I'm quite sure you all know this one, but I post it anyway because it has intrigued me since I first saw it years ago. Peter Eisenman (1932) once said: "I can not judge students whose work I don't understand"...well the same goes for me, after all these years I am still not sure I quite understand Peter's architecture, so who am I to judge him? (btw Peter is the first living architect I ever posted)
The following description was written by some professor at OregonU.
House VI (1972-1975) represents and efficient method of construction. This house is constructed using primarily a post and beam system, with box beams and large dimension timbers forming the major elements of the structural system. The building is a study in the relationships between the actual structure and the architectural theory. Many of the forms that appear structural are actually included to reinforce the concepts behind the design. In his critique of the house, Robert Gutman wrote, "most of these columns have no role in supporting the building plan es, but are there, like the planes and the slits in the walls and ceilings that represent planes, to mark the geometry and rhythm of Eisenman's notational system." It was not Eisenman's intent to convey the actual structure, but rat her to allow the system to define a module, which is augmented by additional space defining forms.
No comments:
Post a Comment