ARCHITECTURAL TOYS

I looked up "architectural toys" on the net and was surprised at how many I found. Christmas is coming and if you know someone who's interested in architecture then maybe one of the items in this post would make a good present.

Hmmmm, come to think of it....this Robie House toy wouldn't work because you can only see the whole layout when it's down at waist level. If you put it out of the way up on top of a book shelf, which is what I'd do with it, then you wouldn't be able to see it. 

This "Wright Blocks" kit was actually sold for a while. It was conceived and designed by Frank Lloyd Wright's son, who was also the inventor of Lincoln Logs. He only got a measly $800 for the Log idea so he figured he'd try again with a new set based on his and his dad's ideas, and this (above) is it.

It looks like an interesting toy that would have good top shelf visibility. It didn't sell well, though. 

I bought my kid an old-time erector set (above) and he never used it. He's an adult now so maybe the set has reverted to me. I'm tempted to build it myself, but where would I put it? 

I also got my daughter a nice Lego Victorian dollhouse and she never used it. Maybe it looked too old-fashioned. Probably she would have liked it better if the design had been more modern, like the one above. 

It would have been an ideal house for a new, updated cubist Barbie (above). I can imagine a situation where she's on the other side of town when Ken calls and invites her to the beach.

She gets in her cubist car and drives to her new cubist house to meet him.

And there's (above) Kubist Ken now, looking dapper as usual!

Apparently there's a whole subculture of adult block enthusiasts who build modern architectural toys. This guy (above) displays his blocks on shelves. He doesn't even have to build anything. The parts look good all by themselves!

While I'm on the topic of architecture I think I'll change the subject a little and hazard a guess about what houses will look like in the near future. My guess is that homes are heading for a new look something like the one in the picture above. Yep, that's what we'll all live in 20 years from now. You can take that to the bank!

What will the interiors look like? Mmmmmm....maybe something like this (above).

ECLECTIC DECORATING

I'll be moving to a part of the country that gets gloomy in the Winter and I want be sure the new house is cheerful and colorful. My plan is to compensate for the overcast by using a lot of interior white to bounce the available light around. I'll also go for an eclectic look that'll justify the use of bright color accents.

I like the room above a lot. If I can get something like that going I'll feel like I've accomplished something.

This room (above) has some interesting ideas. It's far from perfect, but it's white and colorful, succeeds in being challenging, and has a nice artsy feel.

 Hmmmm...a bit too girly and minimalist. I like some of the color, though, and the black Franklin Stove is a nice touch. I'll have to think about this.

I'm not a weaver or a fabric designer but I need an excuse to surround myself with the kind of color that you find in those trades.

My work area will probably be influenced by Julius Schulman's set up (above)...only with lots of color.

Some colorful Ralph Bakshi frame grabs on the bulletin board wouldn't hurt. Boy, Ralph has a good feel for color!  His "Last Days of Coney Island" film will debut on Vimeo at the end of the month.

A CONTEMPORARY LIVING ROOM

I love the updated craftsman-type houses (above) that are popular now. They're pricey, though. All that wood and stone...the irregular room shapes, the architect's fee...they don't come cheap. Fortunately a number of neo-craftsman innovations have been incorporated into other more affordable styles, and I thought I'd discuss that here. 

For comparison here's the home of a friend. The house has a good vibe and my friend and his wife like living there. I see Mediterranean, craftsman, ranch and post-modern influences. I even see a little Cliff May and Frank Lloyd Wright.

The two posts are Craftsman. The ultra wide living room entrance/central corridor is Cliff May and the vestibule area is post-modern. I don't know who invented the sunken living room but I'll attribute it to Wright because he introduced so many similar ideas.

This view (above) is from the front door area looking into the central corridor. To the left we see a hint of the dining room and to the right we get a glimpse of the kitchen.

The pillars look like an obstacle in the photo but that's because I didn't photograph them well. In reality they come off as playful and even sheltering.

The very latest house theories would have the kitchen entrance at the end of the corridor rather than off to the right, but the right access is a nice counterpoint to the rest of the house so it works for me.

The dining room (above) is raised above the sunken living room and that works just fine. The steps look like something you'd trip over but I'd be surprised if anyone ever did. The raised floor lends importance and a sense of fun to the dining room and the abundant daylight makes it very inviting.

