Architecture of Peter Eisenman - Research Paper Example

THE ARCHITECTURE OF PETER EISENMAN Introduction Peter D. Eisenman (born 1932), the American architect, is well known for his architecture based on a dialectic of oppositions in architecture. His imaginative designs drew inspiration from a diverse group of intellectuals from other fields such as linguistics, biology, structuralism, philosophy and mathematics; and he established himself not only as an architect, but also as a theorist, philosopher, educator, and writer. Eisenman was part of the “New York Five”, frontline architects who attempted to examine the origins of 20th century modernism based on the work of Le Corbusier, and who created powerful building forms comparable to the European avant-garde (Davidson 343, 194). The group members then developed their unique ideologies; and Eisenman became increasingly associated with the Deconstructivist movement. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this paper is to investigate Peter Eisenman’s architectural transition from modernism to postmodernism: and to examine his project, the Aronoff Center for Design and Art in the University of Cincinnati, Ohio. Architectural Modernism in the Early Works of Peter Eisenman The traditional anthropocentrism or human-oriented approach of architecture declined by the early 20th century. The basic values which form the foundation of architecture were lost by “removing humanity from the centre of the cultural stage” (Davey 4). Even in the early house projects, Eisenman designed architecture that were “against the traditional notion of how you occupy a house” (King 160). The architect’s early work reflected his idealized modernist principles, with buildings like classical boxes in the House projects. The boxes were “reconceived in a tangle of right angles, seemingly functionless columns, and cutout white planes” (Davidson 102), in his work with geometric and theoretical investigations of space, meaning and signs. In his house projects, Eisenman produced almost identical axonometric transformational sequences of the relationships between columns and walls, volumes and columns, and volumes and walls. This merged traditional concepts with contemporary creation. Figure 1. Architectural Structuralism: House II (1970) by Peter Eisenman (Stanford, 1998) In Figs.1 above and Fig.2. below, the modernist architecture of the rectilinear box-like house rendered it autonomous and self-referential, with no relevance for human purposes. The coolly rational structuralism deliberately challenges human requirements for elegance, aesthetics and comfort (Stanford, 1998). Figure 2. Frank House (1975) by Eisenman (GreatBuildings, 2010) Significantly, Eisenman’s modernism followed the tradition established by early modernist architects such as Le Corbusier and Philip Johnson. Mann (p.4) states that architects have a different perspective from that of other people, “and have learned to see the world as if it is illuminated by a second sun”. In Eisenman’s modernistic early housing projects, he introduced elements such as a stair that did not work, a window on the floor of the bedroom, a column in the middle of the bedroom, so that a bed could not be put in it, and other antifunctional features (King 159). From 1977, Eisenman concluded his structuralist period and started working on his deconstructionist design method consisting of decomposition. In this, elements and space are eliminated instead of added, so that “spaces are decentered, scales distorted, and functions rotated, inverted, then opposed” (King 160), thus rooms may end up upside down. However, there are no norms regarding spaces such as rooms. Eisenman pursued uncertainty, stating that all assumptions would be destroyed, distancing where the process of architecture becomes the scaleless object, and decentering which denotes whatever is manifest as being positively absent, whereby cubes are distorted to form logic-defying mind puzzles. “Thus, all assumptions about architecture itself, space and the self” (King 160) were freed from cumbersome rules, thus achieving emancipation of this field of work. Peter Eisenman’s radical creations were appreciated mostly by some fellow architects and a few other people; however, several critics noted that the architect’s buildings did not comply with architectural principles. Moreover, his lack of concern for the clients’ requirement for comfort, aesthetics, and functionality was experienced by the occupants of his buildings. Critics such as Langdon (p.33) who studied Eisenman’s avant garde architecture have totally disapproved of his modernist work, describing it as anti-social and against humanity. Peter Eisenman’s Postmodern Architecture Influenced by intellectuals as diverse as Nietzsche, Chomsky and Derrida, Eisenman developed and incorporated his various theories including deconstructivism, fragmentation, opposition and postmodernism in his construction designs (Davidson 343). From modernism, Eisenman’s shift to postmodernism included the development of a more diverse and complex vision as reflected in “Ohio University’s Wexner Center, the recently completed Cardinal’s Stadium in Arizona, 1986 jewellery and tableware designs, and a proposal for the rebuilding of the World Trade Center” (Davidson 31). Postmodern architecture was influenced by the electronic media causing culture change, and subsequent shifts in people’s attitudes and perspectives. Figure 3. Deconstructivism in Architecture: Wexner Center (1989) by Eisenman (DesignBoom, 2010) Figure 4. Wexner Center for the Arts, Columbus (1989) (Galinsky, 2006) In Figures 3 and 4. above, a long white spinal passage connects together loosely a series of units, including at the main entrance some tower-like constructions.The use of grid planes, broken lines and curved forms placed irregularly near each other underscore the decomposition effect of the architecture. Cramping effects as well as spaciousness are found in the interiors. The extensive use of grids produces a nauseous feeling, and the stairway appears to violate several safety codes. However, the postmodern architecture is interesting and attention-getting (Galinsky, 2006). Eisenman sought to express new meanings through architecture. To provide a multiplicity of meanings, he pulled apart the direct relationship between “structure, form, meaning, content, symbolism, etc.” (Eisenman 34). This pulling apart was termed as displacement by the architect, considering architecture to project the cosmology and reality of the times. This is exemplified in Figs 3. & 4. above. Though rich in postmodern theory, the Wexner Center for the Arts, Ohio State University, and some other buildings designed by the architect were found to have elementary design flaws such as wrong design specifications and exposure of the fine art exhibition space to direct sunlight. These required redesigning, and extensive repairs. Eisenman’s pursuit of the theory of deconstructivism (Eisenman 1989, p.150) related to the comparatively new phenomenon of alienation experienced by people in society. Accordingly, it was considered necessary for architecture to reflect the angst and fragmentation of modern day society. Further, the architect considered it his responsibility to depict the conditions of the present age, and to delve into “the possibility of a truly horrific environment” (IAA 60) as described by him. Eisenman (p.40) expressed his views that people “need to displace the concept of architecture as a service, as an accommodating profession, as one that people inhabit”. He stated that the concept of “inhabit” refers to individuals growing used to a space, and that traditional views on architecture promoted its purpose as that of indulging the habits of people. Therefore Eisenman conceived of buildings that were oppositional to people’s requirements of comfort and the habitual from architecture. Aronoff Center for Design and Art, University of Cincinnati, Ohio The Aronoff Center for Design and Art (1988-1996) in the University of Cincinnati, Ohio exemplifies the architect’s postmodern construction theories. At the turn of the 1990s, Peter Eisenman explored the phenomena of “accumulation, condensation, folding and shifting of surfaces or superimposed layers in complex palimsests” (Gregory 27). He created grids and stratified planes laid one above the other, and produced the “double vibration of the new and pre-existing” (Gregory 27) at the Aronoff Center for Design and Art, Cincinnati (1988-1996), using electronic management of his concepts. According to Eisenman, architecture was an autonomous art, and one which should be free from requirements such as practicality, as well as from specific concepts associated with occupying a place, such as: love of the place and people. Eisenman was happy when his postmodern architecture became the target of criticism. According to him, architects generally accommodate and allow; they never critique society, art or life, or express political activism through their work. Therefore, Eisenman preferred to present himself as a radical whose unusual work stirs society (Eisenman 39). Early experimentation in the 1990s created a rapid wave motion with the blurring of defining lines and the use of irregular and folded shapes. In the Aronoff facility illustrated below (Fig. 5) sheathed in pastel panels (Figs.6 and 7), tectonic platforms and geological stratifications exert force on one another (Fig.7). Figure 5. View of the Aronoff Centre from the University’s Main Thoroughfare (AHWA, 2009) Figure 6. The North Side Facing West: Aronoff Centre Sheathed in Pastel Panels (AHWA, 2009) Figure 7. The Upper East Entrance, Aronoff Centre for Design and Art, Cincinnati (AHWA, 2009) The Aronoff Center for Design and Art, Cincinnati is a controversial work. This is from both approaches, as renovation of the pre-existing 1950s red brick College of Design, Art, and Planning (DAAP), and as an addition to it in the form of a new low addition which joins the old building at an angle (Fig.9). Figure 8 Interior: The Main Hall with Atrium Café: Aronoff Centre (AHWA, 2009) Figure 9. The Dramatic Angular Joining of the Old and New Buildings (AHWA, 2009) The different surfaces at uneven levels produce irregular forms and shapes, as seen in the main hall with atrium (Fig.8) and at the junction of the two buildings (Fig.9) where the blurring of defined structure is created through the merging of shapes. The shapes merge and fold, while a varied use of colors reveals the physical and conceptual level of the materials composing the building. Thus, there is a total shattering of the notions of “the principle, of the logical succession, of linkage, of