Mahzor

New York Public Library

Churches

Sarajevo Haggadah

Mah Nishtanah

Sarajevo haggadah

Antaea Darom

Israeli women's art

Action

Torah as music

Ben Heine

Action

ceramic bowl

Mohammad Said Kalash, "Offering Reconciliation" exhibit (photo: Ilan Amihai)

Action

Punch and Judy/Pinchas and Jamila

Avi Katz

Action

David Grossman

Ben Heine

Action

Eldrige Street shul

Lower East Side

Action

Dove

Ben Heine

Action

Two birds

Hoda Jamal

Action

Israeli and Palestinian boys

from documentary, Promises

Action

Cat in the Hat

Yiddish version

Action

Daylight through the Wall

Banksy: graffiti art on Separation Wall

Action

Maurice Sendak's Brundibar set

New Victory Theater (photo: Nan Melville/NYT)

Action

Daniel Barenboim, West-Eastern Divan Orchestra

Palestinian-Israeli musical ensemble (photo: Kerstin Joensson/AP)

Action

Great Day on Eldrige Street

N.Y.'s klezmer greats celebrate shul rededication (photo: Leo Sorel)

Action

Joint Appeal for Peace

(Avi Katz)

Joint Appeal for Peace

Ketubah, Ancona, Italy (1772)

(Jewish Theological Seminary library)

Ancona ketubah

Posts Tagged ‘historic-preservation’

Steve Jobs, Hubris, and Destruction of California Architectural Legacy

Thursday, October 6th, 2011

Steve Jobs died yesterday, as all but Martians know. He left an enormous legacy of American innovation and entrepreneurship. He is admired, even worshipped by many. I’ll leave the accolades, no doubt much deserved, for others. I want to talk about the Steve Jobs you won’t be hearing much about.

Juan Cole notes, in an appreciation of Jobs he posted yesterday, that his biological father, who he appears never to have met, was a Syrian Muslim political science graduate student. The latter met Jobs’ biological mother when they both studied in Wisconsin. After the baby’s birth, she put him up for adoption because she wasn’t married to his father (they later did marry).

Jobs’ adoptive mother was of Armenian origin and his father was a blue-collar worker. This is all the stuff of the American Dream. The upwardly striving child of immigrants who seeks to realize his grand ambitions for commerce, discovery or knowledge, using all the tools that America has to offer. And certainly Jobs did that in spades.

But there is a dark side to the American Dream. The one represented by Charles Foster Kane in Citizen Kane. The side of overweening pride, of hubris, perfectionism, intolerance for difference. The rage at the world that slights or disrespects your vision, at anyone who stands in your way.

Like Kane, Jobs left behind a trail of acolytes along with those he betrayed, deserted, quarreled with or left behind.

jackling house destroyed

Jackling House after Jobs's wrecking crew was done with it (Gizmodo)

I want to write tonight about one particular part of the Steve Jobs legacy which curdled my entire impression of him. He’d owned a large, imposing Spanish Revival home in Woodside, CA built in 1926 by an earlier generation of visionary entrepreneur, Daniel Jackling. Jacking House was designed by the Frank Gehry of his day, George Washington Smith, who also designed the most imposing historical public buildings of Santa Barbara.

Jobs bought the house in the 1980s, lived in it for a number of years, and then moved out. Possibly around the time he learned of his cancer diagnosis in 2004, he decided he would build his own Xanadu (the palace Kane had built for himself and wife and where he ultimately dies) on the site. Since he wanted to make a bold statement about himself and his vision, Jackling House would have to go. It represented the past and Jobs wanted to leave his own legacy. For Jobs, it appears the past was only useful when it directly benefitted his own personal needs or vision.

This meant tearing down one of the architectural gems of Northern California, one recognized as such by the National Trust for Historic Places. When local historic preservation activists heard of Jobs’ plans they organized to save Jackling House.

