Serious Discussion-Stress and Psych Disorders — Page 5

A few things to add, but I'm just going to address the topics, not to an individual.

The Gamble House has recently finished a complete 4-year renovation, so it is in prime condition for viewing. In addition to the house, the surrounding neighborhood has a well-preserved collection of other Greene & Greene houses, as well as some Queen Annes, Tudor and even a Lloyd Wright (which is currently being restored.) A self-guided walking tour map of the neighborhood is available at the Gamble House. Also in Pasadena is a neighborhood designated "Bungalow Heaven" (a registered historical district) that is full of renovated California Bungalows. They have open house tours once a year there.

There are other Lloyd Wright structures in SoCal (and North, as well) that are available for tour. The Hollyhock House is probably the most well known - from his period working with formed concrete blocks (similar to the Biltmore in Phoenix, if you're familiar with that.) Also in Arizona is his Taliesen West, which is where he moved his school in the winters.

Lloyd Wright was definitely the next natural step out of the Arts & Crafts movement. He absolutely agreed with and refined the concept of building within the framework of the existing landscape. Many of his structures are built with materials native to the area - many times from the property itself. Taliesen West, for instance, uses a self-created concrete mixture using the existing sand that was then poured over boulders from the property that had been set in forms. The end result being walls that seem to grow right out of the ground.

Also, life in his school wasn't all about architecture. He truly believed in the wholeness of existence, and incorporated art, music and and other 'living arts' (such as cooking) into his school's life. Every other Saturday night was set aside for formal dining that was prepared and served by the students to each other, and then they adjourned to a connected theatre (built as part of the complex) where they would entertain each other with theatrical, music or art presentations. To be invited to one of those events was quite the coup.

He felt so strongly in the need for designers to connect with nature, that he required all his first year students to live in structures they built themselves in the desert. That tradition continues even today.

As to the internet relationship thing, I think the next logical step is integrating video and audio. That will go a long way toward removing the anonymity which, to my mind, is the source of all the difficulties so far.

One personal note - SOMMS, your little tidbit about your thesis made me weak in the knees. We HAVE to find time to discuss that issue specifically. Not only the aesthetic shift, but how it reflected the era's philosophies, as well. I SWEAR, SOMMS!

Sorry I rambled on like this - just trying to address the different topics.

Updated On: 1/20/06 at 03:36 PM

I agree C - thanks DG for your thoughts!

Now I'm thinking about what SOMMS mentioned, the move from the Victorian Era into the Arts & Crafts Movement. In many ways, the Victorians were the personification of the 'presented' life - very focussed on the 'how' of things - how it should be done, how it's going to look, that sort of thing. The focus of the Craftsman Era was much more about the 'why' of living, the actual experience of it all.

Thoreau (a personal hero, and a shining light in the literary and philosophical arena of the Movement) went to Walden for a reason. He rebelled against the disconnect that he felt between himself and the act of living, and he went into nature to find the 'why' again - or maybe even for the first time.

That is the essence of the Movement - to be engaged, connected and personally invested in the living of life. It reflected in the archetecture, which went from houses cut up into small areas designed for specific purposes (THIS is how you eat, and this is WHERE you do it) to homes that were designed for people to LIVE in, with comfort, ease and openness. Front doors began to open directly into living spaces, and they had windows in them so you felt invited by the warm fire you could see inside. You didn't get shuffled off to a 'sitting room', you joined the residents in their living space and joined in the experience of their lives.

Lloyd Wright definitely resonated with this, and championed the development of open and grand living spaces, where many people doing different things could share in the experience with each other. That is reflected in the current use of 'great rooms' today, and I think it absolutely reflects the desire to share in each other's home-based existence.

any thoughts?

Dg,
I like your idea but I was hoping to keep the discussions ALWAYS civil...and that means stemming away from political/religious discussions, unless it's blended into the topic at hand (such as political writers and such).
That said, I LOVE the idea of talking about this, but it's definitely a hot-button, political/religious topic and I think we should, perhaps, do it elsewhere.

I trust that somewhere in this thread there has been reference made to William Morris and Bourne-Jones. I'll catch up with a read-through later.

Hi Somms.

Jose' - William Morris made it (Addy even got his political stance discussed,) but I'm afraid Edward went unmentioned.

And Iflit, I agree. I understand the reticence, but in thinking about it, I'm hard pressed to think of things that couldn't take a wrong turn somewhere.

ok. If people like Iflit and DG are interested in pursuing this topic, I do believe we can keep it civil, especially if we focus on the arguments for and against and, perhaps, not necessarily our own personal convictions.
Or at least our personal convictions without vitriol for opposing viewpoints.

bway - I think euthanasia and assisted suicide are two different things. euthanasia originates from the care-provider, while assisted suicide deals with the will of the dependent person (that's an over-simplification, and crude terminology, but hopefully you get my point.) I think either one is worthy of discussion, but together might be a little overwhelming.

Then again, maybe not.

"And I guess it really shouldn't be the sole choice of one person, but rather a communal decision of those who are close to the person."

oh I don't think so....when those people pay my bills, then they have a right to say when I die, and ONLY then. We come into this world alone and we leave alone, and no group has the right to have any say about when we leave. It is MY decision, and MY decision alone....and if there is a "group" involved, and they love me, they will respect that decision.

---

I think iflit is referring to the fact that the last time we discussed this topic, papalovesmambo behaved in an especially repugnant manner and posted something--inaccurately--about my deceased mother for which I have requested a public and sincere apology.

I think any decent human being would admit that other posters' dead mothers are off-limits for verbal abuse.

---

Updated On: 1/23/06 at 09:57 AM

The problem there, Elphaba, is that there are still ways around that.
Had Schiavo a living will giving her husband the right to remove her life-saving measures, her parents could have still fought the way they fought. There's a chance it would have dragged on longer, but they could still do it.

touchme, You know exactly what point I was making, let's not get caught up on semantics.

Only I get to decide if and when I want assisted-suicide. No one else.This is a matter of personal rights and freedom, nothing more. Society has NO right to decide that for me.

Now, obviously, as touchme I am sure will grab onto this...if I am mentally incompetent, then even I don't have that right, UNLESS when I was competent, I made these wishes known.

My parents, wife, partner, children have NO right to keep me alive, or NOT let me die if it is MY wish to do so.

It is really that simple.

The government has their dirty hands everywhere else, keep them and society OUT of that.

---