Talk:Queen Anne style architecture
|WikiProject Architecture||(Rated B-class, Top-importance)|
|WikiProject Home Living||(Rated B-class, High-importance)|
- No need, the article has been corrected.--18.104.22.168 21:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
[[Image:Z-5371.jpg|thumb|left|Confusingly captioned "A view of the railroad depot at Disneyland amusement park in Anaheim, California. The building is in the Queen Anne style with mansard roofs, widow's walks, dormers, and a clock tower."]] In the illustration at left Walt Disney's design team has reinterpreted, c. 1955, at three-fifths scale, an already generic impression of a "Second Empire" commercial structure without a single feature of the "Queen Anne Style". This image does not help clarify Queen Anne Style architecture, the "free Renaissance" style introduced by British architects like Norman Shaw and taken up by American speculative builders by c. 1880 as an alternative to Second Empire. --Wetman 22:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
This was an erudite discussion, but from a singularly British point of view and perhaps over scholarly (historiographical). Some of the more arcane (for American readers) discussion as been removed, but may still be accessed by use of the "history" tab, above. The article is now broken into three ariticles, devoted to "Queen Anne," "Stick Style," and "Shingle Style."
I added a free use image that I took of a stick style house (according to newspaper articles about its reconstruction). The wording about stick style is about a house that is not pictured. An expert on stick style needs to update the paragraph. I am not qualified. I could easily take a closer image of the house if you'd like. The outside reconstruction is slated to be completed fairly soon, and it would be nice to have a closer image without scaffolding. --Royalbroil 14:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't seem to be standard practice in the US to consider "Stick" and "Shingle" as types of "Queen Anne" style. They are more generally seen as three differnt design languages. The three sections should be separated into three independent articles--cross referenced, of course. This user would never look for "Shingle Style" under "Queen Anne." In the US, the Shingle Style seems to be the more hightly regarded, being identified with the work of some master architects such as H. H. Richardson and McKim, Mead & White. Queen Anne is rather regarded as more commonly vernacular building of the period. Phmalo 22:59, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
- I agree with Phmalo, almost all reference books I come across refer to the styles individually. They are all part of the Victorian design era but Stick, Shingle and Queen Anne are distinct enough to merit their own articles, Eastlake possibly as well. IvoShandor 10:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with the above. The Shingle style is more related to Arts and Crafts, not Queen Anne. The Shingle section should be deleted or given its own article
- Inexplicably, the status quo is still held here. Would anyone be opposed to a move splitting off Stick and Shingle style into their own articles, there is certainly enough published on them to warrant it and the coverage here is poor, to say the least. Any thoughts? IvoShandor (talk) 19:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
This article needs more information about the united kingdom, especially since I assume that tha=e style originated there.
Real Queen Anne
In response to the above comment - absolutely! I'd also have to point out that none of these photographs are of what we would call "Queen Anne" (she reigned 1665 - 1714). Country Life says that "influenced by the Dutch, this pleasing, elegant style of architecture flourished between 1701 and 1714 " Could we please have some pictures of proper Queen Anne style?Ferrymansdaughter (talk) 14:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
Queen Anne restoration
Hate to tell that your example of a restored Queen Anne house in New Westminster, British Columbia is a new house! It is just over 5 years old. (anon.)
- With some editors casually deleting information as too "arcane for American readers" and other inserting photos of local structures, and no reference in the text to published material on the subject, a perfecty modern house fits right in with the general tenor. --Wetman 11:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
some editors casually deleting information as too "arcane for American readers"
I've added the
intro-rewrite template to this article. The intro dives right into the history of the architectural style without describing what it is. --Joe Sewell (talk) 22:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Namesake Seattle district
A prominent geographic feature and residential neighborhood near downtown Seattle takes its name from QA style: Queen Anne, Seattle, Washington, which is also known as one of Seattle's "Seven Hills" Jeffreykopp (talk) 06:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I have never written here but the "Shingle Style" house accross from Queens park has few shingles on it, is a new building and is owned by former NHL goalie Bill Ranford. A charming old couple from Germany, used to own the property before that with a briuck bungalow and a big side yard pool. When I was a kid, they let me use the pool in the summer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 04:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Joe Sewell was right about the intro. I've cleaned it up now so I trust it's up to scratch.