As I wrote earlier, Jobs didn’t get where he was by compromising with the vision of others or by brooking opposition. So the appeals to his sense of history and architectural preservation fell on deaf ears. He was committed to one course and one course alone–realizing his own personal architectural vision and legacy.

jackling house

Jackling House in better days (Woodside History Committee)

The community group founded to save Jackling House recruited wealthy individuals who proposed moving the house to another site so it could be saved and Jobs could get his way. But Jobs always managed to find a way to reject every suitor. Once he realized the preservationists were serious and would not roll over in the face of his legal and PR steamroller the handwriting was on the wall as far as Jackling House’s fate.

For four years, fighting the combined forces of the Town of Woodside and Jobs, the preservationists won every legal battle. But finally, after putting up shoddy arguments, he learned from his previous failures and figured out how to persuade the State judges that he’d exhausted remedies to save the House, when he hadn’t. He finally won and got his way.

On a sad day in 2010, behind a tight security cordon to keep out prying eyes, Jobs’ demolition crew destroyed a moment of California architectural greatness (here is an account from the Woodside local paper). All for the sake of the vision and vanity of a “Great Man.”  As Sarah Amelar writes in Architectural Record:

…What if Jobs had put the funds he poured into destroying the house toward its creative salvation? What if he’d embraced relocation as win-win—freeing his land while preserving a cultural resource? Would a “reasonable contribution” (public or undisclosed) have impinged on a man with $8 billion-plus net worth? Or why not sell the property years ago, and be done with it?

According to Brian Turner, a National Trust regional attorney, “In property disputes, people tend to defend their initial position. They develop tunnel vision, dig in their heels.”

The NY Times reports Jobs’ estate valued around $6.5 billion.  Despite this, during all those years he knew he had a possible fatal cancer, he decided philanthropy was not going to be where he devoted his energy.  I find this startling because almost all the greatest American entrepreneurs devoted considerable time and energy to building their legacy, and they defined an integral part of that through a philanthropic vision.  This didn’t interest him.  When Bill Gates approached him to join an initiative of the super wealthy who took a pledge to give away a majority of their fortune to charity, Jobs refused.  Personally, I think this was a major failure of vision.  I say this perhaps with a touch of self-interest since my professional career was spent as a non-profit fundraiser.  If every wealthy person in America behaved as he did not only would I have been out of a job, there would be none of the amazing philanthropic initiatives which have contributed to our greatness as a free, democratic society concerned with the welfare of even the most humble among us.

But Steve Jobs was not one for humility.

So to those who celebrate Steve Jobs I say, do so, he deserves it. But alongside this celebration of his unmistakable contributions to our culture, hold some space for the dark side of Steve Jobs’ vision. The one who would let nothing and no one stand in his way. The take-no-prisoners Steve Jobs. The angry, vengeful Steve Jobs.  This was a human package containing great good and great badness.

California Supreme Court Refuses Jobs Appeal, Jackling House Saved!

Friday, April 27th, 2007
Jackling HouseDaniel Jackling House, ‘tear-down’ no more (Woodside History Committee)

When last we saw our hero, Steve Jobs he had lost a Superior Court case attempting to demolish historic Jackling House in Woodside, California created by famed architect George Washington Smith (designer of many Santa Barbara Spanish Revival buildings). Steve, never one to accept anything that stands in the way of realizing his ambitions, asked the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. This week it refused. This means that Jobs has exhausted his legal remedies and must find someone to take the House and relocate it if he [Jobs] still wishes to build his dream house on the property.

Uphold Our Heritage, the preservation group established to save the house has always advocated for a resolution that would allow Jobs to build his new home while preserving Jackling House. Unfortunately, he has persevered in demanding his right to destroy it. The preservation group has found several preservation-minded individuals interested in negotiating with Jobs about relocating the home. Let’s hope that Jobs will see reason and begin negotiations in earnest with one of these potential buyers and the UOH attorney, Doug Carstens.