I'll bet lots of people sit on the steps during house parties.

I only have room for one more photo, so I'll put up this one, showing the door and darkened vestibule area. This probably suits my friend who has to stare into a brilliant computer screen all day, and no doubt welcomes a little rest for the eyes. Me, I don't have that problem right now so I'd opt for more light.

I'd put translucent glass panels all around the door. The light would bounce off the nearby walls as if they were additional light fixtures, and probably unpredictable mood lighting would result. Of course the neighbors would think I was crazy for undoing something that worked fine at the start.

ROADSIDE RUINS [EXPANDED]

Another Theory Corner architecture post: I'm always amazed when I catch a glimpse of roadside ruins (above). It's sad to think that families lived and worked in those places and were forced to abandon their homes, sometimes quickly. 

The best roadside ruins are from the 19th and early 20th centuries. I don't think most buildings more modern than that will provoke any regret when they decay.

It's pretty clear that the 19th Century was an architectural Golden Age (except for factories, which were never designed for aesthetics). People built in a more confident and congenial style then, and there was no redistributive income tax to inhibit building. 

  

All over you could find the influence of German and English Gothic. Geez, I love that style. A lot of Frank Lloyd Wright is based on it (well, that mixed with a Japanese influence).

Of course those old buildings are gone now, or if they're still standing they're candidates for the wrecking ball. It's too bad because, even in decay, they're still fascinating to look at. I'd love to spend an hour walking through the rotting hotel above, wouldn't you? I'd even pay for the experience. 

Isn't there some way to rescue these old structures? Like that crumbling hotel above; isn't there a way to make it pay for itself?  Maybe some notable historical event or crime happened there that would interest the public.  I imagine that almost every surviving building of the gaslight era was the scene of some interesting event. 

Lots of people would like to see those old buildings restored, but it's not likely to happen. It would be too expensive. They're too far gone. But, think about it...we don't have to restore them. Let them stay in the sorry state they're in.  All we have to do is provide paths of safe modern scaffolding so the visitors don't have to walk in the rubble. 

That's the way tourists are able to access otherwise dangerous caves with fragile stalagmites.

Beautiful old crumbling buildings are undeniably interesting, even when not restored. The smell of decay and the mess are part of the atmosphere. They evoke thoughts about the ephemeral nature of life, about how a true understanding of the past is almost impossible. We all live like the protagonist in the movie "Memento," unaware of what came before our time and unable to project an understanding of ourselves into the future. It's a sad thought, but an interesting one. 

I'm even interested in more recent ruins (above), but they wouldn't appeal to tourists. 

What I said about buildings goes for outdoor structures, too. The crumbling bridge above is unsafe for visitors but the addition of a narrow and sturdy walkway a couple of feet above the rotting surface might convert it into a tourist attraction. 

All over the country lots of old railroad tracks still exist in the underbrush.  Lets stop ripping them up. They're a goldmine of tourism for the community that contains them.

 Yes, remnants of old railroad trestles still exist! For Pete's sake, leave them standing!

I love the rotting wood and the moss and the rust. It would be great if a working small gauge trolley could ride through the misty forest on reinforced old rails, but that would be a big expense.

It used to be a common practice for trolley routes to end at a scenic restaurant in the forest or on a hill. A lot of those old structures still exist, decayed and covered with jungle. Let's figure out a use for them. No need to renovate...allow them to be beautiful tourist friendly ruins. Build a new restaurant nearby if one is needed.

WARLORDS OF ANCIENT MEXICO

Here's what I'm reading now, or rather will read when I finish Mike Barrier's book about Dell comics. I know nothing about the Aztecs but the illustrations in the book are so beautiful and the stories so enticing that I can't help but jump the gun and write about the subject anyway. 

You can't write about the Aztecs without mentioning human sacrifice (above). I'll return to that in a minute.

Just thumbing through the book has convinced me that my old understanding of Aztec architecture was flawed. The shapes of the structures were more varied than I expected.

The Mayan and Aztec cities were sometimes burned to the ground, indicating to me that there were more wooden and stucco structures than modern illustrators have indicated. You see lots of surviving stone building shapes (above) that only make sense if wood were part of the design.

Mayans and Aztecs made beautiful stone walls (above), probably the most beautiful ever seen, but you have to wonder if stone walls of that type were as common as we think. Wooden walls would have been easier to make and embellish. My guess is that elaborate wooden variants of the stone walls were all all over the place in old Aztec cities. They just didn't survive the Spanish conquest.

Amazingly the early Aztecs and Mayans were believers in relatively limited war. The nobles of each side would fight in a public place and the winners determined which side won the war.

BTW, the illustration above is a cheat, inspired by the later Aztecs who fought differently and massacred large numbers of captives. Amazingly we know the name of the man who convinced everyone to do that.

There he is (above). His name was Prince Tlacaelel, a warrior priest and mystic and...my guess...psychopath. The Prince convinced everyone that the god Huitzilopitchli would grant unlimited military success to the Aztecs provided they practiced ever-growing human sacrifices.

Let me digress to marvel at the beautiful clothes worn by well-off Aztecs. Fashion must have been a big deal in that culture. And look at the furniture in the background! It's like something out of "Dr. Caligari."

I wonder if fashion played an indirect part in the Aztec conquests. Aztecs were pretty good at undermining the confidence of their enemies with their sophisticated art and architecture. The Mayans pre-emptively defeated the Toltecs partly by encouraging Toltec tourism to their magnificent and intimidating cities.

BTW: I'll digress for a moment to marvel at the fact that the Aztecs enthusiasm for architecture never made its way into their drawn art. I'm not aware that any culture in the West thought landscapes were worth an artist's time. Maybe the Chinese and Japanese valued it but I'm not aware that anyone else in the ancient world did.

Anyway, thanks to Prince Tlacaelel an enormous number of prisoners of war were sacrificed over the years, so many that when Cortez and the Spanish arrived to plunder, a lot of the local tribes sided with the Spanish against their own ethnicity. The final battle was incomparably brutal, with genocidal atrocities being committed by Cortez's vengeful Indian allies.

If there were lots of beautifully carved wooden structures maybe they wouldn't have survived the conquest. Both the Spanish and their vengeful allies would have had reasons to destroy them. But this is conjecture. A counter argument might be that Mexico didn't have much hard wood.

ANTONI GAUDI: ARCHITECTURAL GENIUS

Everybody here is probably familiar with Gaudi's cathedral in Barcelona, and with his rolling organic shapes covered with tiles. I thought I'd bypass that and concentrate on his less well-known work, like this (above) administrative office in what used to be a stable.

Here's the same room sans furniture and with older, less appealing doors. Whoever restored this did a great job.

Ruskin, the 19th Century art critic, decried what he believed was the decadence of the later medieval cathedral builders who increasingly built for beauty rather than meaning. I was influenced by Ruskin and for years I resisted what I considered Gaudi's beautiful but pointless decoration (above) on religious buildings.

  

Now I love the work. I don't think Ruskin was wrong, but there comes a point where the beauty is so overwhelming that it sweeps aside all objections.

Lots of Gaudi's buildings have verticals that slant in a bit toward the center. That's because he liked to build with stone which could be very heavy and would have required buttresses if built the normal way.

He discovered the precise angle of the slants by building a model of the building consisting of hanging strings pulled taut by packets of lead pellets. He wanted to see how gravity organized the structure.

When the model was finished he photographed the strings and turned the picture upside-down. The upside-down photo let him know how to stabilize the structure. I haven't explained it very well, and that's because I still don't quite understand how the idea works.

During the Spanish Civil War in the 30s anti-clerical forces invaded the cathedral where he kept his models and destroyed them. Gaudi preferred to work from sculptures rather than blueprints so the vandals deprived posterity of what would have been important insights into the man's working methods.

Gaudi was constantly innovating. One day, when visiting his tile manufacturer, he noticed a pile of broken shards which were earmarked for the trash. He took them back to his studio and worked them into Matisse-like wall decorations.

Gaudi loved wrought iron and he used it every chance he could. I like it too. Cliff May liked it and used it. Why has it fallen out of favor?

Above, Gaudi's tomb. He died after being hit by a trolley. Medical help was slow in coming because he was a shabby dresser and passer-bys thought he was a bum. Yikes!