In 1936, Frank Lloyd Wright
developed a series of homes he called “Usonian”
[link].
Over about a 15 year period, he build a hundred plus
of these structures all over the United States. The
“prototype” to the Usonians was the Willey House
[link]
built in 1934.
|
Willey House builit 1934
phographed in 2000 by Lisa Piazza
|
The Jacobs house (shown in the above masthead and
below) was the first Usonian. It was built for
$5,500 including the architect’s fee. Mr. Wright’s
intent was to develop a grammar and construction
method for the production of simple, affordable,
beautiful houses. In recent years, these works have
been the subject of renewed study because they stand
as eloquent solutions to a most complex and elusive
architectural problem: the affordable single family
dwelling.
|
Jacobs House 1936
link to currant owner’s web site
|
Personally, I
consider the Usonian house - as a class - to be one
of the most successful examples of the architectural
art - and practice - in modern times. These homes
were simple: concrete floors, natural wood walls,
brick masonry piers and fireplaces. Yet, they
provided a vast variety of different solutions and
fit well into a number of different settings and
climes. They produced a band of loyal owners unlike
anything I have seen since.
|
They provided
high quality environments for teachers, writers,
small store owners - average income earners, who
before, could not dream of owning an architectural
masterpiece.
|
The first Frank
Lloyd Wright house that I ever experienced was a
Usonian - the Hanna House built at Stanford
University. Dr. Hanna devoted a large part of a
Sunday morning, one spring day in 1953, to showing
me his house, describing his experiences with Wright
and how the house was designed to evolve as his
requirements changed over the years. This house
evolved as the Hanna’s requirements, lifestyle and
income did. It started off as a “middle-class”
dwelling for a young family, and became, over a
twenty year period, a spacious, eloquent home for a
successful professional couple. The first small
Master Bedroom became the Hanna’s study; the three
children’s Bed Rooms morphed into a new Master Bed
Room; and the Family Room became a large formal
Dining Room for entertainment. A shop and garden
room was added as income allowed. All this was
accomplished with minor reconstruction; the entire
scope of work having been programmed, and
structurally provided for, from the beginning.
|
This
introduction to Wrightian philosophy and work
totally mesmerized me.

|
Hanna “Honeycomb”
House, 1938
|
The Hanna House was built on an hexagonal module
that was scribed into the deep red, waxed concrete
floors. This was the first time that I was
introduced to the use of “Prospect” and “refuge” in
the creation of architectural space. Wright was a
master at this and could make the smallest space
both fit human scale and go on forever. The house
was not large but one space flowed into another
creating infinite variety combined with the sense of
pervasive shelter. Being in the Hanna House is like
living in a forest - ever changing, minute to
minute.
|
Professor Hanna was clearly in
love with his environment which evolved with him and
Mrs Hanna as they raised a family and built
individual careers. I could see that it had become
an integral part of their life and that living in it
had deeply effected their view of life. He
talked about the impact the environment had on his
children as they were growing up. This morning was a
magical introduction, for me, to the precepts and
reality of organic
[link]
architecture.
|
During my time at Taliesin, I was able to talk to
many owners of Usonians. They talked about their
environments with unreserved passion. It was from
one, Mrs. Pew, that I learned the true secret of Mr.
Wright’s genius and success.
|
She described how, at first she hated the house. She
felt that Mr. Wright had not listened to her
requirements but merely built what he wanted. She
was, at the end of her second year living in it,
ready to sell it and move on - at great financial
sacrifice. She told me that she decided that she
would “give the house a year without struggling with
it” before she made up her mind. In that year, a
transformation took place. She discovered that “Mr.
Wright had not built a house for who I was” -
but for “the person that I could become.” “It turned
out that Mr. Wright had listened well and understood
me very deeply.” “Now, I can hardly stand to be in
other people's homes.”
|
 |
NavCenters apply Usonian principles to
the workplace. The AI WorkFurniture
grammar is a direct descendent of the
way that the Usonians were both
built, structurally, and furnished. This
is extending the lessen I leaned from
Mrs Pew: that a way-of-living can be
expressed as a way of working.
These ideas are explored in The
Usonian Workplace
[link].
The
typical North American home, today, is
bloated in size and nostalgic in style.
