Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Inexpensive, affordable transportation and cheap land are the cause Once people could go farther than the streetcar or subway would take them, they bought up land and built homes that were separated from each other, and had larger setbacks from the street. Some communities didn't even have sidewalks, which effectively killed the chance of a front porch attracting passers by, because there weren't any passers by to begin with.
Well since I actually live close to this area, I can tell you it is a busy area. Its a block from downtown South Bend. Its an area that has a wide range of architectural styles. Pretty hard to tell from one screen shot from google earth. Its a beautiful street. Homes that are all the same and painted the same would be boring. Everyone has their own taste I suppose. Personally I think this is thread is a bit ridiculous. Its quite obvious that some do not know FLW's work or what his ideas were. If someone doesn't like his style or building methods than that is a valid point, FLW was not perfect however to accuse him of ruining american life over a porch is hilarious. As far as the single-family homes being designed to exist by themselves in splendid isolation is false. There are plenty of homes built within a city on small lots. The example I have provided pretty much shows that.
it would be boring if all the houses look exactly the same. but you don't want too much extremes in variation either or else they clash. ideally the houses would share a similar architectural style or form but have lots of variation in the details, say the facade, to provide visual variety and interest. its a balancing act between harmony and variety. too much harmony is boring but too much variation results in disharmony and clashing. however, balance is hard to achieve with the single-family suburban form. even if two single-family houses look exactly alike in every way they still clash when you put them next to each other because they weren't meant to be together. having lots of foliage helps to mask the disharmony. but if you were to cut down all the trees on that street it would be very apparent.
I don't enough about FLW to say how much he contributed to the demise of american porch culture, so I wont comment on that. though he may have contributed to it would be my guess due to his large influence.
The ignorance of some on this thread in the URBAN PLANNING forum is frankly troubling. Even if your only knowledge of architecture comes from a single film it is flat out WRONG to say either that anything in Wright's architectural style for higher end residence OR his decidedly more limited experience in designing larger collections of more affordable homes -- Usonia Homes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia contributed to any kind of decline of EITHER the "front porch" or any sense of community.
If one gets "angry" over something that one has incorrect KNOWLEDGE of perhaps one ought learn more about the subject.
As others have correctly stated FLW was well attuned to the role of "green" elements in his design NEARLY A CENTURY before the importance of consideration like seasonal site light / weather patterns, native plantings, naturalistic design elements and harmonious flow were more widely appreciated. Instead of paving over a whole lot and then sticking a few pathetic plantings here and there as "landscaping" FLW often had very functional / multi-purpose FRONT FACING areas with materials like crushed river rock that lead to a broad COVERED entry way that was deliberately designed to encourage folks to linger OUTDOORS. Pretty much ALL the Usonian homes have some variation on this idea. Even the relatively MODESTLY PRICED homes were designed with the idea of LOTS of outdoor areas for relaxing and enjoying the existing natural setting. It would be absolutely COUNTER to any FLW design aesthetic OR conceptual site planning to lump his work in with COOKIE_CUTTER designs that are common in cheap urban and suburban developments.
While FLW did often have identifiable elements that unified his designs those elements, even in the most affordable of home designs, highlighted things that were far more "artisan based" than houses /towns that lack any scale -- it is absolutely incorrect to say that his designs EVER had "small windows". He was HIGHLY EXPERIMENTAL in pushing for absiolutely HUGE amounts of glass, often from the tip-top of the eave to the very lowest points BELOW the apparent floor! The placement of expanses of glass in UNEXPECTED WAYS enabled him to shift focus toward things like TREES, HORIZONS, and STARLIGHT much more so that jarringly unattractive things like alleys and garbage bins. Only someone with no sense of how MOST builders put no effort into "framing a view" would prefer a window that essentially looks at only another structure's walls!
I complete agree that anyone that has an incorrectly romantic view of city life / suburban paradise in the early part of the 20th century, when FLW was most credited with breaking from tradition, really ought to check some of the FACTS that caused things like movements to limit child labor, have limits on work hours and the generally cavalier attitude that most "city zoning" had toward anything like "land use" that kept ordinary people living in hovels under pollution spewing mills / factories. Pretty hard to sip lemonade on the front porch with the acrid stench of rot all around...
...Stoops / stairways are neither particularly comfortable nor inviting for people to "engage with" despite what you may see on Sesame Street...
BS.
I can remember socializing on stoops in NYC in the 50's and 60's. Unlike today, with all the whininess about comfort, people went out and sat their butts on the stone steps and had a great time jaw-boning, older women brought a throw pillow from their living room couch. It was a great place to sit in the hot summer when there was no a/c (oh no!!!!!!!!!!! no a/c????...how could you live?!) drink beers and soda, and hang out with all the people you only passed in the hall and on the stairs in the winter months. I can remember a few older women on Sullivan St. who used to bring out a folding chair at the crack of a hot, muggy dawn and hold court on the stoops all day long.
I had a friend, Eddie, a trumpet player, and he had a railroad flat on Sullivan. In the mornings he would sit in the kitchen window that opened on an air shaft, and practice his trumpet with a mute. Seemed like when we left the building everyone on the street knew Eddie and said hello, and the neighbors evidently didn’t mind his playing. One beastly hot morning a woman was sitting on a folding chair in front of the stoop next door, sweating and fanning herself with the Daily News. As we passed she said something like, “That was nice today, Eddie. Real pretty.”
But there were real neighbors and neighborhoods then, and not phony "community" organizations organized by blow-ins who want plastic cafes, boutiques and rules about everything. Today some blow-in from Long Island have an Eddie arrested and insist that the woman take her chair and her Daily News inside.
I can remember socializing on stoops in NYC in the 50's and 60's. Unlike today, with all the whininess about comfort, people went out and sat their butts on the stone steps and had a great time jaw-boning, older women brought a throw pillow from their living room couch. It was a great place to sit in the hot summer when there was no a/c (oh no!!!!!!!!!!! no a/c????...how could you live?!) drink beers and soda, and hang out with all the people you only passed in the hall and on the stairs in the winter months. I can remember a few older women on Sullivan St. who used to bring out a folding chair at the crack of a hot, muggy dawn and hold court on the stoops all day long.
I had a friend, Eddie, a trumpet player, and he had a railroad flat on Sullivan. In the mornings he would sit in the kitchen window that opened on an air shaft, and practice his trumpet with a mute. Seemed like when we left the building everyone on the street knew Eddie and said hello, and the neighbors evidently didn’t mind his playing. One beastly hot morning a woman was sitting on a folding chair in front of the stoop next door, sweating and fanning herself with the Daily News. As we passed she said something like, “That was nice today, Eddie. Real pretty.”
But there were real neighbors and neighborhoods then, and not phony "community" organizations organized by blow-ins who want plastic cafes, boutiques and rules about everything. Today some blow-in from Long Island have an Eddie arrested and insist that the woman take her chair and her Daily News inside.
The reason people sat out in the 50s and 60s was not that they weren't afraid of being uncomfortable, it was b/c the house was hotter inside.
I don'tknow what you mean about "phony" community organizations. Community organizations give a community, well, a sense of community.
This thread, and the OP's perspective, is remarkable. Not in a good or accurate way. My house doesn't have a front porch. I had no idea it was because of FLW.
Actually I think it is because the back of my house faces a lake and I have a back porch.
The ignorance of some on this thread in the URBAN PLANNING forum is frankly troubling. Even if your only knowledge of architecture comes from a single film it is flat out WRONG to say either that anything in Wright's architectural style for higher end residence OR his decidedly more limited experience in designing larger collections of more affordable homes -- Usonia Homes - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia contributed to any kind of decline of EITHER the "front porch" or any sense of community.
If one gets "angry" over something that one has incorrect KNOWLEDGE of perhaps one ought learn more about the subject.
As others have correctly stated FLW was well attuned to the role of "green" elements in his design NEARLY A CENTURY before the importance of consideration like seasonal site light / weather patterns, native plantings, naturalistic design elements and harmonious flow were more widely appreciated. Instead of paving over a whole lot and then sticking a few pathetic plantings here and there as "landscaping" FLW often had very functional / multi-purpose FRONT FACING areas with materials like crushed river rock that lead to a broad COVERED entry way that was deliberately designed to encourage folks to linger OUTDOORS. Pretty much ALL the Usonian homes have some variation on this idea. Even the relatively MODESTLY PRICED homes were designed with the idea of LOTS of outdoor areas for relaxing and enjoying the existing natural setting. It would be absolutely COUNTER to any FLW design aesthetic OR conceptual site planning to lump his work in with COOKIE_CUTTER designs that are common in cheap urban and suburban developments.
While FLW did often have identifiable elements that unified his designs those elements, even in the most affordable of home designs, highlighted things that were far more "artisan based" than houses /towns that lack any scale -- it is absolutely incorrect to say that his designs EVER had "small windows". He was HIGHLY EXPERIMENTAL in pushing for absiolutely HUGE amounts of glass, often from the tip-top of the eave to the very lowest points BELOW the apparent floor! The placement of expanses of glass in UNEXPECTED WAYS enabled him to shift focus toward things like TREES, HORIZONS, and STARLIGHT much more so that jarringly unattractive things like alleys and garbage bins. Only someone with no sense of how MOST builders put no effort into "framing a view" would prefer a window that essentially looks at only another structure's walls!
I complete agree that anyone that has an incorrectly romantic view of city life / suburban paradise in the early part of the 20th century, when FLW was most credited with breaking from tradition, really ought to check some of the FACTS that caused things like movements to limit child labor, have limits on work hours and the generally cavalier attitude that most "city zoning" had toward anything like "land use" that kept ordinary people living in hovels under pollution spewing mills / factories. Pretty hard to sip lemonade on the front porch with the acrid stench of rot all around...
Wish I could rep you again. Well said.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Its a block from downtown South Bend. Its an area that has a wide range of architectural styles. Pretty hard to tell from one screen shot from google earth. Its a beautiful street. Homes that are all the same and painted the same would be boring. Everyone has their own taste I suppose. Personally I think this is thread is a bit ridiculous. Its quite obvious that some do not know FLW's work or what his ideas were. If someone doesn't like his style or building methods than that is a valid point, FLW was not perfect however to accuse him of ruining american life over a porch is hilarious. As far as the single-family homes being designed to exist by themselves in splendid isolation is false. There are plenty of homes built within a city on small lots. The example I have provided pretty much shows that.
