Architecture CodeX #54 The Glass House by Philip Johnson and The Miller House by Eero Saarinen

[@SonChauThai-p1x]

Thank you for the great information!

[@architecturecodex9818]

Thank your for watching! I hope you enjoy some other videos.

[@leonardboesger8769]

Have visited both. Both interesting in their own unique way.

[@architecturecodex9818]

Yes - hence the video. 🙂

[@he11ange1]

The first time I heard the Miller House was from the movie Columbus (2017). It is indeed an ingenious collaboration work of architect, landscaper and interior designer. Sadly the time for Saarinen was short, otherwise we could see a lot more architectural marvel from his hand.

[@architecturecodex9818]

When I toured Columbus 40 years ago, it was not even on the map! Saarinen is a favorite!

[@WGreen-Author]

One of your best reports...🙂it takes someone with "stones" to throw them when necessary.

[@architecturecodex9818]

LOL

[@claytoncampbell272]

Great video - I think you often mean “consequently” instead of “subsequently”

[@architecturecodex9818]

Perhaps. I use subsequently when something comes after and consequently when something is counter to... but there are times when things are both. As I tried to keep the videos conversational, instead of hard scripted, it is easy for me to mispeak.

[@markwoodley712]

Some of these MCM houses are subject to traditionalism when the owners introduce swagged drapery valances and tied-back side panel drapes or traditionally styled furniture. Also some have been neglected for too long where it becomes prohibitively expensive to restore the houses, especially flat rooftops in snowy climates. One recently sold October 2021 in Toronto for $13.8 M and is slated to be torn down for a two storey mausoleum.

[@architecturecodex9818]

Only some architecture of any style will survive. It's part Darwinian and part act of God.

[@jayess6318]

Rectangular box with glass house does not equate to a masterpiece!

[@architecturecodex9818]

I would not be so absolute. My criticism of Johnson's Glass House is not the design concept but that it cannot function as a house for normal people who would live there.

[@WGreen-Author]

One is beautiful but expensive to build and operate, and difficult to live in; the other was simply expensive to build and operate, and difficult to live in. One was designed by a master builder and theorist; the other by his business associate and acolyte.