The architectural legacy of Frank Lloyd Wright, a celebrated figure in American culture, is examined through his innovative designs for houses and his less successful visions for urban planning. Known for his Prairie Houses, which reflected his vision of American life and values, Wright’s horizontal architecture responded to the landscapes of the Midwest. Frank Lloyd Wright’s skyscraper designs, though not widely recognized, integrated natural forms and structures, while his utopian Broadacre City concept was impractical and reactionary. MoMA’s recent exhibition juxtaposes these ideas but fails to generate meaningful discourse on urban density versus dispersal.
Most Americans familiar with 20th-century art can name a few key figures like Pablo Picasso, Salvador Dali, or Jackson Pollock, but when it comes to architecture, the name most will recognize is Frank Lloyd Wright. Aside from Thomas Jefferson, known for different reasons, Wright is the only architect repeatedly commemorated by the U.S. Postal Service through his visage and buildings. Wright stands as the architect who arguably embodies the American identity in the eyes of the nation.
Considering the wide array of innovative and iconic architecture from the past century, Wright’s persistent fame can be puzzling. He was an innovator and prolific, completing over 500 buildings, a significant achievement for a single-principal firm. However, most of Wright’s work consisted of small, single-family homes. many of his larger projects are not easily accessible: the Imperial Hotel in Japan was demolished in 1967; Buffalo’s Larkin Building was replaced by a parking lot; the Marin County Courthouse is relatively remote, although it did appear in the film Gattaca. The Johnson Wax Building requires a drive north from Chicago, and Fallingwater is over an hour from Pittsburgh. Only the Guggenheim Museum in New York is widely accessible, while most surviving houses are privately owned.
Wright, known for his flamboyant self-promotion and dramatic personal life, has been the subject of biographies and novels, but this alone doesn’t explain his ongoing celebrity. Many charming, narcissistic, self-promoting architects have not garnered a fraction of Wright’s recognition. His fame, therefore, begs the question: why is Wright still such a significant figure?
Wright spent much of his career in the Midwest, where American exceptionalism and the quest for a distinctly American identity were prominent. He aligned with Chicago intellectuals who criticized East Coast Eurocentrism and aimed to develop a culture representing the democratic ideals of a free, self-expressive people. Wright’s Prairie Houses, built between 1900 and the mid-1920s, reflected his vision for American family life. These houses, characterized by their woody interiors, central fireplaces, and low-pitched roofs, conveyed domesticity and individual freedom. Wright believed that American architecture should be horizontal, mirroring the expansive landscapes and endless skies of the country.
Wright’s rise to cultural icon status was cemented by the 1943 publication of Ayn Rand’s The Fountainhead, where she modeled her protagonist, Howard Roark, on Wright. Roark, like Wright, was portrayed as a visionary hero, representing democracy, freedom, and individuality. Wright’s embodiment of American exceptionalism may explain why his work has been featured in hundreds of exhibitions, including ten at the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York.
With yet another MoMA exhibition of Wright’s work, it is worth asking if there is anything left to discover. This show, titled “Frank Lloyd Wright and the City: Density vs. Dispersal,” was prompted by MoMA and Columbia University’s acquisition of Wright’s extensive archive from the underfunded Frank Lloyd Wright Foundation. Although the curators struggle to offer new insights, the exhibition still merits attention. Wright’s lesser-known skyscraper designs are featured, with remarkable hand-drawn sketches that demonstrate his attempt to integrate structure, form, and ornament into an “organic architecture” inspired by nature.
The skyscraper, born in Chicago from land speculation, steel technology, and the invention of the elevator, is often considered America’s contribution to global architecture. Wright, dedicated to creating distinctly American architecture, couldn’t ignore the skyscraper. However, his designs for tall buildings were not in line with traditional urban visions of dense, vertical cities. Instead, Wright sought to create skyscrapers that were organic and reflective of nature. He rejected the steel-frame model and designed buildings where floors cantilevers from a central core, like branches on a tree. This design, exemplified in his 1927 plan for St. Mark ‘s-in-the-Bouwerie in New York, integrated human experiences of nature into large structures.
While Wright’s skyscrapers were impressive, his urban planning vision, embodied in his Broadacre City model, was far less successful. Broadacre City proposed a future where cities would “disappear,” and every American family would live on a one-acre plot, largely auto-dependent. The exhibition’s juxtaposition of Wright’s skyscraper designs with the Broadacre City model does not generate the intended discussion about density versus dispersal. The model, based on Thomas Jefferson’s Louisiana Purchase grid, represents a regressive and economically unfeasible vision of American urban life.
Ultimately, Wright’s skyscrapers, designed to stand alone like trees in a landscape, were meant to offer vistas of the surrounding terrain, not to contribute to dense urban environments. The exhibition’s attempt to contrast Wright’s skyscraper designs with Broadacre City falls short, and a more compelling presentation would have compared Wright’s towers with works by other architects like Mies van der Rohe or contemporary figures such as Norman Foster and Frank Gehry.
The U.S. Postal Service’s celebration of Wright captures part of the truth: he was a great architect who embodied a romantic, idealistic vision of America that still resonates. Wright’s designs, particularly his use of materials, complex geometries, and nature-inspired spatial organization, appeal to fundamental human responses to the built environment. As today’s architects face challenges of density and climate change, wright’s work offers valuable lessons about how architecture can draw on natural experiences to create meaningful spaces.
