A Tribute to Frank Lloyd Wright Author(s): Mies Van Der Rohe Source: College Art Journal, Vol. 6, No.

1 (Autumn, 1946), pp. 41-42 Published by: College Art Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/773564 Accessed: 27/06/2010 12:08
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://dv1litvip.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=caa. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

College Art Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to College Art Journal.

http://dv1litvip.jstor.org

A TRIBUTE TO FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT

By Mies Van Der Rohe
the beginning of the twentieth century,the great revival of Europe, instigated by William Morris, began to grow over-refinedand gradually to lose its force. Distinct signs of exhaustion from the standpointof became manifest. The attemptto revive architecture form was apparentlydoomed. Even the greatest efforts of artists could not overcome the patent lack of any usable convention. Then, however, these efforts were limited to the subjective. But the authentic approachto architecturemust always be the objective. Accordingly,the only valid solutions at that time were in casessuch as industrialbuilding, where objectivelimitations made subjective license impossible. Peter Behrens' significant creations for theelectrical industry are a vivid illustration.But in all other problems of architectural creation,the architectventured into the dangerousrealm of the historical; to some of these men the revival of classic forms seemed reasoneven imperative. able, and in the field of monumentalarchitecture, Of course this was not true of all early twentieth century architecture. Van de Velde and Berlage, especiallyremainedsteadfastlyloyal to their own ideals. Once a way of thinking had been acceptedas essential,Van de Velde's intellectualintegrity and Berlage'ssincerityand almost religious faith in his ideal allowed no compromise.For these reasonsthe former won our highest respect, the latter our special venerationand love. Nevertheless, we young architects found ourselves in painful inner conflict. We were ready to pledge ourselves to an idea. But the potential idea of this period had, by that time, been lost. vitality of the architectural This, then, was the situationin 1910. At this moment, so criticalfor us, there came to Berlin the exhibitionof the work of FrankLloyd Wright. This comprehensive displayand the extensive publication of his works enabled us really to become acquaintedwith the achievementof this architect.The encounterwas destined to prove of in great significanceto the developmentof architecture Europe. The work of this great master revealed an architectural world of unforce and clarity of language, and also a disconcertingrichnessof expected form. Here finally was a master-builder drawingupon the veritablefountain-

TOWARD architecturein

41

42

COLLEGE

ART JOURNAL

creawho with true originality lifted his architectural head of architecture, flowered. into the light. Here, again, at last, genuine organicarchitecture tions The more deeply we studied Wright's creations,the greaterbecameour admirationfor his incomparabletalent, for the boldness of his conceptions, and for his independence in thought and action. The dynamic impulse emanatingfrom his work invigorateda whole generation.His influencewas strongly felt even when it was not actuallyvisible. After this first encounter,we followed the developmentof this rareman with eager hearts. We watched with astonishmentthe exuberantunfolding of the gifts of one who had been endowed by naturewith the most splendid talents. In his undiminishingpower he resemblesa giant tree in a wide landscape, which, year after year, ever attains a more noble crown. Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, Ill.

FRANK LLOYDWRIGHT, Living room, Coonley house, Riverside,Ill., 1908.