It never needed to come to this. Hundreds of thousands of dollars of legal fees, thousands of hours of staff time by the city of Woodside and various judicial venues that heard the case. I guess when you’re Steve Jobs the world marches to your rhythm rather than the other way around.

I get a lot of people coming to these posts who tell me in their infinite wisdom as ‘architectural historians’ that Jackling House looks like a load of rubbish. To them I’ll add a few quotes from the Uphold Our Heritage site:

The Jackling House [is in] the California Register of Historic Places for its association with an historic figure, copper baron Daniel Jackling, and for its exemplary design and materials, the work of master architect George Washington Smith, known as the “Founding Father” of Spanish Revival architecture in this country.

…George Washington Smith is one of only NINE great California estate designers acknowledged in “The Garden Book” (Phaidon, 2002). Smith gets a full page in the book, along with the world’s most important designers of palaces, châteaux, country houses, including Thomas Jefferson, Frank Lloyd Wright, and the designers of the Alhambra, the Imperial Palace and Gardens in Tokyo, and Versailles!

In her book on “The Santa Barbara Style” (Rizzoli, New York, 2001) author Kathryn Masson lauds:

Smith’s masterful interpretation of the architectural vocabulary of vernacular buildings in Andalusian Spain. His use of authentic materials and command of architectural forms convey a romantic Mediterranean atmosphere. Traditional Spanish design is authenticated by thick stuccoed walls that allow for deep window and door openings, heavy overhangs with carved wooden corbels that throw structured shadows back onto the gleaming wall surfaces, and design elements such as hidden gardens, colonnaded porches, and multi-leveled building units with varying rooflines.

On a related subject, I noted that the NY Times business columnist Joe Nocera (TimesSelect required) wrote today about Steve Jobs and the current Apple options backdating scandal. Some of his observations of Jobs’ personality and behavior are amazingly pertinent to his actions in the Jackling House case:

Now let’s look at the other [second] grant–the 7.5 million options to Mr. Jobs himself…

Consider, first, Mr. Jobs’s desire to replace the 20 million options [which were "under water"] with the 7.5 million options. What he was really trying to do was reprice his options without actually admitting that — because repricing would entail an accounting expense. To avoid the expense, he was supposed to wait six months and a day after the cancellation of the first package before Apple gave him the new package.

But he was Steve Jobs, and he wasn’t about to go optionless for six months and a day…

You get the strong impression that nobody dared to say no to Mr. Jobs, a notoriously difficult and abrasive chief executive. One imagines the trepidation of the compensation committee members — or Ms. Heinen [corporate counsel] — in telling him that he couldn’t get a low option price because the stock had risen during the negotiations.

So instead, they found a date in October that approximated the stock price in August — and an underling created phony board minutes.

What is particularly galling is the double standard. You hear from lots of sophisticated investors that it would be terrible if Mr. Jobs were forced out at Apple. How, they say, would that help Apple shareholders?

But lots of other chiefs have lost their jobs because of options backdating, and several have even been indicted. However indispensable he may be, the notion that Mr. Jobs can’t be touched because he’s Steve Jobs is something terribly corrosive.

If the S.E.C. is coming to the view that options backdating is just a peccadillo, as Silicon Valley has claimed all along, it should say so. But if it believes this is serious stuff, then it shouldn’t be making excuses for Steve Jobs, as it appears to be doing.

As for Mr. Jobs, as hard as he’s worked to convey the image of an above-the-fray visionary, that’s not quite the reality, is it? I recently stumbled across this comment from him, circa 1985: “I’m at a stage where I don’t have to do things just to get by. But then I’ve always been that way, because I’ve never really cared about money.”

Yeah, right.

What Nocera notes, and the Jackling House episode confirms, is that Steve Jobs could have close to what he wants, but not quite the whole echilada, if he would just compromise a wee bit with reality in the form of corporate securities law (the stock options) or the California code (preserving Jackling House). But he won’t do it–on self-serving principle. And that’s where he gets himself into trouble. In the case of Jackling House, it isn’t a matter that will bring his empire down like a house of cards. In the case of the options scandal, it probably should but it won’t. Again, Steve Jobs lives a charmed life–one that isn’t earned. And that, as Nocera correctly note, is “something terribly corrosive” of societal values.

Jobs’ behavior concerning both Jackling House and the options scandal betrays his egomania and vanity. What he really wants to do regarding the house is tear it down so he can outdo his other Silicon Valley tycoon rivals who’ve built sumptuous palaces as monuments to their own egos. The irony here is that it’s possible that might’ve been Daniel Jackling’s own motive in originally building the house, since he himself was a copper baron trying to make his mark in the 1920s with an architectural statement. But regardless of whether there was vanity or ego involved in the original creation of this landmark, it has withstood the test of time in its 90 years of existence and is worthy of preservation.

Jackling House Historic Photos and Steve Jobs Taken Down a Peg or Two

Monday, January 22nd, 2007

For the latest update on Steve Jobs’ failure to gain a review by the California Supreme Court in his effort to destroy Jackling House, see this post.

Just after Steve Jobs lost his bid to demolish Jackling House, Christopher Lloyd visited the blog and wrote me a fascinating story about his personal bond to the House. In the early 1970s, a close relative owned the property and invited Christoper and his family to visit. They did and he had an enchanting stay. His father took these images and I reprint them here with Christopher’s kind permission. Should anyone visiting, wish to use these images you must contact him for permission. Clotilde Luce of Uphold Our Heritage, a former resident of the House herself, says these images fill a gap in the historical documentation of the House. So I reprint them here with pleasure.


Most of the previous photos I’ve seen have been in black and white and have not shown many exterior details of the house and its landscaping. What I like about Christoper’s images is that they show wonderful exterior details; and they also show how the House ‘lived’ in its surroundings. For those who know the northern California landscape, these pictures will remind you of the wonderfully lush understory of stately California oaks. The House here looks nothing like a manicured museum like Filoli, another historic home in the area. Jackling House here is lovingly maintained, but it is most of all lived in. It looks like it is being used, but used well. It would make George Washington Smith, its architect proud.


Jackling House front perspective Jackling House driveway
Jackling House door Jackling House outside door
Jackling House outside Jackling House courtyard

Now for something completely different. I love the dripping sarcasm of this column in the San Jose Mercury News by Patty Fisher:

Howard Ellman, Steve Jobs’ attorney, sounded pretty annoyed when I called him last week to ask about the Jackling House.

I wanted to know how Jobs had reacted when a state appeals court ruled Thursday that he couldn’t tear down his 30-bedroom historic mansion in Woodside.

Didn’t I understand how busy Mr. Jobs was? Ellman asked me. Didn’t I read my own newspaper?

Indeed, I understand. What with Macworld, Cisco Systems’ trademark lawsuit over the iPhone and those sticky questions about backdated options, Apple’s iconic chief executive had more pressing things on his mind than some drafty old house.

Not that the house has ever been a pressing issue for Jobs. Since 2000, he has neglected it, hoping it would fall down so he could build a smaller and spiffier house in its place.

Jobs is good at making things smaller and spiffier.

She notes that Gordon Smythe, a local venture capitalist, is very interested in taking on the house and moving it to a suitable local site. But Jobs, alas, hasn’t taken his interest seriously even though it would seem, after his two court losses, to be the only way Mr. Jobs’ Dream House will get built on the Jackling site:

Smythe wants to seal the deal, but Jobs is a tough guy to get a meeting with these days. Considering they live in the same neighborhood, I suggest Smythe stroll by with his baby and knock on Jobs’ door.

Kids grow up so quickly. If Jobs wants to build his own dream house before his kids leave home, he might want to move this project to the top of his to-do list.

After all, one thing we know about a cool gadget like the iPhone (or the Appletalker or CisNO or whatever the lawyers decide to call it) is that it becomes obsolete in a nanosecond. Someone — probably Jobs — will always design something even smaller and spiffier.

A house, on the other hand, can last for generations.

Or not, if Steve Jobs could have his way. Thank God, two California courts have told him he can’t.

UPDATE: Several commenters below have incorrectly claimed that when Jobs bought the House the law under which he is currently forbidden from demolishing it was not in effect. In their view, Jobs bought the building assuming he could do with it as he wished and then the State changed the rules on him thereby punishing him unfairly. This is not the case. Jobs bought the property in 1984 and the California Environmental Quality Act was passed in the 1970s.

Steve Jobs Loses Uanimous Court of Appeals Ruling, Jackling House Saved

Wednesday, January 10th, 2007
Jackling HouseDaniel Jackling House, ‘tear-down’ no more (Woodside History Committee)

Today brings news of a major legal victory for historic preservationists in their effort to preserve the historic Jackling House, currently owned by Steve Jobs. For over a year, Jobs’ has inveigled to circumvent California preservation ordinances which call for significant attempts to preserve historic homes before demolishing them. Jobs proposed demolishing the home to replace it with a newly constructed residence.

First, the Superior Court ruled unequivocally that he had not exhausted such efforts (actually, that he hadn’t even pursued any such remedies). Here’s how UOH’s attorney, Douglas Carstens characterized the victory:

January 2006 Superior Court Judge Marie Weiner decided unequivocally in favor of Uphold our Heritage. Judge Weiner found Mr. Jobs and the Town Council had sought to evade required provisions under the California Environmental Quality Act. Judge Weiner concluded that there was not evidence to support a finding that there were no feasible alternatives to demolishing this historic resource.

After losing the first round, instead of negotiating in good faith with the three serious offers from potential buyers, Jobs chose to appeal to the Court of Appeals.

Today, this Court ruled unanimously that Jobs hadn’t a legal leg to stand on. Again, UOH’s attorney said:

The Court of Appeal upheld the mandate of the California Environmental Quality Act that projects with significant adverse impacts must be denied if there are feasible alternatives.

The San Francisco Chronicle story covering the ruling characterized one portion of the ruling of the three judge court:

The court cited estimates by the town’s Planning Commission staff that the house would cost $4.9 million to rehabilitate and another $4.1 million to add living quarters, office space and a fitness area. Jobs’ estimate was higher, but he failed to provide any information about the cost of building his proposed new home on the site, the court said.

Without that information, “it is not possible to determine whether the cost of renovating the existing historic structure is reasonable or feasible,” Justice Stuart Pollak said.

Although Jobs can’t be forced to restore the mansion, Pollak said, the town can’t allow him to tear down the historic structure as long as preservation remains a realistic alternative.

Reading between the lines, I’m wondering whether Judge Pollak is saying that if Jobs has presented a realistic cost for his new dream house that it would’ve been a multiple (given the enormous sums spent by the high tech Mr. Blandings when they build their dream houses) of the $9-million proposed cost of restoring Jackling House. Thus, the court would’ve been able to say to Jobs that restoring Jackling House is NOT infeasible compared to the cost of building his new dream house. Since Jobs didn’t present this cost to them, they have no way of judging whether $9 million is a reasonable number or not.

I don’t yet have the actual written ruling. But when I do I will quote it here.

A sweet victory. Jackling House is saved. So California justice has thankfully ruled that celebrities and the God awful powerful are subject to the same laws as you or I. Now, let’s hope that the Justice Department will take a page from California justice and not deem a popular high tech CEO above the law regarding his backdating of company stock options.

Mr. Jobs, a piece of unsolicited advice, there are three serious offers on the table. Instead of appealing this all the way to the State Supreme Court, see reason and sit down and talk with the three potential buyers. We’ve had enough of the noblesse oblige approach. Try abiding by the law and making a good faith effort to preserve the House. If you can satisfy the preservationists with a proposal to move Jackling to a satisfactory alternate site, you might still get to building your dream house. But you don’t get to back out of your obligation to preserve a valuable architectural legacy.

Steve Jobs Appeals Jackling House Ruling to Court of Appeals, Refuses Offers to Save House

Sunday, December 31st, 2006

Spanish Revival Architecture
Steve Jobs lost a State Superior Court ruling last year which prevented him from demolishing the historic Jackling House in Woodside, CA. In the interim, the preservationists opposing Jobs have presented to him a serious proposal from Gordon Smythe, a Silicon Valley venture capitalist, that would involve moving the house to a new location and preserving it. Uphold Our Heritage has been generally supportive of Smythe’s proposal. After the group ironed out most of its issues with the potential buyer, Jobs refused to conclude a deal with him.

Jobs prefers appealing the ruling to State Court of Appeals in a desperate hope that what he didn’t win in Superior Court, he might win in a higher court. The hearing was held on December 20th. While no one knows which way the three judges will rule, UOH’s attorney was heartened by the fact that the one justice who asked questions framed them in much the same terms (Superior Court) Judge Weiner did in her original ruling.

Other factors have encouraged those battling to save Jackling House. Preservationists have discovered other offers to Jobs in the past year which he and his representatives never acknowledged to them. In addition, the Town of Woodside commissioned a study of the relocation options for the house and their independent expert found there were many viable options. All of which weakens Jobs’ contention in his claim that there are no ‘feasible’ preservation options for the home. Since none of these offers had been made before the Superior Court decision nor had the Town study been conducted, we believe Jobs’ case has further eroded in the interim.

What I find passing strange is that given the hot water which both he and Apple find themselves in regarding backdating of stock options, you’d think he’d want to negotiate his way out of peripheral matters such as this one in order not to have any legal distractions facing him. But apparently Steve Jobs is one of those Bill Gates-Steve Ballmer types who brook no opposition or compromise when it comes to realizing their perceived personal or business interests. It’s one thing to be so pig-headed when you’re a master of the universe. But after so many other CEOs have been felled by similar backdating imbroglios, Jobs is no longer a king. And if the SEC decides to launch a full investigation, Jobs and Apple will come under a microscope. I can’t imagine that having the Jackling House hanging over his head will be conducive to presenting him before the public as a fully sympathetic individual nor as one fully willing to respect the law as it pertains to him.

The Amazon link above to Spanish Revival Architecture features Jackling House prominently as a sterling example of this vintage architectural style.

Steve Jobs Loses Fight to Demolish Historic Landmark

Friday, December 30th, 2005
Jackling HouseDaniel Jackling House, Woodside, CA. (source: Woodside History Committee)

I’m pleased to announce that Steve Jobs has lost his long and bitter struggle to demolish the historic Jackling House in Woodside, CA. The house was built by Daniel Jackling, a mining magnate in 1923. It was designed by renowned California architect George Washington Smith (who was responsible for Santa Barbara’s “Spanish hacienda” style). For further background, see my earlier post about the campaign to save Jackling.

California Superior Court judge Marie Weiner ruled yesteday (December 28th) that the Woodside town council acted in bad faith in granting Jobs a demolition permit:

The administrative record reflects a severe lack of evidence supporting any and all findings that the EIR alternatives are “economically unjustifiable” or economically infeasible.

George Washington Smith: Architect of the Spanish-Colonial Revival

All of this is unknown to the Town Council and thus their finding of economic infeasiblity is not supported by substantial evidence, and was arbitrary and capricious. This was an abuse of discretion.

What the Town of Woodside has approved is the utter antithesis of its existing General Plan. .. The theme of the General Plan is one of conservation, preservation, and certainly maintenance of existing structures. It is arbitrary and capricious for the Town of Woodside to imply or interpellate the provisions of the General Plan contrary to its express components.

Such findings simply demonstrate the Town Council’s exaggerated efforts to find a means to the end that Jobs seeks.

In regard to the “conditions” placed upon the demolition permit [that Jobs take a year to find someone willing to move the house off-site] , there has been no showing that these conditions are actually enforceable. Jobs is the sole decision maker in determining whether or not to accept any proposals for relocation.

Woodside made a finding that the EIR alternative to have the house relocated to another site was not feasible, yet it required that efforts be made to see if the house could be relocated to another site to a willing taker. This demonstrates the absurdity of the “findings” of infeasibility made by Woodside.

Accordingly the finding of overriding consideration was not supported by substantial evidence, and the granting of the demolition permit by Woodside to Jobs was an abuse of discretion.

–decision provided by Uphold Our Heritage

Jackling House 1960Jackling House, 1960

This is a preliminary ruling which could be amended by the judge before it is made final in ten days. But it is almost a certainty that Jackling House is safe.

Jobs has owned the house for several decades and allowed it to fall into serious disrepair. Preservationists have speculated that Jobs deliberately allowed it to deteriorate in order to strengthen his claim that the only solution would be to tear it down.

Now Jobs is faced with some serious choices. Either he can sell the house, renovate it (which would be an interesting choice considering that he has publicly said that he “detests” it), or abandon it allowing its condition to worsen even further. The last choice would be quite cruel and mean-spirited (at least as far as the house is concerned), but Jobs has shown a great deal of malice during the campaign to save the house so I wouldn’t put it past him.

Great congratulations go to Clotilde Luce and Uphold Our Heritage for waging a brilliant campaign (with the help of Chatten-Brown Carstens, a law firm specializing in cases involving the California Environmental Quality Act). This is a huge victory for historic preservation. It should be a lesson for cities (like mine here in Seattle) which have essentially almost no housing regulations intended to preserve existing housing stock (and especially historic homes). Preserve it or lose it!

Steve Jobs: Attila the Hun of Architectural Preservation

Sunday, January 2nd, 2005

UPDATE: After writing this post, Clotilde Luce, a former resident of Jackling House, started an organization, Uphold Our Heritage, whose purpose is to preserve Jackling House. If you’d like to support their efforts, please click this button which will enable you to donate to the group’s Paypal account.

*********************************

Apparently, Steve Jobs never met a historic home he couldn’t imagine tearing down to replace it with something soulless, sleek and new. Certainly not the Daniel C. Jackling House (1926) which he’s owned in Woodside, CA since 1983 (Free to a Good Home: A Captain of Industry’s Rejected Mansion).

Jackling_front_lawn_tp1

Jackling House vista (credit: Woodside History Committee-all photos from this source unless otherwise noted)

The San Francisco Chronicle wrote a good story in October, 2004 describing the home:

The house in Woodside sits hidden in the woods on a private lane off Mountain Home Road and was built in 1926 for copper baron Daniel C. Jackling. It was designed by George Washington Smith, who created the red-tile-and- stucco look of Santa Barbara and neighboring Montecito and whose Pettigrew House in Palo Alto is on the National Register of Historic Places. Smith homes in Santa Barbara and Montecito sell for tens of millions of dollars.

Gw_smith

George Washington Smith created the architectural style
of Santa Barbara, but Steve Jobs “never heard of him.”
(credit: Architect.com)

The Woodside Town Council has just approved Jobs’ questionable plan to tear down the home if he cannot find someone to take it off his hands–free. I say, if Jobs wants to build a new home there–let him. But why not make him pay the $2.5-million it’d take to relocate it and rebuild it? Why the Town Council has let Jobs off so lightly is a mystery to me. You mean poor Steve can’t afford to shell out the extra $2.5-million? That’s nothing for the likes of Steve Jobs, all he has to do is sell a few hundred thousand more iPods to make up the difference. If I were Steve Jobs, I’d move the house, restore it and recruit a non-profit organization to manage it as a museum dedicated to the architectural legacy of George Washington Smith or to California architecture. Instead of coming across as a boorish, uncultured philistine, for a change Jobs would come across as a mature, civic-minded individual. What a difference that would make!

