The difference between these two is ,,,,help me find the words,,,,
[OP]
Contributor
The difference between these two is ,,,,help me find the words,,,,
Contributor
Falling Water is an architectural deign motif by Frank Lloyd Wright. Gamble House is a Greene and Greene designed house in Pasadena Calif. Look at photos of Falling Water house in Pennsylvania, as opposed to Gamble House in Pasadena.
I would classify Falling water as being more associated with "Art Deco", but Greene and Greene's style was more an amalgamation of Mission and secessionist style, principally inspired by the Jugendstil art movement, and leaning toward the Art Nouveau.
Personally I find that Greene and Greene softened the hard,rectilinear lines of the mission style. Wright's work is abundant with hard lines.
I admire both bodies of work.
"The first thing you need to know, will likely be the last thing you learn." (Unknown)
Member
I like the word "better". Falling Water is better than Gamble. Falling Water was profound at it's inception, and still is. Gamble is nice woodwork in a rather boring house design.
Just my opinion
Contributor
The Gamble House is beautiful. In pictures, it looks more ... ornate? ... than Falling Water. I visited Falling Water and it's just amazing. I love the place. But it was fairly plain inside, with an emphasis on connecting the inside to nature outside. The passage that lets one go from the living room to the water, the slab of vertical windows that let's the woods connect to the upstairs rooms, etc. A few years back they had to shore-up the building to save it, because there were issues. It's quite a place.
I hope to get to Gamble House soon!
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
“If you want to know what a man's like, take a good look at how he treats his inferiors, not his equals.”
Contributor
Gamble House is a work of art.
Falling Water is a masterpiece.
The world is a more beautiful place with both of them in it.
[OP]
Contributor
Edwin I think the opposite. Falling Water is to look at, Gamble House is to look at and to live in.Originally Posted by Edwin Santos
Moderator
I'm with Tom. Falling Water is visually stunning and has wonderful spaces, but like many FLW designs/structures, it wasn't executed very well physically and has had a lot of problems over the years including some heavy renovation not long ago to stabilize it. I really enjoyed my visit there years ago, however. While I've only seen Gamble House in photos, it's a completely different animal than Falling Water. It feels like a home, both visually and in how it's executed.
--
The most expensive tool is the one you buy "cheaply" and often...
Contributor
AFAIK the Gamble house has no structural issues and the roof does not even leak. I do believe falling Water may be one of the few FLW designs that does not have roof problems. FW looks like living in a museum while the gamble house is designed to be lived in.
I have read the family that built falling water loved the location before the house was built. They went swimming and sun bathing on picnics there before the house was built. When they realized FLW destroyed the site and turned it into a basement they hated the house. They wanted a house so they could see the site from inside the house by looking out a window not a trapdoor.
Bill D
on edit; I looked it up, I was wrong, the roof does leak. I should have known. I am not aware of any FLW building that the roof does either not sag or leak or both.
Last edited by Bill Dufour; 05-24-2019 at 9:50 AM.
Contributor
Guggenheim Museum NYC?
Robie House?
Contributor
Since a "bungalow" is a one story house ,why do they call the Gamble House "the ultimate bungalow" ?
Contributor
You are correct the Guggenheim does not leak it just condenses water on the walls that runs down to the floors. the art is mounted on brackets off the wall so it does not get too wet. Long socks of absorbent are placed at the base of the walls so water does not get on the floors and cause people to slip. No mention of how often the absorbent has to be switched out.
No mention of any roof problems on the other house.
Bill
Member
Being consistent with the argument that FLW architecture is defective because a roof leak developed later, would require pretty much all buildings built before yesterday to be judged as subpar because they lack the utmost best materials available now. All buildings fail without maintenance, it isn't a defect. The features that make houses the most remarkable tend to also be the most demanding of maintenance. It'd be a very boring house built exclusively to eliminate potential maintenance.
Contributor
FLW was also warned about engineering problems with Falling Water before they started to show. Something about big
pieces falling off.
Last edited by Mel Fulks; 05-27-2019 at 4:34 PM.
Contributor
The museum was plagued by roof leaks, as was Falling Water (no pun intended).
Sharp solves all manner of problems.
Contributor
.I like the word "better". Falling Water is better than Gamble. Falling Water was profound at it's inception, and still is. Gamble is nice woodwork in a rather boring house design.
Just my opinion
Yeah, GH looks like someone dumped a lot of material, hired a bunch of carpenters, then yelled ,"Gentlemen, start your
hammers !"
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote