"Architectural collectibles"? Oh the fun pastimes of the wealthy!

That looks like a gorgeous place to live. I would have kept the marriage together for the house!

why is it "infamous"?

oops- typo!

Oh, ok. you meant famous.

I was hoping to hear a story involving a dead starlet, a venrable actor, drugs, booze, sex and a hardboiled private dick (detective).

Clearly I have a salacious imagimation.

I think the only "infamous" scandal here is the price someone paid for this place. It's lovely enough, but it's still nothing more than a little bit of metal, glass and stone sitting in the middle of the desert.

Maybe this post should have elaborated a little more on who Richard Neutra was.

He had the pleasure of working with and learning from Frank Lloyd Wright, perhaps one of the most important architects of all time. Neutra himself became very important for the modernism movement, although I think he's a little more international style than modernism.

Mr. Dangerous, regardless of the iconic status of Neutra, regardless of one's ability or choice to read; when balanced with more practical issues in this world, this house truly is "a little bit of metal, glass and stone sitting in the middle of the desert."

We choose to value it (which in fact I do). It has no intrinsic value.

Just because not everyone values such things is no reason to be insulting.

I remember seeing the couple discussing the renovation of the home on "House Beautiful TV" - those two worked very hard to remove unfortunate additions and restore the place to what it was when it was first built.

It's a shame they're not together anymore.

Thanks for the condescending remarks, y'all. I, um, like, know about Neutra and stuff (twirling my hair), and from what I can recall, like, um, he did not, like, walk on water or turn water into wine and stuff like that.

He also didn't machine every piece of this house and put it together with his hands. And at this point, practically everything on the inside must have been replaced due to wear/tear/maintenance. Unless George Washington slept there, or Betsy Ross sewed her flags there, a house's value is as a place for people to eat, sleep, use the bathroom and dream. A house as a piece of art or some kind of prized commodity is silly; it is only as valuable as the function it serves.

Hey, I can sell you George Washington's cherry tree ax for only 10 million dollars. However, I should mention that I replaced the handle and the blade.

"A house as a piece of art or some kind of prized commodity is silly; it is only as valuable as the function it serves."

Wow. Now architecture can't be art? I guess all that stuff in museums shouldn't be worth much since it serves no practical purpose either.

I'm glad someone was willing to pay to preserve this gem, instead of razing it like Neutra's Maslon House.

Good. For $16.84 million, no one should be considering it a tear-down anymore.

I love it when people post condescending remarks "only a trifling of glass & metal" and then get insulted when someone calls them out.

Yes, the house is just glass and metal, and Michelangelo's David is just plain white marble. We revere them because of what people DID with the materials.

And Hejiranyc - A more fitting analogy would be Jefferson and his architecture. Do you think Jeffersons contemporaries were exalting Monticello when it was built? Or is it with the lens of history that we can look back and see how truly remarkable things are? What would we see if we looked back 100 years from now and saw this house has been torn down to make way for a McMansion?

And ps. 16m AINT that much for a house these days!

http://www.boston.com/realestate/gallery/1216pallotta_mansion/

http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2007/05/23/high_style_units_unheard_of_price/