This is not affordable to the individual
family, nor over the long run, to the
planet. This housing has been kept in
place by insane “creative financing,”
short term “economics” and the
determined effort to ignore social and
ecological consequences. It is time for
the concept of housing to be recreated.
|
|
 |
The typical office environment is a
strange combination of cheap “rental”
real estate
[link] (where most actually work)
and grandiose flash and blatant brand
exploitation (in lobbies and common
areas) combined with the misapplication
and underutilization of modern
technology [link].
It neither inspires nor augments
knowledge work [link]. |
|
I spent an afternoon with Mrs.
Pew in her house, in 1958, and consider that day to
be one of the seminal experiences in my development.
The idea that an environment could
facilitate the evolution of a life was
extraordinary in its implications. It was not a
great leap from this lesson to think of the
environment facilitating work; a “way of life”
and a way of working
[link];
this idea of a transforming workplace
[link]
is just now, in 2004, finding a full expression in
built projects - prime examples of which are the
Vanderbilt Children’s Hospital Executive Offices
[link]
(which, unfortunately remained un-built) the
Collaboration Studio for masters Academy and College
[link]
and the World Economic Forum’s WorkPlace
and RDS
[link].
|
Stanley and Mildred Rosenbaum
built a Usonian in Florence, Alabama in 1939. It was
expanded in 1948 to accommodate a growing family.
The Rosenbaums lived in the house until 1999 when
the city of Florence purchased it and restored it by
raising funds by a 1% sales tax (!). Their son,
Alvin Rosenbaum
[link]
has contributed a great deal to the history of
architecture
[link]
and cultural connectivity and tourism
[link].
The Rosenbaum family story is a typical Usonian
story. These houses were not just abstract pieces of
art - they were environments based on a concept of
human potential and a-way-of-life that seeks it. See
my article What Makes an Usonian a Usonian?
[link] |
Usonian Homes in
Kalamazoo, Michigan
|
These Usonian Homes are
scattered all over the country built by Mr. Wright
and those who kept and developed the tradition.
There are a group
[link]
of them (mostly the concrete block variety) in
Kalamazoo, Michigan that I discovered in June 1999.
I don’t (yet) know the whole story of this
development but a fast drive by sparked my interest.
I understand that there is another cluster of them
just south of the city.
[note: here is a
link to information about the development - mt;
04/02/04]
|
The Roland and Ronny Reisley
Usonian was build in 1951 in a Wright designed
community in New York
[link].
This development is probably the most successful of
several attempts on the part of Wright, his clients
and several apprentices to build a sustainable
community based on Usonian ideals. The story is told
well in a fasinating book by Roland Reisley
Usonia, New York: Building a Community With Frank
Lloyd Wright
[link]. |
For an extensive online list of
Usonian references go to Answers.com
[link]. |
a house at Rush
Creek Village
|
There were other architects and
developers that took on this task of providing great
works at low costs. Bruce Goff
[link]
produced many successful and very unusual pieces in
the 40s and 50s. Gordon Drake had a brief, brilliant
career after World War II. Architects Charles Eames
[link]
and Raphael Soriano
[link]
explored the possibilities of steel and build
surprisingly “warm” structures with this difficult
material.
|
|
 |
Goff 1952
|
Drake 1947 |
Architects like John Lautner
[link]
carried on and build an amazing number of works some
of which were small and compact.
|
photograph ©
Judith Lautner
|
The Desert Springs Motel
[link]
is a great retreat place
[link]
where you can experience a Lauter environment
[link].
|
The Case Study houses sponsored
by Art and Architecture magazine generated
intense interest in small, affordable houses
[link].
|
And then, there
was Rudolph Schindler without doubt one of the most
under-rated and greatest architects of the 20th
Century. |
Schindler - Kings
Row 1926
|
Schindler - Pueblo Ribera
[link]
|
Schindler’s Wolf House - late 1920s
photo © david leclerc
GoTo: David’s story of the destruction of
this masterpiece
|
Rudolph Schindler
[link]
built a number of wonderful and inexpensive homes in
Southern California during the 30s, 40s and 50s.
Schindler’s own home predated much of the Unsion’s
grammar by nearly a decade. Along with him was Lloyd
Wright
[link],
another highly under rated genius. In the Bay Area,
there were a number of architects that worked with
great success: Wurster
[link],
Bernardi and Emmons
[link],
Jack Hillmer
[link]
and Warren Callister
[link] among
them.
