design is the indispensable true heart of architecture, to which we all too readily agree, but it must be exposed as a single part of the equally indispensable process, least it never exist at all. Only the total process results in the whole living organism. We were never taught the process, but we must understand like any organism, it must have all its parts to properly serve the purpose for which it is created. If sculpture, then sculpture...but if architecture, then please architecture. ............Too much focus on "architecture as art" (yen and yang) has created an imbalance in our approach to practice which ignores the importance of the total process, this ignorance is resulting in a very, very, bad outcome for the profession. Our design hearts are already broken by those who now dominate the processes, in time our spirits and determination will die, then with compromise, the corpus follows. It is then gone. No longer relevant. I'm certain someone, in the future, will explain it better to the kids who still might have wanted to be architects, when they close the college of architecture, as they have other such irrelevant cirriculums (such as Home Economics). ....................For me, your new english friend, I am committed to practice the total process, already being eroneously accused, by the more brilliant illiterati, of having compromised my design commitment, by my attentions to processes not supposedly relevant to design only. Yes, I'll remain so committed, and hope for a thousand young men of conscience to join me................... None of you can deny that we need new direction. New hope. New definitions of architecture to widen the ever narrowing future of this great profession. New messages for the young professional men and women, about how architecture must be practiced, wholistically to produce a sustainable profession, to create, and provide a stable existence for talented, influential, and effective designers, and to develop a socioeconomically strong profession....................hasta la weiny muchachas! mi amigos!

Signed: Lawrence Edw. Sturm, Sr.

Posting: ADVICE TO THE YOUNG ARCHITECT 1. FORGET THE ARCHITECTURES OF THE WORLD EXCEPT AS SOMETHING GOOD IN THEIR WAY AND THEIR TIME. 2. DO NONE OF YOU GO INTO ARCHITECTURE TO GET A LIVING UNLESS YOU LOVE ARCHITECTURE AS A PRINCIPLE AT WORK, FOR ITS OWN SAKE…PREPARED TO BE AS TRUE TO IT AS TO YOUR OWN MOTHER, YOUR COMRADE, OR YOURSELF. 3. BEWARE OF THE ARCHITECTURAL SCHOOL EXCEPT AS THE EXPONENT OF ENGINEERING. 4. GO INTO THE FIELD WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE MACHINES AND METHODS AT WORK THAT MAKE THE MODERN BUILDING, OR STAY IN CONSTRUCTION DIRECT AND SIMPLE UNTIL YOU CAN WORK NATURALLY INTO BUILDING DESIGN FROM THE NATURE OF CONSTRUCTION. 5. IMMEDIATELY BEGIN TO FORM THE HABIT OF THINKING "WHY" CONCERNING ANY EFFECTS THAT PLEASE OR DISPLEASE YOU. 6. TAKE NOTHING FOR GRANTED AS BEAUTIFUL OR UGLY, BUT TAKE EVERY BUILDING TO PIECES, AND CHALLENGE EVERY FEATURE, LEARN TO DISTINGUISH THE CURIOUS FROM THE BEAUTIFUL. 7. GET THE HABIT OF ANALYSIS…ANALYSIS WILL IN TIME ENABLE THE SYNTHESIS TO BECOME YOUR HABIT OF MIND. 8. "THINK IN SIMPLES" -AS MY OLD MASTER USED TO SAY MEANING TO REDUCE THE WHOLE TO ITS PARTS IN THE SIMPLEST TERMS, GETTING BACK TO FIRST PRINCIPLES. DO THIS IN ORDER TO PROCEED FROM GENERALS TO PARTICULARS AND NEVER CONFUSE OR CONFOUND THEM OR YOURSELF BE CONFOUNDED BY THEM. 9. ABANDON AS POISON THE AMERICAN IDEA OF THE "QUICK- TURNOVER". TO GET INTO PRACTICE "HALF-BACKED" IS TO SELL OUT YOUR BIRTHRIGHT AS AN ARCHITECT FOR A MESS OF POTTAGE OR TO BE PRETENDING TO BE AN ARCHITECT. 10. TAKE TIME TO PREPARE. TEN YEARS PREPARATION FOR PRELIMINARIES TO ARCHITECTURAL PRACTICE IS LITTLE ENOUGH FOR ANY ARCHITECT WHO WOULD RISE ABOVE THE BELT IN TRUE ARCHITECTURAL APPRECIATION OR PRACTICE. 11. REGARD IT JUST AS DESIRABLE TO BUILD A CHICKEN-HOUSE AS TO BUILD A CATHEDRAL. THE SIZE OF THE PROJECT MEANS LITTLE IN ART, BEYOND THE MONEY-MATTER. IT IS THE QUALITY OF CHARACTER THAT REALLY COUNTS. CHARACTER MAY BE LARGE IN THE LITTLE OR LITTLE IN THE LARGE. 12. ENTER NO ARCHITECTURAL COMPETITION UNDER ANY CIRCUM- STANCES EXCEPT AS A NOVICE. NO COMPETITION EVER GAVE THE WORLD ANYTHING WORTH HAVING AS ARCHITECTURE. THE JURY ITSELF IS A PICKED AVERAGE. THE FIRST THING DONE IS TO GO THROUGH ALL THE DESIGNS AND THROW OUT THE BEST AND WORST ONES, SO, AS AN AVERAGE, IT CAN AVERAGE UPON AN AVERAGE. THE NET RESULT OF ANY COMPETITION IS AN AVERAGE BY THE AVERAGE OF THE AVERAGES. 13. BEWARE OF THE SHOPPER FOR PLANS. THE MAN WHO WILL NOT GRUBSTAKE YOU IN PROSPECTING FOR IDEAS IN HIS BEHALF WILL PROVE A FAITHLESS CLIENT. 14. THEN GO AS FAR AWAY AS POSSIBLE FROM HOME TO BUILD YOUR FIRST BUILDINGS. THE PHYSICIAN CAN BURY HIS MISTAKES, THE ARCHITECT CAN ONLY ADVISE HIS CLIENTS TO PLANT VINES. 15. IT IS UNDESIRABLE TO COMMERCIALIZE EVERYTHING IN LIFE JUST BECAUSE YOUR LOT HAPPENS TO BE CAST IN THE MACHINE AGE… IN ARCHITECTURE THE JOB SHOULD FIND THE MAN AND NOT THE MAN THE JOB. IN ART THE JOB AND THE MAN ARE MATES: NEITHER CAN BE BOUGHT OR SOLD TO THE OTHER. 16. RESPECT THE MASTERPIECE - IT IS TRUE REVERENCE TO MAN. THERE IS NO QUALITY SO GREAT - NONE SO MUCH NEEDED. FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT TALIESIN 1932

Signed: Frank Lloyd Wright

Posting: Mroning Foks and Lawrence Edw. Sturm, Sr. hehehe. Hope your jet lag does not last indefinatley. I 'm gonna miss your biting humor should you disconiue posting.......Architects and Budgets, a nasty beast. When i was doing my apprentiship i noticed the archtiects i was waroking for had no idea about budgets, just threw darts at the Dodge means manual, and come bid opening day, all held their breaths..... Locally a boondoggle political tower got built about 10 years ago which was suppose to cost 4 mill and cost 7 mill. The "Acrchitect" is still blamed today for the projects finacancial failure because he took the bait and said it could be disigned for the freamy 4 million dollaor goal. I lose over 50% of my clients because i am realitstic to them about construction cost up front in the negotition phase. As J. Paul Getty said. "Do not get involoved in a ventrue unless you can see all the way to the other end of it" or something dimiliar in meaning. And a project which runs out of money is a loser for all concerned, especailly te Architect and/or Builder. Architects who do not delve into the building trade are insulated from having real knowledge of construction cost. The best they can do is guess, yet the public expects the archtitect to magically know the cost of any building just by looking at it.....I suggest Archtiects should not claim to hit budgets they are unsure of. It leaves a bad after taste if missed. I know cleints push for it, and rightfully so, cause someones got to pay for the building. So....I propose, If you can accreutely project the cost, fine, if you cannot then don't.

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: I apologize for my mis-spells. I must proof read to keep from makin such mistakes and promise to do better in the future.

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: Nelson - and any others that venture to Clemson for the Knute lecture - definately don't miss Frank Lloyd Wright's "Broad Margin" in Greenville, SC and, if you can, check out the Alfred Browning Parker designed residence in Anderson, SC (built in the early 60's).

Signed: Randy Henning

Posting: OOPS!! Sorry about that Larry...[re: LWG post of Sept. 15]..... i erred.....really should have paid more attention to your stated parameters......kinda ran drsign..build..develop into one activity... University Motor Cars was actually design build with owner acting as general contractor....and hey, to late to change my story now...my post pointed out that UMC was built for Bobby McKee!

Signed: Bob Faust...

Posting: Re: Post of Sept. 16, 1997 - o5:08 FRANK...FRANK...YOU'Re BACK!!!! [hummmmm, i think there is another Deity that would like to know how you did this back to earth thing....] But the important thing is you're back, and look, i can understand your dismay with the disarray you see about you... and understand your ire....but i think more people would be more attentive to your admonitions and instructions if you didn't shout so much...just speak to us in normal small letters...and if you want more emphasis, perhaps, leave a space between each line...its the "kinder, gentler" thing...[know what i mean?]...and with that approach and your message i'll bet you could draw big crowds anytime you speak....and one other thing, as a special favor, would you post a bibliography concerning those 1932 observations? ....and also, about that mud pie quote,well, Gaudi's stuff does look kinda funny,and just what does Bruce Goff know....??? Gosh, Thanks a lot Frank...and...well...Be Careful Out There!

Signed: Bob Faust...

Posting: Randy, Thanks for noting the Parker house in Anderson, I will add that to my Architectural tour of the region. Please forward address and directions, my email address is noted below. I had already planned to go by "Broad Margin" in Greenville (I have the address). Are you planning on comming to the lecture in Clemson?>>>>>>>The MOMA Egon Schiele exhibition starts 10/3 to 1/4. A panel discussion is set for 11/4 at 7pm, call 212-708-9781.>>>>>>>>>>>>>Age is catching up with one of the youngest architects on Jack's list, Fay Jones is now 76, he has been ill for the past few monthes. I first meet him over 20 years ago on an Architectural tour with Joe Kirkwood (Pensacola, FL), Bob Whitten (Florence, AL) and Tom Sutton (Memphis, TN). All of us were students at Auburn University. Bob Faust acted as our "advisor" in planning the trip. I called Fay to setup our visit. He didn't know us from Adam. He took us into his office on a cold night in December of 1974 and spent almost 4 hours igniting our Architectural passions. We continued our tour to see all of the Wright, Goff and Herb Greene we could find in Bartlesville, Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Norman, Dallas and Tyler. That is another story.>>>>>>>> If anyone wants Fays address, please send me a request via email. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Architecturally,

Signed: Nelson Brackin

Posting: ......."We all know the difference between right and wrong. Even without teaching there is an innate knowing that reminds us when we have overstepped our right or someone else's.......Every time we prefer not to keep a law or a rule we say it was put in place to punish us. But it really says to go this way and you will be protected, like driving the right way on a one-way street. But natural laws are for our good as well. They are reflections of spiritual laws and should be revered......Respect for ourselves and for others covers a multitude of rules. Akin to love, it saves a person from himself." J. S. Hifler........"When people come to trouble it is better for both parties to come together without arms, to talk it over, and find some peaceful way to settle." Spotted Tail, Sioux........transcribed from A CHEROKEE FEAST OF DAYS, vol. 2, written by Joyce Sequchie Hifler.

Signed: the "original" transcriber

Posting: To all those "would be" transcribers, and relatives, associates and etc......we, of the guild of transcribers international, prefer to transcribe the words of others and to give them due credit. Such transcriptions are placed, with respect, in those spaces in cyberspace where they seem to be needed. The transcribers international does not consider it appropriate for a transcriber to speak directly to any one individual, to reproach any individuals right to free access to cyberspace........So, we ask those of you who consider yourself self-proclaimed relatives of the transcriber, to not discredit the "original" transciber by using it as a guise to say things that you yourself desire to say......we ask this humbly in the name of all good things, thank you.......(afterall, if you want to say something anonymously, then that is not in fact a transcription, is it?)

Signed: the "original" transcriber

Posting: I suppose corresponding with an individual in an open forum like this is a little like arguing with your wife in the street - you have to answer or have everyone think she’s right about you - and sometimes she may be.... Well Lawrence, you have me there. And who would know better? I really did get wordy about a subject that’s been spinning around in my brain of late - How precious is human life anyway? What’s special about it? What’s our responsibility as a species to advance it? How do we contribute to it’s advancement? That has been important to me lately. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, your concern for the working role of an architect in today’s world - and how many (most??) architects are misguided certainly has merit. Many are. But in my experience, many are not - at least in assuming the responsibilities of preparing good buildings. The competition is too great. And no architect can survive in an era of new-age litigation if he makes as many mistakes as you suggest he does. Attrition (be it competition or litigation) will take care of the truly careless. That however, is not what I mean when I talk about the architect as artist. I was not discussing the architect as a competent technician - not that it’s not important - I certainly think it is. But, if an architect creates good buildings he may not be an Architect in the true sense. After all, even Marcus Vitruvius knew that good building is not architecture without what he called “delight.” In fact in today’s world we have the technical means and a unique opportunity to give it a spirit of “jubilation,” as Jim Hubbell puts it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, about the architect as “master-builder.” I’ve said all this before - and at the risk of repeating myself here goes. >>> The modern ( and currently traditional) role of an architect does not include actually constructing his work. As the age of the master-builder has faded into antiquity, the architect has been gradually separated from the role of craftsman and builder. Since the Industrial Revolution, architects have been progressively isolated from the actual construction process, intentionally limiting their efforts to a specialized litany of professional services. They normally include programming and forming building design profiles (based loosely on the currently accepted academic or corporate philosophy or styles) within the purview of local and national regulatory codes, the scientific application of structural options, research and selection of materials, documentation of specific descriptions of systems and detailing, coordination of the mechanical and electrical components of the design, cost management, and the administration of the construction contracts. And to do this he really must master the technical skills and know-how, or he can’t deal with the engineers, contractors, or even his client successfully, Certainly, if an architect fulfills these duties, his efforts should satisfy any client corporate or otherwise that he has bought a “good building.” And if the architect is clever, he may even convince his client that he has paid for a significant piece of “architecture.” >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But that does not address “jubilation,” spirit, innovation, mystery, art, excitement, or even “delight.” From Wright’s coiling Guggenheim, to Bruce Goff’s spiraling Bavinger house, to Kendrick Kellogg's concrete "wings," to James Hubbell's free-flowing sculptural spaces, to Steve Badanes' earth-borne constructions, architecture is emerging from poviding humankind with technically proficient enclosures with “commodity” and “firmness” (or, simply put, good building) to Architecture that explores achieving the possibilities of the human spirit. If that’s too rich - then let it be. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.>>>>> “One of the primary objectives of the Friends of Kebyar network and publications is to broaden awareness of the scope and rich diversity of creative architecture today, and by example show that there are extraordinary possibilities for innovation in the world.” And after all, don’t count on the architectural journals in the USA to do it. There’s a great window of opportunity here! If Kebyar doesn’t do it - who will?<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< - Jack Golden

Signed: Jack Golden

Posting: Hello All.....from Lawrence. AT LAST............I've written a message so powerful that GOD himself has sent our main man back to earth. Frank Lloyd Wright, returneth, to reiterate his 1932 advice to young architects. Me thinks there are a lot of old architects that need to carefully read, or reread this great advice. Pretty darn good stuff too. , Tanks God! and you too Frank. We're dying down here.

Signed: Lawrence Edw. Sturm, Sr.

Posting: Hi Jack Golden.......from Lawrence. Fortunately verbosity is not a crime or we would both be incarcerated, possibly I myself would face the chair. At least I have generated controversy and conversation, even if slightly defensive in nature, you would proabably agree it is better than none. Indeed I have noted with pleasure that the substance of your particular missives has distinctly redeeming characteristics. .............. I am compelled to respond to our "street argument", which I personally greatly appreciate. Its clear to me that I have now engaged the heavy weight division of this forum, with delight...............Jack, I could not agree more with your thesis about the capability of todays architects. I need to point out a minor miscommunication. I don't believe I said "todays architects make lotz of mistakes", although when you say so much, things happen.........But to clarify my position regarding todays architects, I would be foolish to not recognize the great majority of these men as the greatest group of individuals with whom an old man could ever have hoped to spend his life in compatriotism. Their commitment, originality, devotion to purpose, are more than exemplary, but most evident in the character profile of the architects I have known is their undying faith in a positive future. Always, always the next project. The next compassionate client ....................It is this very understanding that drives my passion for a better future for american architects. To describe it as passion, is close, but pain is a better term....................such a fine group, dedicated to principles beyond the understanding of the typical american, much say businessman, or even less, general contractor. ..........While your careful explanation of how an architect functions was not very educational it was appreciated, however;it seemed to say that architects have voluntarily given up their historical roll as master builder. It is my thesis that this role was insidiously usurped, and architects have literally, in their distraction and devotion to design, failed to recognize the implications, and tremendous import of this powerful fact...........Try to imagine a reversal of this role, and a retaking of this lost ground................If the building industry were back in the hands of the kinds of men I have described above, what effect do you feel this would have upon architecture and building design in the 21st century?............Whom else would you rather see calling the shots?.....................I also agree that there is a wonderful change taking place within the profession. Great universities offerring degree programs in construction management for architects. Major east coast universities, such as Princeton, challenging the subverient role of architects in the building process. Each asking the same question........who should provide the leadership for the building industry in the 21st century? Then, joyfully, I have observed so many fine young men in my area, tired of taking it on the chin, responding and reaching out, taking full personal responsibilty for completion of their work. Already owning the terrible liabilities conveniently left with us, but discovering that with taking full responsibility you remove the individual liability makers for the architect...... What a needed solution!..................Indeed, I fully agree that we are in the midst of a revolution in architectural design, and I glory in your listing of the accomplishments fine architects and their projects. However; if I were still in my university design studio, I could better appreciate its oversimplicity. I am not, and I tell you that a greater change is already in process in this profession, my voice is just a little tenor in the back row of a growing chorus of fine men who will not feel the need for quite the same level of masochism in practice................I envision a professional role for architects in america commensurate with the quality of the men whom serve it. A profession of master builders, recognized as such, and highly valued by the society at large. But, then, mainly in the best position to serve our "true heart of design" without being forced into sometime mindless and needless compromise. Often just a reminder by those that currently control the industry, that they "call the shots", and we are really just the "design subcontractor". Our position in this industry is one of latent poser beyond imagination. Try to imagine the impact, if architects simply refused to work for any more developers. Or any bulding committee, or government agency which did not employ a prequalified design architect on staff to approve the design response to the program. Or when it gets really tough, refuse to work on any project where the architect of record was not also the builder, with all else subcontractors. We could indeed change a few things, rather than continue to pathetically reduce our influence where it counts. How could you visualize this happening? Can You? What impact would it have on design decisions? In your view, is this already in process? Does the function of architect as master builder detract from the architects ability as a designer? Are do you feel that things are fine just like they are now???? If not, what changes do you feek are imperative? Or somewhat needed?

Signed: Lawrence Edw. Sturm, Sr.

Posting: To Jack Golden:-----I for one, appreciate your long posting which reveals your coming to terms with the meaning of life.-----Two things come to mind, about human experience, which are complementary. Life means much more with love. Love becomes more valuable when you have experienced the death of loved ones.-----Life and death are just parts of the phases of our existence, the knowledge of this makes love more powerful and death more acceptable.----- I find that a lot of people tend to not want to deal with personal things when they are discussing art and architecture, however, for me, such personal things open the door to really sincere communication among individuals. Living free of the fear of what others think is a very powerfull experience, however, one has to be prepared to also deal with the consequences, or at least that is my experience (the result of always being honest with my thoughts.)-----I believe that all things are sentient. That makes all things alive. I am not alone in this, because I have found that the scientists, especially those in quatum physics, are starting to consider the fundemental building blocks to be sentient, which solves some of those mysteries they work on. Eastern religious thought has spoken of this for over two thousand years.-----Furthermore, I believe that the creation of space, that makes one sense that connection to all other living things, is about the most meaningful thing we can do. Unfortunately, most humans are disconnected from that experience, and our existence suffers as a result.-----To all: -----I apologize, if by chance, this is too personal for some, but our karma has now mingled into greater complexity, like it or not!

Signed: lwg

Posting: Gee. Nice postings fellows. hmmmm. May i ask eaches definition of Architecture? I will start with "Architecture" = "Kewl Buildings" can it be tied down more than that? May each add a word or two? ...............................When i was camping this weekend, sitting in a virgin forest, thinking of how to mabey place a human adobe there... as little building as possible seemed the answer, or mabey none at all. Any would be an afront to the existing Architecture of that site. Philosophically, lets be gentle to our planet, theres too many of us already. The thrill of creating a fine building is a blast for sure, i'm sure for all of us, but lest we get carried away with the importance of it?

Signed: Miles

Posting: But to sound a little old fashioned. It's what we do, so we must do it well. yes?

Signed: Miles

Posting: Miles: ----- I vote for building less. If and when we build, make it our best effort. In the case of Sipsy Wilderness, bannish the thought of building there, or anywhere where we can be in our most sacred repose. -----Our human need for shelter combined with our need for buildings needed for commerce, and the network for us to go from one to the other, make up the single most devasting impact upon our existence. By "our" I refer to all living things, not just humans life, but all life.-----Being concerned about lessening that impact, each and every time that we build, is what achieving sustainable balance would be. That is the conscientiousness that we ( all humans, not just architects ) must take on. The fact that we do not behave in a conscientious manner (collectively) is the result of being brainwashed by "mother culture" (for those who have read Ishmael, you will know where I am coming from.) ----- I am a proponent of "responsible-individualism" in architecture, which promotes diversity, in contrast to the "rugged-individualism" which promotes the American way of life which is part of the problem, rather than the solution.-----Such a position, on my part, is the reason for my skepticism of Lawrence Sturm's being in support of the architect-developer. If the result is to be architecture, it must not only be creative-diverse, it must also be "responsible." -----Miles, by the way, your story about recent experience in Sipsy, came into benefit, because just yesterday I mentioned what had happened to you to some friends who were packing their car to go to Sipsy to spend a week. They decided to remove the wine from their car, and just take some juice.

Signed: lwg

Posting: Larry: Thanks for your understanding. You've always had that capacity. Jack.

Signed: Jack Golden

Posting: Lawrence: Words fail me.

Signed: Jack

Posting: A few words from Maine. I check in every morning just to keep up. I have been busy lately trying to keep one of my projects from being cut not because of budget so much as completion time. The house is a little gem and the cuts suggested are more to get it done sooner and not so much to save money. Yesterday we had a meeting and I guess we will be able to save most of the good stuff. I wish I could send you all a picture but don't know how yet. This house is all stone, glass, Mahogony and copper roof. It has been under construction since Aug. 1996 and we expect to complete it by the end of March 1998. 2000 SF $1.2 million is the estimated cost. I am not the builder but I pick the builder and have direction of the work on the job. I go every day and make adjustments and design refinements. I try to keep my work load to one or two jobs in the construction stage at any one time so I can have this kind of involvement with the construction work. I try and push my limits as much as possible on each project and to do this I have adopted some ways of working that you may find interesting. I don't invoice. I don't have any signed agreements I just start working on the job and do not require any money or except any money for fee until after the design concept is presented and expectable to me and my client. If they don't like it then they go and get some one else if they do like it then I find they are happy to pay the fee. I leave the fee and the amount up to them. I just say when the job is all done you should pay me the same percentage you would pay a good waiter for good service. Fee based on satisfaction as it should be. I have done this since 1990 and it requires the highest level of design and the highest level of service and understanding of the clients needs. Yes I did a $1.1 million house and with no invoices got $129,000.00 in fee. It was my first back in 1990 and I have done it ever since. This house was no ordinary house very complex and it pushed all the limits of my client and myself. If any one is interested in the details of this I am glad to supply them. It is about doing Architecture at my highest possible level of design and service. The more I am in harmony with the conditions of the total situation the better it works. I must be in harmony and then the rest just seems to work out. Zen? Organic? I guess it is these and more. I think that Bruce Goff used to just start designing a job with on money and no agreement and usually did two schemes, the first at the limit and if that did not fly another usually completely different second one a little more in the budget. He first tested the limits of both himself and that of the client. The client needs to see the vision before they can support the vision. I start to educate my clients from the first meeting right thur the job. If on the way to the concept I find that I can not work for them and they will not go on the creative trip then I some time let them go. With no money and agreement what can they do? I think this puts the energy in the hands of the architect. Take care of the design and the money will come.

Signed: James Walter Schildroth, Architect

Posting: James, I like your appraoch of not charging in the sense that it takes the pressure off everyone, client and architect. I've toyed with the idea, not to the extent or succes that you have obviously had with it. I've worked more at a very very minimum fee to get out some preliminaries, to just set the table. I would like to try it your way, but, damn, i find it hard to spend time for absoulutley nothing, because i would not expect someone to do that for me.... but, prehaps i will try your method, as it apprears to be working for you. 2000sf for 1.2 mil? Cool. I'll be glad to convey how to do pics if you like. Email me and i will explain? Or i'll try an explain here if others are interested?........Larry, i'm glad my Sipsey expereince was beneficail to others. I am planning to offer a continuing education course to the Lawerence County Game and Fish Dept and Sheriff's Dept..titles ( How to distinguish between the criminal and U.S. Citizen ) but first i must pay the fine, so as to not be vulnerable! Bye FOKS!

Signed: Miles

Posting: Hello Larry Wayne Grantham........there are no architect-developers. The term is an oxymoron. Only architects doing there job. Trust me, when I tell you in all friendship, to open your mind to the possibility that there is significant change in the air. Your repetitive architect-developer mantra infers that your perception of the architect-developer, is that of a compromised architect. Architects who take full responsibility for total project delivery are in a ENHANCED posture related to design, and all your other buzz phrases, not COMPROMISED in any aspect of the process............... However; at this point into these somewhat one-sided and single-minded discussions I must conclude that some redundancy has developed, and little meaningful, controversial or productive dialog ............regrettably, I am now resigned to accept the very limited response from this forum, or as Jack Golden so tersely phrased his disappointing cop out......."words fail me"............But before I bid the FOK a dieu, I must respond to the absolutely terrific input from James Schindroth. I feel your pulse man. Your right on. Keep on running those jobs, selecting those contractors, and making those critical infield design decisions. Stay on the battle field where architects belong, not metaphorically cramped into some attic space, wearing a drafting visor, and passing our work through some hole in the wall to the rest of the world...............I've never seen your work but I'm already certain its very, very, good stuff.........I relate to your comments, and got a great deal out of your posting. Particularily the non-contract approach. Lotz of food for thought. The project sounds beautiful, and the approach to compensation unique and effective...........Bon vie and a dieu.

Signed: Lawrence Edw. Sturm, Sr.

Posting: Hello Larry Wayne Grantham........there are no architect-developers. The term is an oxymoron. Only architects doing there job. Trust me, when I tell you in all friendship, to open your mind to the significant changes in the profession. Your remarks infer that your perception of the fully engaged architect, as that of a compromised architect....... ..... Au contrare, architects who take full responsibility for total project delivery are enjoying an ENHANCED posture related to design, and not COMPROMISED in any aspect of the process............... However; at this point into these regrettably one-sided discussions I must conclude that some redundancy has developed, and little meaningful, controversial or productive dialog. I can only conclude that perhaps my observations do not square with the purposes of FOK, as so timely related by Golden,Jack.............regrettably, I am now resigned to accept the very limited response from this forum, or as Jack Golden so tersely phrased in his disappointing cop out,"words fail me".........Regrettably, it is so for you..............But before I bid adieu to that incredibly important topic, I must respond to the absolutely terrific posting from James Schindroth. I feel your pulse man. Your right on. Keep on running those jobs, having fun, selecting those contractors, and making those critical infield design decisions. Stay on the battle field where architects belong, not metaphorically cramped into some attic space, wearing a drafting visor, and passing our work through some hole in the wall to the rest of the world.........I've never seen your work James, but I'm already certain its very, very, good stuff, your words reveal a steady, insightful, and devoted hand on the wheel.........I relate to your comments, and got a great deal out of your posting. Particularily the non-contract approach. Lotz of food for thought. The project sounds beautiful, and the approach to compensation unique and effective.......I'll drop in on the postings from time to time, hoping to hear more about your work efforts.........Bon vie and adieu. Lawrence

Signed: Lawrence Edw. Sturm, Sr.

Posting: To Lawrence Sturm:-----I am saddened by your intent to depart. More so, especially if my personal repeated response, to your repeated drumming of the message, has been the single cause of your decision to bow out.-----I hope this does not offer the wrong reflection upon KEBYAR. -------- First; KEBYAR, although initiated by Jack Golden, and supported by a core group of people in the start, is now supported by 350 +/- subscribers (Jack can give us a detailed number). Among those, we have only seen around 15-20 people participate, by expressing opinions, both here and on FOKemail chat.---------Second; I suspect that there is probably much more support for your view than has been expressed. I happen to be a born-again socialist, living in a world where I see the common good of all life being trashed by rampant-irresponsible-individualism (especially in the USA). Knowing that, I am a hard sell, especially with respect to what you are a proponent of, especially since (with my own eyes) I have witnessed the failure of all development whose purpose puts profit above the interest of life itself. I do believe that what you propose is possible, and could address my concerns (and I am interested in doing myself)-------------Third; With respect to this posting site, chat rooms and etc., we have presented to us, in the last few years, a wonderful means to communicate. I make the analogy to a room where people are having many conversations at one time. We all have a desire to be heard, and we are all likely to step into a room, occassionaly, where it seems like our thoughts would be appreciated. To step in and start speaking about your heart felt concerns, and expect immediate recognition and acknowledgement, is perhaps too much to expect.--------We have to learn to be extremely patient with each other. I say again, Lawrence Sturm, please do not judge FOK and this chat site, by what I say, or any other one particular other individual. Give it time, continue to keep an eye on us, and you will probably find, in the long run, that your prophetic (not just profit-tic) view may be taken serious by others (if not indeed myself.)-------Thank you again, for your participation, and I am sorry that you feel you must take leave of our presence.------Respectfully....LWG

Signed: lwg

Posting: Lawrence! You may not leave for good. It is not allowed!......I see no need for anything but discussions here. I, for one, believe there are many ways to skin the cat. I can understand and relate to everyone's point of view. We are not so egotistic to believe only our solution is the answer, are we? Larry, I fail to see the connection between an architect not being a developer. I feel their is an apple verses organges discussion going on sometimes, the apple being the reality of the construction industry and the orange being the philosphical ideal. Lets say a neighborhood is going to be built, there is no stopping it. Would it be better done by the 'typical house builder' or the 'architiect'? Lets say the Architect also decides, because projects must make a profit, that it will not be an entire neighborhood of Bavingers.... but prehaps a compromise between 'pure' architecture and 'poor' housing. Which is better, the run of the mill neighborhood, or the well, designed one? Many people are not turned on by architecture. Most cannot afford the 1.2 million dollar homes. Most are so busy trying to make ends meet the last thing on their minds is a strange house.........Building your designs teaches one a lot and gives one the power to execute it or modify as needed. I think it also saves one's clients a fair amount of money. I can cite many examples of architectural specifications costing the Owner money. We all should sit in a General Contractors seat on bid day one time and see how its done those final hours before bid opening. A recent example of this was a bank i bid as a GC. Marvin True Divided Ligths were speced. They cost $40,000 on this job. Simulated Divided lights cost $20,000. The building was a peice of crap anyway, so why spend $20,000 extra on a window typ ethat looks the same but has a much higher rate of failure and poorer insulation value? Now isn't that a decision that should be discussed with the Owner? Too late in a bid scenario. I've seen many poor and difficult to build details come out of Architects offices too. Unless an Architect builds, he is dependant on the Contractor to cover his/her lack of knowledge about 'putting a building' together in many instances. But thats ok, it works that way too. Good Builders are just as nessecary to the succesful completion of a project as good Architects. There will always be a small client base wanting 'pure' Architecture. Angled and curved is not as cheap as square...all thing considered. I think it important to analyze a project at the beginning as to what kind of project it is...in relation to budget, how its goning to build, how its going to be financed, etc. I , for one, get very little pleasure of a project failing to get of the boards. If the buget is reasonable, I also feel a responisblity to hit it, and save some of my warriors to fight another day... Later FOKS!

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: Lawrence! You may not leave for good. It is not allowed!......I see no need for anything but discussions here. I, for one, believe there are many ways to skin the cat. I can understand and relate to everyone's point of view. We are not so egotistic to believe only our solution is the answer, are we? Larry, I fail to see the connection between an architect not being a developer. I feel their is an apple verses organges discussion going on sometimes, the apple being the reality of the construction industry and the orange being the philosphical ideal. Lets say a neighborhood is going to be built, there is no stopping it. Would it be better done by the 'typical house builder' or the 'architiect'? Lets say the Architect also decides, because projects must make a profit, that it will not be an entire neighborhood of Bavingers.... but prehaps a compromise between 'pure' architecture and 'poor' housing. Which is better, the run of the mill neighborhood, or the well, designed one? Many people are not turned on by architecture. Most cannot afford the 1.2 million dollar homes. Most are so busy trying to make ends meet the last thing on their minds is a strange house.........Building your designs teaches one a lot and gives one the power to execute it or modify as needed. I think it also saves one's clients a fair amount of money. I can cite many examples of architectural specifications costing the Owner money. We all should sit in a General Contractors seat on bid day one time and see how its done those final hours before bid opening. A recent example of this was a bank i bid as a GC. Marvin True Divided Ligths were speced. They cost $40,000 on this job. Simulated Divided lights cost $20,000. The building was a peice of crap anyway, so why spend $20,000 extra on a window typ ethat looks the same but has a much higher rate of failure and poorer insulation value? Now isn't that a decision that should be discussed with the Owner? Too late in a bid scenario. I've seen many poor and difficult to build details come out of Architects offices too. Unless an Architect builds, he is dependant on the Contractor to cover his/her lack of knowledge about 'putting a building' together in many instances. But thats ok, it works that way too. Good Builders are just as nessecary to the succesful completion of a project as good Architects. There will always be a small client base wanting 'pure' Architecture. Angled and curved is not as cheap as square...all thing considered. I think it important to analyze a project at the beginning as to what kind of project it is...in relation to budget, how its goning to build, how its going to be financed, etc. I , for one, get very little pleasure of a project failing to get of the boards. If the buget is reasonable, I also feel a responisblity to hit it, and save some of my warriors to fight another day... Later FOKS!

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: Man, A double post! I throw myself upon alls mercy! I have no pic today but submit this picture (with his permission) of a building under construction which was designed by David Milstead, FOK suscriber. David is this weekend, in Kentucky or wherever it is, working on one of Bruce Goffs designs, the stone house looping around the 3 circles... the name escapes me. This pic is a building constructed of styrofoam panles with WWF factory installed on either side of them. The panels are erected, tied together and sprayed with about 1.5 inches of gunite each side. This building had an additional 1/2" exterior layer of gunite colored with red oxide sprayed on the exterior for the final finish. It is an strip type office building, built by a gunite subcontractor for his wife's accounting office plus some rental spaces, which was the main reason the gunite system was used. It worked very well, and any who like may want to investigate the system. Its the first time i've seen it done. http://fly.hiwaay.net/~mcolcock/harrev01.jpg

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: Miles:-----Thanks for the pic of DAM's project, which look's like it is coming along nicely.-----Surely, we speak of apples, oranges, bannanas and some of us are meat and potatoes "kind of guys" and others of us are vegetarians. I agree that there are many ways to do things, but "skinning a cat" is something I would not do (so, please note that I am trying to be satirical, just in case you have not noticed).------If it sounds like I personally question all development, regardless of who it is by, then you understand me clearly. We have been programmed to be believe that it is inevitable, so if "we" are invloved it makes it better (?)-------Being that we (in the USA) are one of the most wasteful societies on the face of this planet, the concept that we should not build new might seem contrary to our survival, however, to not question our growth and development is to participate in our common demise.------The traditional concept of continued growth, which a large part of our profession is dependent upon, is now being questioned. Architects need to wake up and realize that outside of their profession, there are serious changes under consideration.------When we have a client, that has a need, then we are off course obliged to assist them. Most of us, in this conversation, believe that such design should be creative-diverse-beautiful-(organic) or otherwise, to varying degrees, based upon the principals of nature. -----Most of us are not always obliged, when there is no client, but rather just an oppportunity to make money (development), to buy a piece of property, build a building, and sell or lease it. I would understand that a creative architect, who has the means to build speculatively, would desire an opportunity to express their creative ideas, and make some money as the result (afterall, we all need some money to exist in our economic system.)-----No matter who the developer is, those in our society, with which we live, have a right to question whether such development is in our best common interest. Our growth pattern over the last fifty years has gone unquestioned, and as a result we have vast wastelands of devalued property going to ruin, while new areas are being "developed" not because we really need them, but because "developers" are out just to make money. Such developers are insensitive to added value costs to increase quality, energy efficiency, and otherwise long range value. -----If, by all this talk, you(all) get the idea that my focus, as an architect, is shifting from just being an architect into planning concerns, then you understand something about where I am going with my career. I have no doubts about my creative ability, and know I can design and build, with my own two hands (been there and done that). What I cannot do is sit by the waiting for clients who can afford my services, afford the creativity while in the meantime there are more pressing concerns that I desire to see accomplished.------So, Miles, I addressed this to you, because you seemed to be speaking to me. I would like to say, in clarification, that I respect you greatly for your path. You are truly one who is fully engaged in dealing with solving the problems. I understand your abilities as a contractor, and as such, know you to do good work. I respect your creative ability, and admire your devotion to getting as much creative stuff accomplished when you are doing the design-build aspect of your business. More so, I consider your adaptive reuse of an existing downtown structure as real smart and part of the solution. Since I know you are the owner-architect-developer of that project, I admire your devotion and hard work. Furthermore, when you make money on it, I believe you will deserve it.-----

Signed: lwg

Posting: Hello all, >Lawerence, you will be missed! The boundless energy of your postings rivaled Larry on his best day. :o) I for one welcomed your comments. ......................... >Other news for all: I have recently learned of a planned event at Taliesin West that I believe should be of interest to all. It is a four day plus one event entitled "Celebration of Organic Architecture at Taliesin '97", set for November 6 through 10. The tentative list of speakers and round-table participants includes Eric Wright, Art Dyson, Neil Levine, Bruce Brooks Pfeiffer, Susan Lockhart, Fred Stitt, Santiago Calatrava (confirmed), Vern Swaback, Elizabeth Wright Ingraham, etc. The toll free number is 1-800-929-3309. A desert picnic is planned for the first evening and a "Gala on the Desert" is planned for Saturaday the 8th. The recorded message is not up to date, but it will offer a sense of the event and will ask for information to get you on the mailing list. My thanks go to Robert Green, a local Atlanta Architect and Taliesin fellow who first gave me the phone number. Architecturally,

Signed: Nelson Brackin

Posting: -----James W. Schildroth: ------It was good to hear from you. More so to know that you are fully engaged in your work.-----To give you some idea of contrasts between what you are doing and what opportunities I have had, let me tell you about my most recent complete house which I designed and built for a client.-----This would be the Charlie Porter house in Pensacola, FL, which some of our FOK friends have seen, but perhaps not you. It was built in 1990-92, has 2000sf airconditioned sf space (plus carporte) and was built for less than the fee that you quoted as having recieved for your current project.------I worked for almost two years, at less than a living wage, with my own hands daily, to make that project be as creative as I could manage, with what materials we could justify affording. The project was a speculative house. The owner-developer lived in it for the last five years and it is now for sale.-------Such contrasts underscore the wide diversity of opportunities that we are presented in life. I am not complaining about my lot in life, I am just trying to do my best. In the meantime, I have my eyes focused on what I consider the bigger picture is, and I offer my story for comparison's sake.------What comes to mind, for me, is the story I like to tell about one of my friend-architect ( who I greatly respect) who drives a Ferrari. The replacement bumper on his car, cost his insurance company, more than I paid out cash for my used Alfa Romeo GTV-6. However, I believe I enjoy my Alfa, just a much as he enjoys his Ferrari. I am glad he can afford to get his serviced. Meanwhile, I will retire from this conversation now to go out into my impromtu-garage-tent and reassemble my Alfa's transmission, so as to get it going again as soon as possible.------

Signed: lwg

Posting: 'planet'. The word is derived from the Greek word of 'wanderer'. ( Thats cause to the bests minds of the time the 'planets' seemed to 'wander' about the heavens. Architecture has always turned me on because of that quality about it. Prehaps we should consider renovating the term 'organic architecture' to the term 'planet architecture'..."I feel often like a wanderer" .

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: All of us dedicated architect's hearts are in the right places i think. (keyword=dedicated) I think a concern for our enviroment is part of the organic way of thinking. (if i'm incorrect in this assumption, someone please say so) Is the discussion that we should all quit participating in building because it uses resorces? Is the discusssion about the best ways to go foward. Is the discussion about how the best way to go foward is? Or are we all in-expereinced egotistical chatters....uh...architects?. Is it about all of the above? (can't believe i passed the exam first try.)hehehe

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: Larry, my writing style may have been off a little. I was answering you, but then, upon rereading my post, see that i kinda 'wander off' as i go. hehehe. Prehaps i should take English Lit 101. Since i see the human race in a headlong expansion, its not my favorite subject. Time will tell. 'Nail it!

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: Hey, and i've seen a picture of the house i think you mean, Larry, its the one at Dave's office , yes? It is kickass in my opinion! James, a digital camera that will let you pop pictures ofto to the net in seconds cost only 600 bucks. I promise you, i've never had a comission anywhere near as good as yours! I challage you to get one and post us a pic!!!! **rebel yell*

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: Lawrence, I am curious as to what you base this 'change in the air on' as far as Architect Builders becoming more popular? Can you tell me some examples? Why do you see it leaning in that direction?

Signed: Miles Colcock

Posting: There! Dodging, ducking and weaving! did i post this piece of stain glass? http://fly.hiwaay.net/~mcolcock/angel01.jpg ?

Signed: Miles

Posting: "The Discourses"......By Epictetus.......circa 85 AD.................................A mans perception of his state of affairs is the beginning of his philosophy, when his philosophy is weak in his heart, then he can not swallow even a small morsel. Such men should carefully consider what their true ability is................................In theory it is easy to convince an ignorant person, but in affairs of real life, no one offers himself to be convinced without an averse logic to shield his fear......................Strangely, we invariably hate the man whose truths, whether real or hypothetical, force us to examine our convictions, even more if our conviction is weak, slight or partial............... Socrates has taught and advised us to not live a life which is not fully open and subject to careful examination, nor based on convictions not supported by the actual state of affairs of our own lives.............Lawrence

Signed: Lawrence Edw. Sturm, Sr.

Posting: ....."Put a lid on all the nonsense, the frenzied chatter, the idle conversation that gets around to criticizing---with or without reason......Talking is like a leak in a dam. At first it is only a trickle but the longer it goes the greater the flow, until it begins to gush. One comment can bring on another and another, and before we know it we have said things we never intended to say......It is enough to know something, to feel and think it, but to speak it opens the way for our words to be recorded forever in the atmosphere. What do we want to our credit?" J.S. Hifler......."It makes my heart sick when I remember all the good words and broken promises." Chief Joseph, Nez Perce.......Transcribed from A CHEROKEE FEAST OF DAYS, VOL.2, written by Joyce Sequichie Hifler.

Signed: the transcriber

Posting: To all: ----- Here is another excerpt from Goff on Goff. From Chapter Six: The Continuous Present in Architecture. One paragraph, from page 204: In Goff's words: ------"Now, it is also neccessary for us, as architects, to do some absolute architecture, too, where we not only solve problems of a utlilitarian nature but where we can build things for architectural expression, that you might call absolute architecture, just as a composer of music, or painters, or sculptors, or dancers, of any other kinds of artists can. This will offer considerable freedom and will require an even more intense discipline. Speaking of discipline, this is one of the things that I am accused of not having. Particularly by many architects. They think that what you do is done "just for effect"----this supposed to be bad because it implies that if you do something just for effect that it can't have very much depth, or meaning, or reason. I plead guilty to working for effect. I think that architecture has to have effect to be more than just building." ------ Bruce Goff, April 3, 1967, Santa Clara, School of Architecture.

Signed: transcribed by LWG, in admiration of "the transcriber" and those who would be related to the transcriber ;o)

Posting: To Lawrence E. Sturm:----Glad to know that you are truly still with us. I posted the previous quote, from Bruce Goff, with you in mind, because for most of us (certainly for me personally) what Goff said is meaningful.----- Bruce Goff is like a beacon in the storm. That beacon can be used to guide you to where you might desire to go, and when you get there, be a familiar reference point as you move on beyond Goff's time into the future.-------FOK is much greater, collectively, than Goff was singularily. That is why I am continuing to be an active part of FOK, because my personal devotion to creativity is inseperable from my experience of being an apprentice to Bruce Goff.-----The reason I needed to say this, to you, is because I do find encouragement and excitement from your words, however, my personal reality has shown me that the way, that you are promoting, is equally difficult to the path I am already on. ------ I admired Goff, from the very begining, for his honesty about "absolute architecture." I am more akin to artists than architects. As an artist, it is easier to be concerned about nature (since any work of art does less damage to nature than a building). By considering my love for Nature above my love of Art, and considering both above my love of Architecture, I seek to define my own path and contribution to life (in contrast to denying my part in the demise of life.)------Lawrence, you seem very wise, and I personally thank you for staying with us. I look forward to your continued participation, and more so to the contributions of others, than myself, to give you some idea of how welcome your enthusiasm really is.

Signed: lwg

Posting: Lawrence, Like the proverbial "bad penny" i do hope, that for whatever reason, you will continue to "show up" and continue to expound upon your ideas of needed change....and while on the sublect of "change" i have yet to interject my own "two cents" worth into this confrontation. [discussion] Without getting too involved at this point, i would like to observe that Larry's last post from Goff also raises interesting questions of the Architects role and responsibilities.

Signed: Bob Faust...

Posting: Mr. Wright said that when you do a building the resulting architecture should make the site better for the building having been built. That is where the chalenge is, each building that we do must strive for this high purpose. The word better is not Mr. Wright's word but it think you all know what I mean. This can be done any where. Just by being alive we each Impose our selves on Nature and add to the load. So if you want to have no effect I would say shoot your self or at least stop buying things and for god sake don't have any more kids. But some how I don't think this is the purpose of life. I believe we are here to be expressive and this means creative. As Architect we have two clear choices copy or create. Creation is the expresion of our ability as we see it. This takes great courage, to be true to our selves. But do it any way. Design the best building you can get away with, push your limits and those of the client. The greatest loss are the designs that are not concieved because you did not design them.

Signed: James Walter Schildroth

Posting: *high fivers* all around the table!

Signed: Miles

Posting: Elevation shot created on Microstation and turned into .jpg. Just for fun since I'm picless today. Elevation of old downtown warehouse being renovated. (a bit short of a Frank or Goff original but think about the saved resources!) ....... http://fly.hiwaay.net/~mcolcock/tombev00.jpg Mabey a Goff absolute next time!

Signed: Miles

Posting: This is a test and message to all.

I have made some modifications to the Posting Site and paragraphs should now be possible. I can't type the command that you should use for this directly because it will be invisible; so I'll just describe it in a sentence string and hope it works.

It is not necessary to return to start a new paragraph, although it will probably be good for clarity sake in your writing, as I'm sure most do as standard practice. So, in order to use paragraphs you will need to type a < and then you will need to type a P and then you will need to type a >

As I said I cannot type them all together because they will be invisible but, you will need to type all three characters together in a three character string.

Just did and here goes a new paragraph. This is reverse order of characters so you can see >P< . Reverse order to use.

Sorry to sound so ???? something but if you can't see it you sure wouldn't know what I'm talking about.

Sorry to have been out of pocket for so long. Have been working my tail off in this heat. Just havn't had the energy after 8 - 10 hours out in hot sun -- tying steel, placing concrete, etc.

I'm keeping up though and enjoying. So, I'll keep the site up and you all keep the postings up. I'm here and shall pipe up maybe on a rainey day, if we ever have one of those again.

Thanks to all.

One closing note -- We cannot guard enough against complacency nor apathy and we cannot regulate the things that are wrong back to right again. Our walk is primarily a spiritual walk and we must not base very many of our actions in the physical on the basis of what we have seen in the physical and none on what we have heard!

If everyone can hold on until the weekend, I'll probably purge the positngs at that time.

Signed: Tom Arlin Dean

Posting: To all: Just in case my personal sociopolitical dogma rubs anybody the wrong way, it is not my intent to offend anyone, and certainly not my intent to convert anyone. It is my intent to clearly expresss myself and have those who would, understand my creativity in the context of, what I believe to be, greater concerns in life. With that being said, I will now try one of TAD's paragraphs.

With respect to being outspoken about the problems facing our society, it seems to me that Frank Lloyd Wright was often known to express himself clearly about his view points (certainly not limited to architecture.) It is no news to those in my neighborhood, but perhaps would be to others, that I have been active, politically. Over the last twelve years I have run for Mayor of Foley, three times, each time losing with much more fanfare, but having a good time and making my point, although not appreciated. That such activities have probably affected my career as architect in this community, so be it. I am living with the consequences of my actions.

We all have to do what we can to find a balance with nature, rather than continue in the war with it. That is all I promote. Many of us believe we can have sane growth, which is what sustainable development is about. My political affiliation is with the Green Party, which for those who do not know, put Ralph Nader into fourth position in the 1996 Presidential Election. I know, but it was only 1% of the national vote. Before that it was 0%.

I do respect those of you that have your own paths and I do admire the many works of great architecture that are the result. Some wrongs, however, are being continually repeated, and we can change the way we do some things to make the future more sustainable. I happen to feel responsible for participating in some of those "wrong ways" and part of my life is about trying to correct them. If, sometimes, I sound like I am trying to make "you" feel guilty, that is not my intent. I am just witnessing, to you, what my path is ( and I fully know that I might seem fanatical, at times.)

Well, enough of that, most of the time I will be speaking about Nature-Art-Architecture, which are the things that I love. If I was fully consumed with my work, as an architect, I would probably not have the time to dwell on these other things. However, since I am not always busy, I keep busy with thoughts and actions that further define who I am and what I have to contribute. It is the least that I can do.

Signed: lwg
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: I am continually enjoying the ebb and flow of our dynamic cyber dialogue. I have to admit, occassionaly it does gets a bit "up there" for me, but then I just hang on for dear life and try to follow along. Two occassions to announce - Alfred Browning Parker's 81st birthday is Wednesday, September 24th and our esteemed colleague and loved one - Larry Wayne Grantham - is celebrating his ?##th birthday this Thursday, September 25th. HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO BOTH! Tomorrow I'm off to Wisconsin for a cousin's wedding at the Wisconsin Dells on Saturday. While up that way I hope to visit the recently completed/opened Monona Terrace in Madison (inspired by FLlW; designed by Taliesin Architects). If so, my impressions to follow, upon my return. Randy Henning

Signed: Randy Henning
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: With nothing to say today I will try the paragraph also so it will prehaps stick a and post a pic grabbed of the net of anouther archs work.. name of tsuih in californa ... http://fly.hiwaay.net/~mcolcock/trdhq01.gif

Signed: Miles
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: Subject: The Architect vs. The Masterbuilder Dear Lawrence: I didn’t intend for you to take my “words fail me” comment as a put-down to your concerns. Far from it. Unlike others, many times words do fail me! In this case, I believe your response to my waining and waxing about the importance of life and our responsibility to see that it advances - is saved - perhaps for the sake of the universe! - ignored my meaning. Perhaps no one could respond to my personal musings anyway, except LWG - I think he understood what motivated me. But, these messages are many times posted out of sync. My comment to Larry Wayne was in response to his response to my “essay” about life - not to your comments about the artist-architect vs the master-builder-architect. Wow! how convoluted things can get! But, about the architect as masterbuilder - Kebyar published a journal issue featuring the works of seven architects and three schools involved in designing and then overseeing - controling - and in many cases, actually building their work. Following is Kyle Bergman’s lead comments to that issue: CONTINUOUS ARCHITECTURE - Design from conception throughout construction - “Continuous architecture is an approach to design/build that [continuously] integrates the design and building process. It encourages the consideration and execution of design ideas during all phases of a building, from conception through construction. Continuous architecture describes a different process than an architect's designing and then building that design from a set of plans and specifications he has prepared. It only occurs when an architect allows the building process to inform the design in full-scale three-dimensional reality. Typically, creative design is confined to the drafting board and model making. In contrast, continuous architecture describes a process in which fresh ideas are born and are allowed the opportunity to be nurtured and implemented as the building emerges on the site. Making buildings this way has a variety of benefits ranging from a resurgence in the joy of architecture to greater client satisfaction. From experience we know that the larger the scale of your model the more you learn about the building. A I/16" scale massing model gives you different information about a design than a 1/2" scale detail model. Therefore, at full scale, a building can suggest new ideas that will improve its design. Continuous architecture is like sculpting with clay. When you begin, you have a lump of clay and a general idea of what you are going to sculpt. Once you start carving and molding the clay, you begin not only to react to your original goals but to the form the clay is taking. This approach allows an architect to make spatial decisions that react to his emerging design encouraging him to make design decisions at full scale. This opportunity to make decisions as the building is erected is an especially powerful tool for the clients who typically do not have as much experience with scale drawings and models. The process facilitates a client's ability to make more informed decisions. Ultimately it enhances the occupant's feeling and understanding of the finished space. “A common element in buildings made in this approach is their eccentric and idiosyncratic nature. The fact that design is considered in the making process affects the spirit of the building. The buildings in this issue with this approach, are created in part from an experiential viewpoint and need to be experienced to be truly appreciated. The eccentric spirit is not easily captured in words, drawings, or photos, but is powerfully felt by the users. When visiting a site one can easily distinguish between a building that is mass produced, custom designed in an office or organically created from conception through construction. “The trend in architecture since the turn of the century has been to retreat from legal responsibility. With this loss of responsibility comes a loss of control. Design/build and continuous architecture are attempts to regain the role of responsibility and architectural determination. Continuous architecture requires us to re-evaluate the typical contractual agreement, because the architect not only creates the initial design but remains intimately involved in the making of the building. This process alters the traditional litigious, finger-pointing, tripartite relationship of architect/ client/builder. Instead it creates a hierarchical structure in which the architect is ultimately responsible. It takes a special relationship between the client and designer for this process to work. This relationship requires the client to put a great deal of trust in the architect. Accordingly, the architect must be ultimately responsible for the design, the quality of construction and adherence to the budget. This design philosophy and contractual agreement is not for all projects. “There is no particular "style" associated with continuous architecture, but the process and ideas are shared by those who practice it. As a rule of thumb, an outline might look something like this: 1) Program, 2) Understand the site, 3) Design the main structure and volumes, 4) Consider the circulation of all systems including people, hvac, electrical and plumbing, 5) Concepts for infill, 6) Sketch the rest of the design, 7) Start Building, 8) Keep designing, 9) Concurrently finish the design and building. A design is never complete: we just run out of time to finish. Consequently by maximizing the design time there is an enhanced potential for better architecture. “In this feature we examine seven architects working in a continuous architectural approach. The architects were chosen for their divergent methods of applying the process, and the broad range of buildings they produced. Each was asked to look at and discuss his approach to one particular project. For this issue the understanding of the method is as equally important as the product. If continuous architecture is to become more widely accepted then it is important to look at, and understand, architects who are currently modeling this process. “Three schools teaching courses in design/build are also included in this issue. Their design/build courses emulate the professional continuous architecture process. These courses are an in-teresting and serendipitous melding of the unrelenting academic focus on design and the professional realities of building production. Within these courses, schools and the students have the unique opportunity of experimenting with continuous architecture. Educators are beginning to seize this opportunity by responding to the students requests to interact with the building process, by adding design/build courses. “Why all the buzz in the firms, in the schools, and in current architectural theory about design/build and in this case continuous architecture? Maybe it's because we are on the cusp of the new millennium. The beginning of the 20th century was a time of separation between the architect and builder. Possibly the 21st century will be a time of reuniting the architect and builder, a time of being responsible for one's actions; a time of holistic rather than linear thinking. It could be that continuous architecture is a place where the academic and professional worlds can meet. Conceivably it's just the current zeitgeist. I am not certain of the reason for this recent surge of interest, but KEBYAR is devoting an entire issue to Continuous Architecture, because of the variety of interesting work being created through this process.” - Kyle Bergman blink@cts,com One of the shortcomings of the issue is that many really creative architects such as Robert Faust (who has truly created great work with his own version of this process) were not included in the seven. Maybe that was another case of confused communications - I don’t know, but we try! Well, I don’t know if this completely or even partially responds to your call for a return to the architect masterbuilder - I think it does, at least partially. I do hope it clears the air and that you understand that, at least “editorially” we are not all at odds with your masterbuilder proposal. Of course, in this forum everyone is expected to speak for themselves! Best Wishes, Jack ..........

Signed: Golden
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: Subject: The Architect vs. The Masterbuilder

Dear Lawrence:

I didn’t intend for you to take my “words fail me” comment as a put-down to your concerns. Far from it. Unlike others, many times words do fail me! In this case, I believe your response to my waining and waxing about the importance of life and our responsibility to see that it advances - is saved - perhaps for the sake of the universe! - ignored my meaning. Perhaps no one could respond to my personal musings anyway, except LWG - I think he understood what motivated me. But, these messages are many times posted out of sync. My comment to Larry Wayne was in response to his response to my “essay” about life - not to your comments about the artist-architect vs the master-builder-architect. Wow! how convoluted things can get!

But, about the architect as masterbuilder - Kebyar published a journal issue featuring the works of seven architects and three schools involved in designing and then overseeing - controling - and in many cases, actually building their work. Following is Kyle Bergman’s lead comments to that issue:

CONTINUOUS ARCHITECTURE - Design from conception throughout construction -

“Continuous architecture is an approach to design/build that [continuously] integrates the design and building process. It encourages the consideration and execution of design ideas during all phases of a building, from conception through construction. Continuous architecture describes a different process than an architect's designing and then building that design from a set of plans and specifications he has prepared. It only occurs when an architect allows the building process to inform the design in full-scale three-dimensional reality. Typically, creative design is confined to the drafting board and model making. In contrast, continuous architecture describes a process in which fresh ideas are born and are allowed the opportunity to be nurtured and implemented as the building emerges on the site. Making buildings this way has a variety of benefits ranging from a resurgence in the joy of architecture to greater client satisfaction.

From experience we know that the larger the scale of your model the more you learn about the building. A I/16" scale massing model gives you different information about a design than a 1/2" scale detail model. Therefore, at full scale, a building can suggest new ideas that will improve its design. Continuous architecture is like sculpting with clay. When you begin, you have a lump of clay and a general idea of what you are going to sculpt. Once you start carving and molding the clay, you begin not only to react to your original goals but to the form the clay is taking. This approach allows an architect to make spatial decisions that react to his emerging design encouraging him to make design decisions at full scale.

This opportunity to make decisions as the building is erected is an especially powerful tool for the clients who typically do not have as much experience with scale drawings and models. The process facilitates a client's ability to make more informed decisions. Ultimately it enhances the occupant's feeling and understanding of the finished space.

“A common element in buildings made in this approach is their eccentric and idiosyncratic nature. The fact that design is considered in the making process affects the spirit of the building. The buildings in this issue with this approach, are created in part from an experiential viewpoint and need to be experienced to be truly appreciated. The eccentric spirit is not easily captured in words, drawings, or photos, but is powerfully felt by the users. When visiting a site one can easily distinguish between a building that is mass produced, custom designed in an office or organically created from conception through construction.

“The trend in architecture since the turn of the century has been to retreat from legal responsibility. With this loss of responsibility comes a loss of control. Design/build and continuous architecture are attempts to regain the role of responsibility and architectural determination. Continuous architecture requires us to re-evaluate the typical contractual agreement, because the architect not only creates the initial design but remains intimately involved in the making of the building. This process alters the traditional litigious, finger-pointing, tripartite relationship of architect/ client/builder. Instead it creates a hierarchical structure in which the architect is ultimately responsible. It takes a special relationship between the client and designer for this process to work. This relationship requires the client to put a great deal of trust in the architect. Accordingly, the architect must be ultimately responsible for the design, the quality of construction and adherence to the budget. This design philosophy and contractual agreement is not for all projects.

“There is no particular "style" associated with continuous architecture, but the process and ideas are shared by those who practice it. As a rule of thumb, an outline might look something like this: 1) Program, 2) Understand the site, 3) Design the main structure and volumes, 4) Consider the circulation of all systems including people, hvac, electrical and plumbing, 5) Concepts for infill, 6) Sketch the rest of the design, 7) Start Building, 8) Keep designing, 9) Concurrently finish the design and building. A design is never complete: we just run out of time to finish. Consequently by maximizing the design time there is an enhanced potential for better architecture.

“In this feature we examine seven architects working in a continuous architectural approach. The architects were chosen for their divergent methods of applying the process, and the broad range of buildings they produced. Each was asked to look at and discuss his approach to one particular project. For this issue the understanding of the method is as equally important as the product. If continuous architecture is to become more widely accepted then it is important to look at, and understand, architects who are currently modeling this process.

“Three schools teaching courses in design/build are also included in this issue. Their design/build courses emulate the professional continuous architecture process. These courses are an in-teresting and serendipitous melding of the unrelenting academic focus on design and the professional realities of building production. Within these courses, schools and the students have the unique opportunity of experimenting with continuous architecture. Educators are beginning to seize this opportunity by responding to the students requests to interact with the building process, by adding design/build courses.

“Why all the buzz in the firms, in the schools, and in current architectural theory about design/build and in this case continuous architecture? Maybe it's because we are on the cusp of the new millennium. The beginning of the 20th century was a time of separation between the architect and builder. Possibly the 21st century will be a time of reuniting the architect and builder, a time of being responsible for one's actions; a time of holistic rather than linear thinking. It could be that continuous architecture is a place where the academic and professional worlds can meet. Conceivably it's just the current zeitgeist. I am not certain of the reason for this recent surge of interest, but KEBYAR is devoting an entire issue to Continuous Architecture, because of the variety of interesting work being created through this process.”

- Kyle Bergman blink@cts,com

One of the shortcomings of the issue is that many really creative architects such as Robert Faust (who has truly created great work with his own version of this process) were not included in the seven. Maybe that was another case of confused communications - I don’t know, but we try!

Well, I don’t know if this completely or even partially responds to your call for a return to the architect masterbuilder - I think it does, at least partially. I do hope it clears the air and that you understand that, at least “editorially” we are not all at odds with your masterbuilder proposal. Of course, in this forum everyone is expected to speak for themselves!

Best Wishes,

Jack ..........

Signed: Golden
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: OH MY GOD!

Don't know if I'll ever get this computer stuff right! Sorry guys for the double posting and the dumb paragraph MK mistake.

Good grief I almost did it again.

Jack

Signed:
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: oops. Typo http://fly.hiwaay.net/~mcolcock/tdrhq01.gif Pic from yesterday that i typoed.... On design/build vs continuous architecture. Having been involved with Design/Build over the last 10 years, I 'continously' look for the line between the proper amount of 'contract documents' when the architect is also the builder. To me, one of the beauties of design/build is that after the architect has completed the design portion, he/she is in the uniuqe position of konwing the building from the inside out. Plus as the builder he has the authority and knowledge to correct, modify, or substitute thruout the construction phase. The result is its easier for the architect to build the project that it is a general contractor, who must learn the building and operates in the dark in many ways, unable to see the design intent....should a field modification be needed, etc. So why not go ahead and build it....? ...................The other line is how much drawing to do? One still has subs who'll want more money if you've left something off, and rightly so, so its a tricky line on just how much documentation is needed to insure the Owner does not pay extra money unessasailry. (sp) IN my expereince, one still needs to prepare drawings to the extent of getting good prices and advoiding change orders. But its still much less drawings than the traditional architect then contractor bid scenario...and i don't know about you guys, but if i never draw or print another hollow metal door frame it won't hurt my feelings at all.

Signed: Miles Colcock
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting:

Signed: David W. Hinson
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: I am a newcomer to this site, but I have enjoyed reading your postings of the last two weeks. I'm a visiting professor in the Architecture Program at Auburn, and have come to this site at the suggestion of Bob Faust. I'm teaching a seminar for upper level students this fall that looks at four issues I believe are significant to the practice of architecture today and in the near future: Design/Build (and/or Continuous Architecture as I have learned here); Sustainable Design (or Permaculture); Architect's responsibilities vis-avis society (aka "social responsibility"); and architects as "visionary leaders" (see Dec. issue of Architecture mag. for editorial by S. Sutton). I've been so impressed with what you all have posted that I'm going to have my students visit this site (at least for the next few weeks). I'd appreciate any thoughts on these topics you all would like to post, and your help in teaching a new generation of achitects. David Hinson hinsodw@mail.auburn.edu

Signed: David W. Hinson
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: Hey now, bob faust here. i would like to encourage everyone out there to respond to David Hinson's request concerning his seminar...... somehow i have a feeling that Miles will more than adequately report on his situation and hope that Tom cools down long enough to report on his activities. John, Lawrence seemed to think that you were in some ways admirable defying convention, and there must be many others, envisioning viable alturnatives to conventional practice....if so.....David..and i would appreciate hearing...thanks!!

Signed: bob faust.....
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: pardon the misspellings in my last post..... hast does make waste!!! bob faust.....

Signed: bob faust...
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: Design/Build: ( Continuous Architecture)

For real Architecture to come into physical existence the man with the vision must be in a position of direction of the work. This can be accomplished in many ways. I have worked mostly as an Architect in a some what traditional way of Client, Architect, Builder. I have experience with Design/Build for ten years in the 1980’s I provided a service that I called "Design Build Construction Management" This service represented the owner in their dealings with large Design/Build companies in the construction of Hospitals. We would come on board before the contract was signed and stay with the job through the completion of construction. It was a real money maker but I did not like running it because it took me away from my real love and that was design, being an Architect and doing my own work.

If real architecture is to come out of the Design/Build approach then the owner of the Design/Build Co. must be the Design Architect. Most D/B is owned by contractors and the architect is just one of the employees. The Architect is powerless in this situation. I’m talking about real Architecture here not just good practice. Real, Creative , Original, Organic Architecture.

I find it works for me to be just an Architect, as the owner of the firm I can act without consulting with others. This is where the power is and where the buck stops. I make the choices and direct the work and I can also choose which jobs I take and which I don’t. I make my own terms. My terms these days is; yes, I will design the best possible building I can conceive that meets your needs and is in harmony with the conditions of your site and is affordable. If you don’t like it then don’t pay me and I take the design and you get some other guy to do it. My track record over 27 years of practice is this; no one has rejected any of my design proposals. Yes, I make lots of design adjustments after the initial presentation of the concept but the changes are design development and done as continuous design process and I do the design until it meets both the satisfaction of the Architect and the Client. The Visionary must be in a position of Power.

Of course none of this is worth anything if you don’t know how to create real, original, organic Architecture. If you are just going to copy what some past architect as done or just draw floor plans that work. If that is all you know how to do, then Design/Build, Sustainability, is not relevant. It is for sure Socially irresponsible to design poor, ugly buildings. So don’t do any harm may be your first responsibility to yourself and the world.

This gets some of my views out there. I am available to any one interested in learning more about Real, Creative, Organic Architecture and how to practice. I believe that ever person is creative and the source of all ideas are within your mind. You just need to know how to receive the guidance. Frank Lloyd Wright said he did his architecture in his mind and then just recorded it after he could see it and walk through it in his imagination. I have been doing this also now for over 35 years. Standing by in Wiscasset, Maine.

Signed: James Walter Schildroth, Organic Architect
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: To David W. Hinson: Welcome, surely you and your students should not only find some response here, but also be able to interject some fresh insight into our discussion.

We are a diverse group, needless to say, and at the core of our inspiration to be creative is the need to be, in some minds, unihibited by restraints. The creative process, which most here are identifying as "organic" is seen, I believe, in the context of artistic expression. Since I am not a spokesman for FOK, only a FOK supporter who is often outspoken, I will allow that to be further defined by others who will take the time to discuss it.

I can speak, personally, directly to your short list of issues, which I will reorder in what I think is a proper hierarchy: Vision, Responsibility, Sustainability, Design/Build.----First: Vision, is what we need to comprehend the role of our human impact upon the balance of nature. There are too few creative-architects who are taking on such vision. Palo Soleri, comes to mind. -----Second: I believe that one of the fundamental flaws of "Western Civilization" is the very idea that we are free. Such freedom is just seen as a license to act uninhibited. Responsibility is, in my mind, should be the basic rule of our life. Responsibility to the total community of life, of which we are only a part.-----Third: I like this definition for sustainability: ".....to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." (World Commission on Environment and Development)-----Fourth: Design/Build is an appropriate means for the architect to realize their work. Such a process, among many things, connects the architect directly to the reality of the materials and methods. ( As Frank Lloyd Wright said, "......you must have your hands in the mud of the bricks" ) Part of the reason we-architects are losing our impact upon society is because part of the education of architects is made itself more elite, hence removed from reality, via the persuit of theory and virtual reality.

Well, that should give you enough of an introduction about where my thoughts are about such things. You need not worry about my feelings, so, everyone please express yourself. After the last twelve years of private practice in Alabama, which have beaten me almost senseless, I am hanging on to my personal vision, being responsible for my actions, trying to be sustainable, and designing and building architecture ( when I get a client who is willing to trust me.)

Signed: lwg
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting:

Signed: cameron
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: To all: Just a reminder that the FOKemailChat is also occuring simultaneously with the conversations here at the website. To subscribe to that, just contact me by email at: bdglwg@gulftel.com , and let me know you want to receive it. Things are forwarded out at least once a day.

Please be reminded that Tom Arlin Dean is the webmaster here, and we are fortunate that he has the knowledge and time to keep this going, and he is donating whatever net access costs he is occuring, for our benefit. Thanks again Tom.

About the FOK=Friends Of Kebyar.....If you are visiting this site and do not know what KEBYAR is all about, please let us know, and Jack Golden will repost his explanation or contact you directly. If you know about KEBYAR but do not subscribe, please consider subscribing. There is a reduced rate for students (I believe). The more subscribers we have, the stronger our voice becomes, and that will benefit us all in the "continuous present...."

You will notice that there is a GO TO CHAT SITE link on the submittal page. That is for real time chatting, and it works well. If you would ever like to chat, please let me know, via email. Suggest a time, and I will try to meet you there.

I understand that Thad Kusmeirski is working on a FOK website-homepage, which will provide us with general information (Thad, please post an update at your convenience.)

By the way, I appreciate the expressions of appreciation that I have been receiving from you all, regarding the Email chatting. I am glad to do it. This year is a pivotal year in my life long (from 17 to 46) devotion to architecture. As 1998 approaches, marking 30 years of involvement, I am considering a finer tuning of my conerns, and look forward to sharing that with everyone in the future. More to all, as it developes.......

Signed: lwg: Larry Wayne Grantham: Nature-Art-Architecture ( working title for not for profit in formation )
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: Hello all and Hello David Hinson. In answer to yuor 4 queries, I need help on what you mean by Sustainable Design (or Permaculture)?....Architect's responsibilities vis-avis society (aka "social responsibility")& and architects as "visionary leaders" Gotta think a little about those too..prehaps you could jump start the conversation or your students could?.....As to Design/Build..I can say no great things as to why I personally am practiceing in that fashion. Its a combination of personel preference, market and fanaincial pressures. I think one may practice architecture successfully either in the traditional fashion, as Design/Build or many other spin-offs. A little personal history..I began working at 14 on night shifts and graveyard shifts while in high school and after a couple of years of this knew I had to do something or....After 2 years at a local college in general curriculum and two years just probing and working construction, I kinda accidently ran into a woman whose name I forget at a party who was in Interior Design at Auburn. After talking with her for a few hours I was fired to to go to Auburn's Archtiectural School. Just had not realized it was there till then. When I got to Auburn they would not let me in because of poor grades in high school and farily poor at two year college. Presistance paid off and after 3 trips of not taking no for an answer I was admitted under the contingency of taking Calucals, Physics and some others and making a B average for 3 quarters. Which i did to the hair loss of several grad students assinged to assist undergrads..... The basic reasons I decided to become an Architect was three-fold, 1.I've always enjoyed building things and 2. The creative aspect of it. and 3. It seemed to me to be the top rung of the ladder for someone who wanted to be in the buiding industry..............So, Design/Build was kinda a natural for me personally...(Not the only way to go) I viewed graduating from college as about halfway there. My apprenticeship took 4 years cause i did two with arch firms and 2 with Construction Companies and only got half time for that. Then 2 years at Intergraph Corporation helping develop and teaching Microstattion Cad software (Just had to give the corp world a look see and it was like being paid to go to college) So after about 6 years of training after college, I went into the Design & Build Bussiness. ................. It agrees with me as i like to mix office and field, either by itself tends to bore me. I practice as a single individual. With Cad and other software, (espcecilly accounting) it is very do-able to do a million dollars worth of design/build work yearly if the work is there. ...I often fast-track jobs...pour foundation while still desgining and it is a continuous process. Being the one point of responsibily for a project tends to make points with Owners..Budgets can be hit as you prepare the buildings cost as you design, (unless its a wild thing, *grin*) and one learns quite a bit each job...Being responsible for the cost and warranty of a job makes one very quality conscious if not a little conservative..which is the dangerous part of the design/build bussiness....I'm not married to it..but it works for me at this time...If the batteries wern't low in my digital camera I would post a pic of the cover of 'Builder-Archtiect' an Alabama magazine which shows what can happen to Architects who go Design/Build....but the same danger awaits the traditional fashion too.... Later Foks

Signed: Miles Colcock
BACK TO HOME PAGE

Posting: Subject:Architect/Builder and Social Responsibility "If you can accurately project the cost, fine, if you cannot then don't" - from Miles Colcock's entry of September 16 refering to some architects' inability to accurately project the cost of a building to a client. This seems like a very logical suggestion to make to many architects practicing in the traditional method of design-award-build, especially those with less experience and no input from a builder. However, I would suggest that "if you cannot, then find a way" would be better. As the construction industry has become hi -tech and information on the net has made traditional methods of cost projection (including Sweet's) outdated, the building profession has done a marvelous job of keeping up - except for architects. The argument can be made that as the information needed to perform becomes more specialized, so should the different professions in the industry. However, if architecture becomes any more specialized, it will no longer exist. We are currently limiting ourselves to the minimum of our capabilities, using the guise of design-build firms to mask our retreat from responsibility. Why can architecture firms not provide their clients with the best design and budgeting advise without becoming subsidiary to contractors? If it has become impossible for firms to divide their employees' time between design and production work and research into constructability, then the firm should hire new people who will specialize in constructablilty. This knowledge should come from within the architecture firm. In this way, the architect will be able to retain his role as agent of the client, and not become financially involved as in the roles of design sub-contractor or even architect/developer. The key word here is agent. The architect in the traditional method acts as an agent to his/her client, thereby representing the client's interests. The architect also has the obligation to act as an agent to the public and to the environment. Some current design build models have the architect acting as vendor, demoted to the role of employee of a contractor. Is it possible for such an architect to respect the safety needs of the public and the needs of the environment when his 'boss' is telling him to do the opposite for profit's sake? Even design build firms that are owned by the architect remove the architect from his role of agent, a role that allows him/her to shoulder responsibility for his client's needs and social responsibility without jeapordizing his own financial concerns. Jack Golden has written before that design/build and continous architecture are trends focused on returning architects to roles of increased responsibility and control. His reasons for this are undeniable, including the heightened trust it takes for a client to let a building begin construction before it is even on paper. Yet, I wonder if it is possible to structure a widely usable system that allows for 'continous architecture' and leaves the architect in the role of agent? - By the way, I am a fifth year student in Professor Hinson's seminar class. I have worked one summer for an experienced architect in Macon, Ga, and that is the extent of my own professional experience. My understanding of the professional world is therefore very limited and I welcome any insights on possiblities for architects to remain in ,or regain, roles of responsibility and social prominence.

Signed: bill
BACK TO HOME PAGE