About time we moved stick etc to an article of its own, if there are no objections.
Suggest a split
You have no idea how much consternation this article has given us in England!
Here is a beautiful building in the heart of Liverpool,
Bluecoat Chambers which we would describe as Queen Anne style, but obviously not Queen Anne Style! I suggest splitting this article into Queen Anne Style (US) and Queen Anne Style (British) RodCrosby (talk) 21:14, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
- Your link to the webpage at Oldsoger.com has been broken (or never worked) and I can't find the page on the site. I hope you will fix it. -- Also, supply some references for your British style name. Tchao, Charvex (talk) 06:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Yes, the current article covers only the different US use of the term (assuming it does this correctly). Johnbod (talk) 00:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
This article is confused and definitely needs some drastic pruning / splitting.
- The US styles are completely different from the English Queen Anne even if the early inspiration was the same.
- The stick style and shingle style are not classified as Queen Anne and should not be in here.
- The article is about architecture, Queen Anne furniture needs to be reinstated even if only as a stub, it is not the same style and not even the same period.
- For now I've removed the images of US and Turkish examples from the section dealing with the UK, and put in a modest but highly typical house by Norman Shaw. Put those removed images somewhere else if you want to reinstate, but there are far too many images already, most of that gallery should be removed. ProfDEH (talk) 10:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Agree. The article is a mess. Some of the details of American have English overtones that are not correct in the US and the Stick, Eastlake, and Shingle Styles have always been studied separately from where I come from. Stick and Eastlake are often grouped together. Norcalal (talk) 10:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
- a recent program on BBC4, where the Bluecoat is described as Queen Anne style. People's Palaces RodCrosby (talk) 02:31, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
We need to discuss the main picture.
Which picture is ideal to be located in the introduction? Norcalal 04:31, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
- The photo of the Welfare Building is certainly not the best representation of this style. In my opinion, a much better illustration could be found. MarmadukePercy (talk) 18:36, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Suggest a split (continued)
Continued from above... Better be clear about the distinctions before splitting. There is a summary of the American styles here http://www.fredbecker.org/News%20Letter/Vict%20Arch.htm - although lacking decent references the classification seems correct, but please comment. I'm still reading up on the English side of things. ProfDEH (talk) 08:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
There is already an article about the Eastlake Movement although why movement not style I don't know. This is a style of decoration, not an architectural style at all. ProfDEH (talk) 08:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- My understanding is that the Eastlake movement (whatever) started out as a furniture style and then the characteristics or elements were added to Stick or Stick was a launching off point for the Eastlake Victorian architectural style to form using the elements from the furniture. Norcalal (talk) 18:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Queen Anne furniture has virtually nothing to do with the architectural style. See http://www.buffaloah.com/f/fstyles/queen/index.html for a brief summary, where it is described as "Colonial: Queen Anne 1725-1750" i.e. pre-Revolution, not at all the same historical period. Another split coming up. ProfDEH (talk) 10:21, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, the Stick and Shingle styles should definitely be put in their own articles. Who has the courage?
- And we should also do the Queen Anne Style architecture (British) and Queen Anne Style architecture (US) thing too. I have seen no one objecting and they really are different styles. This need not be another American Revolution or War of 1812. Let's just Balkanize this article and go our sordid separate ways. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 00:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
Good, a split is probably the best approach and certainly starts to unravel the subject. There is a certain justification in the name of the article, since it originated in England, but I think given the popular use of the term in America, it wolud make things clearer (and fairer) if there was a disambiguation page, and this became Queen Anne Style architecture (British). The Australian section doesn't belong here any more than the American section did. Another stub is the answer I suppose. ProfDEH (talk) 13:48, 15 February 2010 (UTC)