More than
any single architect that I can think of, Warren
gave fresh expression to the “bay Area Style”
[link]
[link]
started by Maybeck
[link]
[link]
(go to
[link]
for his materpiece) and others
[link]
at the turn of the 20th Century.
|
Duncan Residence
by Warren Callester
|
Ludekens House
by Jack Hillmer
|
In terms of
volume, however, the developer Joe Eichler
[link]
outpaced them all.
|
I met Eichler when I first
moved to Palo Alto in 1953
[link:
1953 and
the tower]. His work
and his passion for it impressed me greatly. He took
more joy in what he was doing than any
developer I have met since. One day, he gave my
mother and me a tour of several of his subdivisions.
In retrospect, what this man accomplished seems like
a miracle today. Joe Eichler built thousands of
homes in what, today, is Silicon Valley. They were
simple and were inspired by Frank Lloyd Wright:
standard materials used well, privacy toward the
street, radiant floor heating, floor to ceiling
glass looking into indoor/outdoor spaces, high open
ceilings. Although these Usonian principles were
used by Eichler, he followed another architectural
idiom: the more casual California “post and Beam”
construction style. He hired, challenged and turned
loose a new generation of architects, Anshen and
Allen
[link],
and, A. Quincy Jones
[link]
[link]
among them.
|
In
short time, a new framework was developed and to
this day “an Eichler” stands for a distinct
definition of lifestyle and architecture. A book
chronicling his many successes has recently been
published: Design for Living - Eichler Homes
(Chronicle Books, San Francisco) - it is a fine
tribute to one of the best developers that ever
worked.
|
Sadly, these fine
homes are now worth 500 to 750 thousand dollars - or
their land is - and they are being decimated by
inappropriate alterations and additions, and in many
cases, being torn down
[link]
to be replace by
bloated boxes of dubious character.
|
For a through
review of Eichler’s work go to John Fyten’s web site
story
[link].
This is one of the best overviews that I have found.
A number of Eichler related links can be found at
Eichler Re-Mod - Adventures in DIY Remodeling
[link:
eichler.kimio.com]. |
No matter their
differences, what all these architects, designers
and developers and their works have in common is a
dedication to building an environment based on a
singular view of human lifestyle: simple,
uncomplicated, natural, eloquent, affordable
[link].
These are not “trophy” houses which is why they are
so vulnerable today. All of these works sought to
rethink what a single family dwelling should be, and
together, constitute a movement that has come and
mostly gone but, I think, is returning
[link].
They flourished in an unique period of American
history and mostly, with the exception of Wright’s
work, in an unique place: California. Their basis
was a notion of lifestyle that stands, today, in
sharp contrast to an over-consumptive and compulsive
culture.
|
In a brief period
of time - mostly three decades - a complete cannon
was laid down. I do not know what is more surprising
- that it was done in the first place or that, once
accomplished, so little remains of the practice
today.
|
In the 60s and
70s, there were several attempts to revive this
movement mostly driven by ecological, energy and
related issues. This included a strong
do-it-yourself movement. To a great extent this also
has mostly faded. Unfortunately, the affluence of
the 80s, and 90s has not been generally kind to the
American landscape. In the years that I first lived
in Northern and Southern California 1952 to 1961), I
used to go and visit these houses and wonder - I
still wonder: what sparked their creation, what
allowed the majority of work to go another way
despite their enduring popularity to this day?
|
Today, there are many branches
of the Organic School of architecture. Bart Prince
[link]
who has “inherited” Bruce Goff’s work and the Jersey
Devils
[link],
who design-build, are prime examples. Fay Jones
[link],
gone now, did wonderful work - mostly churches.
Arthur Dyson
[link]
has built a number of fine works in Fresno,
California and now is receiving very large
commissions. Here and there, all over the world,
great works are being created. They remain, however,
out of the financial and organizational reach of
most people.
|
Arthur Dyson
LENCIONI RESIDENCE
1985
|
In all, there are
about a 100 or so architects that consistently
practice some variant of Green or Organic
Architecture many of whom pay attention to small and
compact housing. The San Francisco Institute of
Architecture
[link]
and the Frank Lloyd
Wright
[link]
School of Architecture at
Taliesin, together, have an enrollment - at any
given time - of about 100 students. This is out of a
base of about 80,000 plus architects practicing in
the US. Given the scale of development and the
wealth in our society, the percentage of truly fine
architecture - in proportion to what is being built
- is on the decline. On an absolute measure, I
expect it is on the rise. Architecture that can be
considered “green” is also an extremely small
percentage of the whole. This is particularity true
at the low end of the building cost range. However,
there are places where building “green” is becoming
the standard. Sadly, however, given the scale and
scope of development, green practices alone will not
be sufficient. We are, if we like it or not -
recognize it or not - entering into the era of
planetary architecture
[link].
|
There is little, in commercial housing today,
carrying the tradition of the Usonian home, the
Eichler house and the many other post WWII examples.
However, in the realm of custom homes, there are
significant exceptions to the rule. Sarah Susanka of
Mulfinger, Susanka, Mahady and Partners and her
associates are exemplars. She has co-authored
The Not So Big House
[link],
published by Taunton Press
[link],
and it is a feast for the eyes and soul. The New
Cottage Home by Jim Toplin documents another
path to simpler living. He has established a network
[link].
The
insightbuilders website lists many resources
[link].
Recent developments in cob, compacted earth and
straw bail housing, augmented with solar, abounds -
particularly in Northern California where I live
[link].
Bahl Homes in Mountain View, California has build a
number of modest size patio homes that reflect this
philosophy
[link:Bahl
Patio Homes]. Below
is a home they built in the early 70s.
|
Here is a
classic Usonian design and built by Tim Sutton for
himself and his wife Marion in Ohio - it was
completed in 2005. Click on the picture to go to a
Gallery of this very well done project which
illustrates many, many of the features of the
Usonian ideal and way of living. Tim is a retired
architect and this work shows his 50 plus years of
experience in every detail. |
Thomas Tim Sutton, architect
Usonian Red House
started November 2002 completed january 2005
|
This project is interesting in
many ways. It is an extremely true rendering of a
traditional Usonian while at the same time employing
appropriate modern means and meeting contemporary
requirements. As a 21st Century project, it shows
that the Usonian concept is still viable and can be
accomplished. I do not know details such as cost -
these are things to hear about from Tim. His web
site
[link:
usonian red house]
walks you through the history of the project and
provides a narrative about the experience of living
in this superb environment. This is clearly a work
which Tim wanted to do for most of his life. A great
deal of care and passion went into this piece. It is
good to see it done. As I note often in my
architecture Notebooks
[future link],
one of the most disconcerting aspects of
architecture today is it loss of material quality.
The Usonian Red House is a reminder of what
can be done with basic materials and the sense of
place which can be made by their proper
employment. |
Affordable domestic architecture
[link]
remains
one of the great challenges facing architects. The
need for the recreation of this body of work has
never been greater nor have the opportunities been
better. This issue has to be placed back on the
designer’s agenda and the solution will surly evolve
only out a close integration of the
Design-Build/manufacture-Use process
[link].
You cannot build affordable housing if over 50% of
the cost and 65% of the calendar time invested is
non-value added waste. This is a ValueWeb
[link]
and
supply-chain challenge.
|
A better method
of building is required and and new method of
contracting, financing and selling is necessary. A
new practice model
[link]
is required. The
housing industry is dominated by UpSideDown
Economics
[link]
-
this fact drives the design process more than any
other single factor. Structure wins. The
entire real estate development and management
process
[link]
has to be re-created
- it is broken
[link]
now.
|
However, new
methods
[link]
of
designing and building and new methods of
organization can combine to bring great architecture
back to a far larger number of our population.
Re-integration of design/build is a start. Chandler
Construction
[link],
among others, is doing this. There is no excuse for
ugly, energy inefficient, ecologically taxing,
lifestyle impoverishing buildings - no matter what
the budget demands are. Green building
[link]
is necessary - and
possible.
|
For some of the
problems associated with affordable housing to be
solved, new codes (and a new non-government code
method), development practices and building types
will be required. Communities and community living
[link]
will
have to be reintroduced. Ken Norwood (Rebuilding
Community in America) of the Shared Living
Resource Center in Berkeley, California (800 475
7572) has explored this ground.
|
One comment that Mr. Wright made again and again was
“until we have an organic culture we will never
have an organic architecture.” His point is
that architecture is the result of the choices
individuals make and it expresses the culture they
make up and in turn are influenced by. The Usonian
house is not just another way to “style” a building
- it is about a different way of living; a way that,
today, is alien to the mainstream of our American
culture. The usonian way is about relating
differently to the Earth, to life and to all living
beings - it is an integrated, natural life-style.
Sustainable, evolving, sensory, engaging - it is to
be surrounded by beauty and to live in harmony. |
|
|