A reader recently wrote to me citing Frank Lloyd Wright as a model for the future. “Wright’s discipline itself offers us an antidote to the wandering efforts of rudderless students: it can be understood and undertaken by those with a little personal aptitude and a readiness for hard work to design buildings of real point, character, freshness, and charm.” How likely is a Wright Revival? Historical examples of revivals abound: Inigo Jones revived Palladio, Wren revived Bramante, Lutyens revived Wren. More recently, Richard Meier launched his career by reviving early Corbusier, Tadao Ando learned a lot from Kahn, and Thomas Phifer has revisited Mies. What is striking about the revivalists cited above is that they are all architects of the first rank who found inspiration in the work of an earlier master. Inspiration, not instruction. The reason that a Wright Revival is unlikely is that his work and writings are didactic—my way is the right way, the only way—which tends to produce disciples and followers, but does not necessarily inspire independent creative talents. The successful model for a revival is capacious, opening doors rather than setting limits, acting as a springboard rather than a template.
Photo: Smith House (Richard Meier), 1965-67