causality” (Gregory 27). These concepts are replaced by a logic that allows several possibilities. Thus, spaces are conceptualized not from a coordination of spaces and volumes offered as such by the architect, but from the uniting of fragments that both architect and the occupant of the building invest with meanings and values. According to Pile (p.430), the Aranoff Center introduces complexities of surfaces and planes that contribute to its deconstructivism. Conclusion This paper has highlighted Peter Eisenman’s architectural transition from modernism to postmodernism. His project, the Aronoff Center for Design and Art in the University of Cincinnati, Ohio has also been examined. The architect’s use of structuralism in his earlier work on box-like house projects incorporated his idealized modernist principles of creating space and meaning which was not user-oriented. He believed in emancipating structural form from all meaning. Eisenman’s later postmodernist work used the theories of deconstructivism and fragmentation which literally meant breaking down instead of building up. This concept also underscored the creation of buildings that were anti-social and hostile, opposing the age-old concepts of building for comfort and aesthetics. He used sheaths, grids and uneven planes extensively, along with irregular, folding shapes and colliding forms. Post modernism and its related theories of deconstructivism, blurring, folding, fragmentation and opposition are attributed to the increasing use of electronic media which is bringing about a change in culture. Deconstructivist architecture which is not human centred reflects the greater alienation experienced by people. The evidence indicates that Peter Eisenman’s modernist architecture of his earlier work evolved into the decompositional or deconstructivist architecture of his later works, in a continued attempt to liberate form from all meaning. Further, the central theme of architecture remained the same: opposition to providing buildings that were human-centred. However, postmodernism based on the changing culture of increasingly isolated individuals, came to be represented by irregularly shaped buildings with interiors that produced a sense of discomfort and distress. The reason for Eisenman attempting to establish his radical and postmodernist position is that his kind of signature architecture becomes a commodity. His buildings are composed as a work of art, thereby establishing the user as culturally progressive. This is accomplished without touching the heart and inner nature which is the prime purpose of all art, including art that is modified and enhanced by practicality as architecture is. Eisenman considered the influence of the media in the form of television and advertising to have completely altered culture, producing a totally new attitude to truth. Thus, to change architecture’s reality, Eisenman (p.35) believes it “means to displace the conditions of architecture as they used to be: in other words, the condition that saw architecture as reasonable, as understandable, as clearly functioning”. Works Cited AHWA. (Art History Webmasters Association). Aronoff Center for Design and Art/ DAAP Building. University of Cincinnati. Retrieved on 14th December, 2010 from: http://www.bluffton.edu/~sullivanm/eisenmancin/daap.html Davey, Peter. America rediscovered. The Architectural Review, 202.1209 (1997): pp.4- 6. Davidson, Cynthia (Ed.). Tracing Eisenman: Peter Eisenman complete works. New York: Rizzoli International Publications. (2006). DesignBoom. Peter Eisenman. Interview. April 8, 2002. Retrieved on 14th December, 2010 from: http://www.designboom.com/eng/interview/eisenman.html Eisenman, Peter. Strong form, weak form. In Peter Noever & Regina Haslinger (Eds.) Architecture in transition: Between deconstruction and new modernism. The United States of America: Prestel Publishers, (1991): p.33-45. Eisenman, Peter. Blue line text. In A. Papadakis, C. Cooke, and A. Benjamin (Eds.). Deconstruction/ Omnibus Volume. New York: Rizzoli International Publications, Inc., (1989): pp.150-151. Galinsky. Wexner Center for the Arts, Columbus. Peter Eisenman and Richard Trott, 1989. Galinsky. (2006). Retrieved on 14th December, 2010 from: http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/wexner/index.htm GreatBuildings. Frank House, Eisenman. (2010). Retrieved on 14th December, 2010 from: http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/Frank_House-Eisenman.html Gregory, Paola. New scapes: Territories of complexity. Switzerland: Birkhauser Publishers. (2003). IAA (International Academy of Architecture). World architecture: Issues 45-46. Virginia: Grosvenor Press International Ltd. (1996). King, Ross. Emancipating space: Geography, architecture, and urban design. The United States of America: Guilford Press. (1996). Langdon, Philip. Avant garde against humanity: The rise and fall of anti-social architecture. The American Enterprise, 13.1 (2002): pp.26-33. Mann, Dennis A. Beams of light: Looking at architecture. Journal of American Culture, 19.1 (1996): pp.1-5. Pile, John F. A history of interior design. Edition 2. New York: Lawrence King. (2005). Stanford. Peter Eisenman. Stanford Presidential Lectures in the Humanities and the Arts. Retrieved on 14th December, 2010 from: http://prelectur.stanford.edu/lecturers/eisenman/ Read More