Louis Sullivan: Lieber Meister
However it was Wright’s second employer that influenced the young architect in a way that would change the course of American architecture forever. Wright referred to him as his “Lieber Meister” and admired Louis Sullivan’s talent for ornamentation, and his skill of drawing intricate plans and designs. Wright picked up on the philosophy of Sullivan and was so loyally devoted to his employer that he soon moved ahead of Alder in importance within the firm. Sullivan was extremely critical of classicism which was appearing across the USA during the 1990’s in reaction the 1893 Chicago World’s Fair exhibits. Wright’s relationship with his employer caused great amounts of tension between Wright and fellow draftsmen, and well as in-between Sullivan and Alder. When Wright left the company, Sullivan’s quantity of contracts declined quickly. Sullivan had reached his peak of innovation, and without a young prodigy to carry it on into the new century, many potential clients turned away. Wright would call on his “Lieber Meister” when Sullivan ran into economic and personal troubles. His international reputation had dwindled by 1920 and Wright found him rejected, ignored, penniless, and dealing with alcoholism. Sullivan died in 1924 without regaining the glory of that the firm held when during Wright’s early years in Chicago.
WRIGHT IN RELATION TO GARDNER’S MODEL
It surprises me that Howard Gardner in his book “Creating Minds” did not choose Frank Lloyd Wright as a subject, let alone mention him. When you compare the life trends of Gardner’s choices and that belonging to Frank Lloyd Wright, it is rather obvious that by Gardner’s standards Wright is a creating mind of the modern era. Beginning in the early stages of childhood, Wright, like others Gardner choices, showed prodigious tendencies which were nourished, later developing from mastery into creative innovation. The development of Wright’s skill and creative output continued throughout his life, which is a rather extraordinary occurrence, since he lived for ninety-two years and produced for over seventy years. This length of time and the rate at which Wright produced buildings, addresses a question raised during the class discussion time of whether a prolific individual has a better chance of hitting on a product considered creative.
Certain trends which I picked up on from Gardner’s model relate directly to Wright’s childhood of comfort rather than warmth including a touch of estrangement, distance from society but not ignorance, a value of learning and achievement, and high expectations for oneself or from another. In reference to the retention of childlike qualities, it could be argued that Wright’s lack of concern in financial situations and his habit of running away from comfortable situation represents this in a negative sense. In a positive light, Wright rejoiced in the creative essence of daily life through his productions. Often his inspirational breakthroughs would not come at night, rather he would be in the fields working or awake in the middle of the night. The concept of marginality also applies to Wright’s case and is best explained by the Lloyd-Jones motto “Truth Against the World” which he placed above the fireplace of his houses. Many of Gardner’s choices went through a period of both religiosity and despondency . Wright’s Unitarian background and his marital behavior are examples of contradictory manners throughout his lifetime. Wright exhibits the pattern of stubbornness, pride, and self-confidence in Gardner’s choices. He often saw himself as a misunderstood and persecuted genius. Wright’s move to Chicago directly coincides with the migration to a metropolis in adolescence where the creative individual found a support group of peers. Often times of Gardner’s choices became isolated from the supportive peers after discovering a problem in the domain, which for Wright could be seen as the popularity of classicism, and his falling out with fellow draftsmen.
It is difficult to pin-point Wright’s creative “breakthroughs” for reasons relating to the field of architecture and to Wright’s personal philosophy that all houses should be site appropriate and unique. Time often passed from the creation of a building on paper and the actuality of it in stone, brick, etc. Also, many of Wright’s designs were created and not built for years or decades. An example of this is a civic center currently under construction in Madison, Wisconsin of Wright design, although the creator passed away three decades ago. Though many of his buildings can be fit into a period of his production, such as the previously mentioned Prairie houses, textile block houses, and the Usonian houses, the period’s (Frank Lloyd Wright refuted that his architecture was about a certain style, rather it reflected a philosophy) edges are gray, and many projects overlapped on creation and production. The trend I recognize in Wright’s development may be comparable to a series of waves. There tends to be a peak where one of Wright’s buildings “defines” the period of architecture that he used as a base, and could be (and sometimes is) considered as the model .
From perusing his personal life I would have to agree that the financial difficulties that continuously faced Wright, and the disasters of his personal relations could be seen as his Faustian bargain. The destruction of Taliesin twice by fire and constant revisions were major burdens placed on Wright’s financial situation because of his creative lifestyle. There appears to be only one period when Wright was financially stable. This was after completing the 4.5 million dollar Imperial Hotel in 1921. It is remarkable that the sometimes devastating financial situations troubled Wright little. Like other creators, he welcomed challenges. Creative life was not supposed to be comfortable for Frank Lloyd Wright. Wright was a fighter in relation to his work. Boulton marks Wright’s toleration of disorder at the core of his creative lifestyle.
So again I address the question, why not Wright? The only deviance from Gardner’s model is Wright’s geographic location. While all the other members of Gardner’s model were greatly influenced on the European continent, Wright defied this by creating an American architecture based on the environment surrounding and the lifestyles affecting the people of the United States during the first half of the century. The time frame is right, the geographical position is wrong.
To conclude my study of Howard Gardner’s creative mind model and Frank Lloyd Wright in reference to Howard Gardner’s model, I ask a series of questions. Why did Gardner choose creative geniuses of Europe during this time when it appears that Chicago had the same draw for reformers during the modern era? Specifically in reference to Wright, I wonder what his production would be if he was still alive today. Would Wright’s work have continued to evolve as the lifestyle of the US citizen and the environment surrounding their habitats had changed? What would Wright think about computers roles in the field of architecture and how would he incorporate this new technology into the home? Is it ethical to build a Wright design from the 1930’s in the society of the 1990’s? Would Wright have wanted this? Should those now owning Wright designed homes maintain the decor and at all costs or discomforts should the integration be maintained? The is a question which could be addressed to the work of various creative individuals thorughout time. It is a question of respecting the creative work versus the natural evolution of the domain and deterioration of materials. Would Wright have wanted the houses to be revised with the changing lifestyle ? Did Wright change architecture forever? Most of these questions are being addressed by those in architecture today, and will be for as long as the name of Frank Lloyd Wright is associated with the title of Greatest American Architect.
For further information on Frank Lloyd Wright’s life and works check out these WWW sites: http://flw.badgernet.com:2080/flw.htm or http://www.mcs.com/ tgiesler/flw_home.htm
REFERENCES
Boulton, Alexander O. Frank Lloyd Wright: Architect: An Illustrated Biography, Rizzoli International Publications, New York, 1993. Color pictures and text following Wright’s personal and professional life.
Gill, Brendan, Many Masks: A Life of Frank Lloyd Wright, G.P. Putnam’s Sons, New York, 1987. Text biography concentrating on Wright’s hidden motivations and true personality.
Heinz, Thomas A., Frank Lloyd Wright: Architectural Monographs No 18, St. Martin’s Press, New York, 1992. Color photographs of the interior/Exterior of restored Wright homes.
Lind, Carla, The Wright Style, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1992. Photographs of Wright’s works, with text discussing his architectural productions and approaches.
Secrest, Meryle, Frank Lloyd Wright: A Biography, Alfred A. Knopf, Inc. New York, 1992. Text biography of Wright’s work and life.