Daniel C. Jackling House–a Steve Jobs tear down?

Instead, this clueless Joe has made the following ignorant comments about his home showing he has an absolutely tin ear and obtuse mind when it comes to understanding the value of preserving a culture’s architectural legacy:

Jobs, the billionaire chief executive of Apple and Pixar, who has called the mansion, built for an earlier captain of industry, the copper baron Daniel C. Jackling, “one of the biggest abominations of a house I’ve ever seen.”

At a hearing earlier this year, he explained that he had always intended to knock it down, calling the house “poorly built” and professing never to have heard of the architect, George Washington Smith, revered elsewhere in California for creating, among other things, the architectural look of Santa Barbara.

“Why should I invest a lot of money to keep it protected when I want to tear it down?”

“It was never really a very interesting house to start with,” he told the planning commissioners. “So I think I could build something far, far nicer and far more historically interesting down the road.”

He described [the house] as “pretty much a dump when I moved in.”

Mr. Jobs said of Mr. Jackling: “He was a very wealthy man. Unfortunately, he didn’t have very good taste.”

Says who, Mr. Jobs? And you have better taste? Please don’t make me laugh! And finally we have this nugget from his attorney, who doesn’t appear to have a much more developed sense of decency than his client: “All he wants is the house off the property,” Mr. Ellman said. “What happens next is of little or no concern.”

Thalia Lubin, architect and member of the Woodside History Committee put the lie to all of this intellectual chicanery in this statement: The estate is “part of the cultural fabric of the town,” she said. “Every time you lose one of those threads, you’ve lost a little bit of history.”

Harry Kolb, a Santa Barbara real estate agent specializing in sales of George Washington Smith homes, places Smith into broader architectural context:

Smith is “revered” for his neo-European designs and wanted the homes to appear upon construction as if they had been expanded over the generations. He used multiple roof lines and non-functioning chimneys and varied the iron work adorning windows. Inside, he designed corner fireplaces, tile floors that rose slightly higher in the center of the room and rooms twice as long as they were wide with coffers, beam work and painted medallions in the ceilings to create an intimate feel, Kolb said.

Smith also liked to surprise homeowners with steps going up or down into a room simply for artistic purposes and indoor-outdoor walkways that would force residents to go outside to get to their bedrooms or other rooms in the house.

Kolb considers the homes works of art but knows they are not suited to everyone.

“I can understand someone saying a house of the 1920s isn’t appropriate today. They didn’t have kitchen-living rooms, their closets were small — people have more than three changes of clothing today. On the other hand, it’s just as easy for somebody who really likes that type of architecture to point out all the things that are special and that you don’t want to lose.”

Why should the architectural judgments of Neanderthals like Steve Jobs be substituted for architectural historians like the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which decries the effort to tear down the Jackling House?

Clotilde Luce, an architectural preservationist who lived in the Jackling House in the 1970s and is leading the effort to preserve it said this about Jobs’ plans: “I think it’s irresponsible and predatory to deprive the house to future owners, ones who know the value of a 17,000-square-foot masterwork by a great California architect.”

Cities, towns and neighborhoods throughout this country are fighting losing battles to preserve their architectural heritage. Young nouveau riche like Steve Jobs come along and feel they need to make their own architectural statements with the new palaces they wish to build. They know nothing of what has come before them. They care little what will come after them. They want what they want when they want it. Pity the poor, decrepit old home that stands in their way.

Don’t know about you, but I can do without Apple products in my life as long as Steve Jobs wants to be the Attila the Hun of historic preservation. Shame on you, Steve Jobs. You should know better!

Some of the above quotations come from this article in the International Herald Tribune (also published in the New York Times): Steve Jobs brings down the house

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE