"...you might like to know that Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000 will be released on June 24, 2008.
Peter Eisenman, renowned for his own controversial and influential body of work, looks at ten leading architects of the twentieth century and their theoretical positions, technological innovations, and design contributions. Eisenman identifies a project within the oeuvre of each of these architects—Luigi Moretti, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Le Corbusier, Louis Kahn, Robert Venturi, James Stirling, Aldo Rossi, Rem Koolhaas, Daniel Libeskind, and Frank Gehry—that has profoundly affected architectural discourse and practice. With drawings, diagrams, and always-incisive text, he presents each architect’s theoretical position, and then offers detailed critical analysis of the project."
Any guess what the 10 buildings might be? Your own picks?
Moretti: Casa del Girasole (Eisenman)
Mies: Seagrams (Eisenman)
Le Corbusier: Palais des Congres (me)
Le Corbusier: Olivetti Center Milan (me)
Kahn: Dominican Sisters Convent (me)
Venturi & Rauch: Franklin Court (me)
Stirling: Leicester Engineering (Eisenman, "Real and English")
Stirling: Nordrhine/Westfalen Museum (me)
Stirling: Wallraf-Richartz Museum (me)
Rossi: Modena Cemetery (Eisenman)
Koolhaas: Patent Office (me)
Libeskind: who cares (me)
Gehry: Wagner Residence and other residences of that era (me, just to be a bit obscure)
Well Im glad to see Stirling on there - even though his buildings are rather ugly by todays standards, at least he was the inovator of the era. I still dont know any of the buildings on the list except Seagrams. I guess it begs the question - how influential are these buildings really?
May 29, 08 9:54 am ·
·
Schindler died 1953.
For a very thorough Eisenman analysis of Stirling's Leicester Engineering see "Real and English" in Oppositions 4 (perhaps also in the Oppositions Reader).
you could add Bucky Fuller too...although Eisenman only sees him as a tinkerer...I would argue the mero space frame has allowed a tad bit more innovation than say anything Libeskind has done...and is also a little bit more than just 'tinkering'
May 29, 08 10:06 am ·
·
'Canonical' is a tricky adjective itself. One definition of canon is 'a list of saints' as in a list of those individual deemed to be safely in heaven. In a (typical?) way, Eisenman is trying to be the establisher of an architectural canon.
Luckily, Peter was the first Pope, and no subsequent pope has ever taken the name of Peter.
sorry, I meant to say lithograph...very similar printing process...and all his mixed media work as well...huge fan...as a screen printer I would like to do serigraph renderings when the right chance arises.
Yes. But surely the originals are watercolor, tempera and/or colored pencil renderings ? Would they have been issued in lithographed editions when new ?
I admire his color work very much. And as the son of a serigraph artist I can agree with your ambition. (My own print medium is spray-paint and stencils:)
i would definitely include stirling's leicester project among canonical works, holz.
May 30, 08 7:07 am ·
·
"In the Casa del Girasole itself, materiality replaces abstraction. The materials do not stand for anything; they are. At the same time, there is no dominant material system that suggests a preference for one material over another. Neither is there a color palette that makes any kind of structural or formal sense; the colors merely exist. This is a form of neorealism in architecture"
Peter Eisenman, "Critical Analysis: Luigi Moretti" in Peter Eisenman: Feints, (2006), p. 67.
But the real point will be:
Luigi Moretti, "The Value of Profiles", 1951.
Luigi Moretti, "Structures and Sequence of Spaces", 1952.
both reprinted in Oppositions: 4, (1975).
I'm beginning to smell a bit of a 1970s re.....
"I remember Rosiland Krauss telling me "You with your surrealist shit", when she heard the word [delirious] in the seventies. It seemed the most efficient terminology to introduce at the time, even though the time was definitely hostile to it."
Rem Koolhaas (2006).
I think I'm telepathic because I often hear "You with your reenactment shit".
"Luigi Moretti's apartments on the Via Parioli in Rome: are they one building with a split or two buildings joined?"
Robert Venturi, "Ambiguity" in Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture. (1966).
The Church of Peter and Latter-Day Canonicals: is that multiple buildings joined or one building splintered?
holz, i had the same thought regarding moneo's book when i read the original post of this thread.
compare the language of moneo's title to eisenmen's:
Theoretical Anxiety and Design Strategies in the work of Eight Contemporary Architects
vs.
Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000
this may be a minor thing, but i'm struck by the fact that moneo's title is what it is (self evident), while eisenmen's presupposes that these 10 works are, in fact, canonical. while they may very well be accepted as such, this foreshadows what is likely a text full of hops and ljumps that may or may not be as digestible as the one in the title.
hope that makes sense...
in general i appreciate the straightforward language of moneo's book.
"In this painstaking analysis of an apparent architectural syntax, the author offers a fresh interpretation of one of the canonical works of the Brutalist movement--the Stirling and Gowan Leicester Engineering Building, completed in 1963. Responding independently to one aspect of a theme broached by Manfredo Tafuri in Oppositions 3, Eisenman attempts to uncover the precise manner in which Stirling has rewritten the "words" of modern architecture."
--Kenneth Frampton, an introduction to "Real and English: The Destruction of the Box. I." (1974).
The article was first presented in lecture form at Cooper Union in the spring of 1973 and again at Yale during the spring of 1974.
"The thrust of the argument below will be that the Leicester Engineering Building invokes a similar critical and thus, polemical, intention as Venturi, but does so in a different and perhaps less traditional manner--by distorting the form of the iconic structure as opposed to perverting the form of the iconic content, as in the case with Venturi."
"Much of the work of Louis Kahn, which proposes a classical alternative to a modern eclecticism, can surely be seen..."
"...and more recently in the wall decompositions of John Hejduk, destroys it conceptually."
"Real and English: The Destruction of the Box. I" was a (personal) inspirational motivator for a fourth year design (taken through to working drawings) project, Fall 1979. None of the faculty "got" the design--it was like Leicester Engineering meets Staatsgalerie Stuttgart. Hyper Avant. Very distorted iconic structure fucks with perverted iconic content. Then during "working drawings", Spring 1980, witnessed schizophrenic survival of horrific expressway accident, emergency room lobotomy, subsequent two-week drug-inducted coma, and the commencement of a whole new history (where all that remains canonical is a sense of humor).
Jun 1, 08 11:07 am ·
·
"Eisenman's Canon..."
Luigi Moretti, Casa "Il Girasole," 1947-50
Lugwig Mies van der Rohe, Farnsworth House, 1946-51
Le Corbusier, Palais des Congres-Strasbourg, 1962-64
Louis I. Kahn, Adler & DeVore Houses, 1954-55
Robert Venturi, Vanna Venturi House, 1959-64
James Stirling, Leicester Engineering Building, 1959-63
Aldo Rossi, Cemetery of San Cataldo, 1971-78
Rem Koolhaas, Jussieu Libraries, 1992-93
Daniel Libeskind, Jewish Museum, 1989-1999
Frank O. Gehry, Peter B. Lewis Building, 1997-2002
Jun 25, 08 2:23 pm ·
·
Just wait till you read the first few sentences on page 129. Apparently the book it interchangably tragic and comedic.
Jun 25, 08 8:31 pm ·
·
Odd dyslexical, editorical mistakes on pages 88 and 89 (etc.):
On page 88, the fifth floor is depicted, yet it is labeled and analyzed as if it were the fourth floor.
Likewise, on page 89, the fourth floor is depicted, yet it is labeled and analyzed as if it were the fifth floor.
The mistake is carried through on page 91 where "...the fulcrum for the spiraling movement in the second, third and fourth floors." should actually read "second, third and fifth floors."
Additionally, what is 'interpreted' as a central stair core of the building, is actually a stacked pair of up and down escalators. The stair "core" of the building is someplace else.
And it is unfortunate that the stage set is missed altogether within the 'canonical' analysis, as it would have offered the 'missing link' of clarity to the whole figure/grid development.
In the Introduction, Eisenman emphasizes the notion of "close reading", yet, with the series of mistakes within (at least) the Palais des Congres analysis, I have to wonder just how closely Eisenman actually "read" these buildings and how much was simply relied upon the student analyses that the book is based on.
Jun 26, 08 8:05 am ·
·
metamechanic(fan) asks:
do there have to be ten buildings?
A close reading of Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000 very much discloses a sublimated implicit nth canonical building, videlicet Quondam, a virtual museum of architecture: 1996-. [Elaboration forthcoming most likely elsewhere.]
The stars of Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000, somewhat ironically, are not actual buildings at all, viz. the Palais des Congrès-Strasbourg (1962-64) and the Jessieu Libraries (1992-93). In the Forward, Stan Allen refers to the Palais des Congrès as a "previously somewhat overlooked building." As it happened, Arcadia's 1991 published analysis of the Palais des Congrès became one of the corner stones of Quondam. Was Koolhaas aware of Arcadia's analysis within the Loeb Library at Harvard?
In a geometrically progressive sense, Eisenman describes canonical buildings as designs which themselves manifest a close reading. Albeit requiring a 'photo-finish', Stirling wins the "architect as close reader" award, with many close seconds. Stirling perfected the reenactionary architecturism kick.
While reading/skimming through Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000, I often wish Koolhaas was the author rather than Eisenman (although Eisenman does indeed set a fine stage himself), but, alas, Koolhaas has already designed another nth canonical building, viz. OMA's Patent Office:
"Social Condenser" (1982)
"Strategy of the VoidI" (Planning) (1987)
"Timed Erasures" (1991)
"Loop-Trick" (1987)
"Strategy of the Void II" (Building) (1989)
"Stacked Freedoms" (1989)
"Inside-Out City" (1993)
"Disconnect" (1994)
"Everywhere and Nowhere" (1994)
"Variable Speed Museum" (1995)
"Inertness Modified" (1997)
Tall a& Slender (1996)
Skyscraper Loop (2002)
"Cake-tin Architecture" (2002)
"The End of the Road" (2003)
In 1972, the Musical Heritage Society offered a free recording of Pachelbel's Canon in D Major as performed by the Jean-François Paillard chamber orchestra when you(I) joined their record club. By the late 1970's, Pachelbel's Canon became very popular. Perhaps canons are best when consummately baroque.
"We understand Le Corbusier's Palais des Congrès in Strasbourg as canonical today primarily because it has sponsored several generations of work on the warped surface. In this case, Koolhaas's Jussieu Libraries confer a retrospective "canonical" status to this previously somewhat overlooked building."
--Stan Allen, 2008
Chris, read the 'Introduction' and be aware of Eisenman's ongoing oppositional reenactment of Colin Rowe's analytical method (which ultimately reaches farce in the analysis of the 10th canonical building).
One could almost describe Eisenman's whole architectural design career as one oppositional reenactment after another, finally puctuated with bursts of intense originality (like the Max Reinhardt Haus, Haus Immendorf and the Staten Island Institute of Arts and Sciences).
Jul 5, 08 10:27 am ·
·
"Take a look at Le Corbusier's Palais des Congres a Strasbourg (1964), and then look at OMA's Hotel at Agadir, the Library at Jussieu, the Educatorium, and then MVRDV's VPRO--a trail of design reenactments." 09/23/04 12:14
cf. 06/30/08 12:58 above
Aug 31, 08 11:03 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Can you say canonical?
"...you might like to know that Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000 will be released on June 24, 2008.
Peter Eisenman, renowned for his own controversial and influential body of work, looks at ten leading architects of the twentieth century and their theoretical positions, technological innovations, and design contributions. Eisenman identifies a project within the oeuvre of each of these architects—Luigi Moretti, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Le Corbusier, Louis Kahn, Robert Venturi, James Stirling, Aldo Rossi, Rem Koolhaas, Daniel Libeskind, and Frank Gehry—that has profoundly affected architectural discourse and practice. With drawings, diagrams, and always-incisive text, he presents each architect’s theoretical position, and then offers detailed critical analysis of the project."
Any guess what the 10 buildings might be? Your own picks?
Moretti: Casa del Girasole (Eisenman)
Mies: Seagrams (Eisenman)
Le Corbusier: Palais des Congres (me)
Le Corbusier: Olivetti Center Milan (me)
Kahn: Dominican Sisters Convent (me)
Venturi & Rauch: Franklin Court (me)
Stirling: Leicester Engineering (Eisenman, "Real and English")
Stirling: Nordrhine/Westfalen Museum (me)
Stirling: Wallraf-Richartz Museum (me)
Rossi: Modena Cemetery (Eisenman)
Koolhaas: Patent Office (me)
Libeskind: who cares (me)
Gehry: Wagner Residence and other residences of that era (me, just to be a bit obscure)
booo, no Rudolf Schindler...tilt wall man...not to mention his beautiful letterpress renderings.
Well Im glad to see Stirling on there - even though his buildings are rather ugly by todays standards, at least he was the inovator of the era. I still dont know any of the buildings on the list except Seagrams. I guess it begs the question - how influential are these buildings really?
Schindler died 1953.
For a very thorough Eisenman analysis of Stirling's Leicester Engineering see "Real and English" in Oppositions 4 (perhaps also in the Oppositions Reader).
excuse me, I perused your post and missed the date...although I still see him as more influential than many of those listed above.
you could add Bucky Fuller too...although Eisenman only sees him as a tinkerer...I would argue the mero space frame has allowed a tad bit more innovation than say anything Libeskind has done...and is also a little bit more than just 'tinkering'
'Canonical' is a tricky adjective itself. One definition of canon is 'a list of saints' as in a list of those individual deemed to be safely in heaven. In a (typical?) way, Eisenman is trying to be the establisher of an architectural canon.
Luckily, Peter was the first Pope, and no subsequent pope has ever taken the name of Peter.
Is 'canonical diversity' an oxymoron?
Why is Eiserman and Stanley getting so vocal now days? Who listens to them anymore anyways? What about their work? Less talk more work!
I'm with Jason -- but what is a "letterpress rendering" ?
hmm... i fell this book was already written by moneo...
while i don't think that many of those on that list qualify as having canonical werks (robert, james. daniel)
i will say that without rossi, i don't think switzerland would be as impressive as it currently is.
sorry, I meant to say lithograph...very similar printing process...and all his mixed media work as well...huge fan...as a screen printer I would like to do serigraph renderings when the right chance arises.
Yes. But surely the originals are watercolor, tempera and/or colored pencil renderings ? Would they have been issued in lithographed editions when new ?
I admire his color work very much. And as the son of a serigraph artist I can agree with your ambition. (My own print medium is spray-paint and stencils:)
(Sorry)
You are probably correct...and stencils are great.
If you like stencil work you should check out a poster artist friend of mine in Austin, Mig Kokinda...he does some amazing stencil work.
http://www.migkokinda.com/
Wow. Beautiful stuff, huh ? Thanks for that. (Stencil lettering that good should win a prize. . .)
i would definitely include stirling's leicester project among canonical works, holz.
"In the Casa del Girasole itself, materiality replaces abstraction. The materials do not stand for anything; they are. At the same time, there is no dominant material system that suggests a preference for one material over another. Neither is there a color palette that makes any kind of structural or formal sense; the colors merely exist. This is a form of neorealism in architecture"
Peter Eisenman, "Critical Analysis: Luigi Moretti" in Peter Eisenman: Feints, (2006), p. 67.
But the real point will be:
Luigi Moretti, "The Value of Profiles", 1951.
Luigi Moretti, "Structures and Sequence of Spaces", 1952.
both reprinted in Oppositions: 4, (1975).
I'm beginning to smell a bit of a 1970s re.....
"I remember Rosiland Krauss telling me "You with your surrealist shit", when she heard the word [delirious] in the seventies. It seemed the most efficient terminology to introduce at the time, even though the time was definitely hostile to it."
Rem Koolhaas (2006).
I think I'm telepathic because I often hear "You with your reenactment shit".
"Luigi Moretti's apartments on the Via Parioli in Rome: are they one building with a split or two buildings joined?"
Robert Venturi, "Ambiguity" in Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture. (1966).
The Church of Peter and Latter-Day Canonicals: is that multiple buildings joined or one building splintered?
holz, i had the same thought regarding moneo's book when i read the original post of this thread.
compare the language of moneo's title to eisenmen's:
Theoretical Anxiety and Design Strategies in the work of Eight Contemporary Architects
vs.
Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000
this may be a minor thing, but i'm struck by the fact that moneo's title is what it is (self evident), while eisenmen's presupposes that these 10 works are, in fact, canonical. while they may very well be accepted as such, this foreshadows what is likely a text full of hops and ljumps that may or may not be as digestible as the one in the title.
hope that makes sense...
in general i appreciate the straightforward language of moneo's book.
(though Jencks was talking more about the 1900-50 period)
nice Medit.
"In this painstaking analysis of an apparent architectural syntax, the author offers a fresh interpretation of one of the canonical works of the Brutalist movement--the Stirling and Gowan Leicester Engineering Building, completed in 1963. Responding independently to one aspect of a theme broached by Manfredo Tafuri in Oppositions 3, Eisenman attempts to uncover the precise manner in which Stirling has rewritten the "words" of modern architecture."
--Kenneth Frampton, an introduction to "Real and English: The Destruction of the Box. I." (1974).
The article was first presented in lecture form at Cooper Union in the spring of 1973 and again at Yale during the spring of 1974.
"The thrust of the argument below will be that the Leicester Engineering Building invokes a similar critical and thus, polemical, intention as Venturi, but does so in a different and perhaps less traditional manner--by distorting the form of the iconic structure as opposed to perverting the form of the iconic content, as in the case with Venturi."
"Much of the work of Louis Kahn, which proposes a classical alternative to a modern eclecticism, can surely be seen..."
"...and more recently in the wall decompositions of John Hejduk, destroys it conceptually."
"Real and English: The Destruction of the Box. I" was a (personal) inspirational motivator for a fourth year design (taken through to working drawings) project, Fall 1979. None of the faculty "got" the design--it was like Leicester Engineering meets Staatsgalerie Stuttgart. Hyper Avant. Very distorted iconic structure fucks with perverted iconic content. Then during "working drawings", Spring 1980, witnessed schizophrenic survival of horrific expressway accident, emergency room lobotomy, subsequent two-week drug-inducted coma, and the commencement of a whole new history (where all that remains canonical is a sense of humor).
"Eisenman's Canon..."
Luigi Moretti, Casa "Il Girasole," 1947-50
Lugwig Mies van der Rohe, Farnsworth House, 1946-51
Le Corbusier, Palais des Congres-Strasbourg, 1962-64
Louis I. Kahn, Adler & DeVore Houses, 1954-55
Robert Venturi, Vanna Venturi House, 1959-64
James Stirling, Leicester Engineering Building, 1959-63
Aldo Rossi, Cemetery of San Cataldo, 1971-78
Rem Koolhaas, Jussieu Libraries, 1992-93
Daniel Libeskind, Jewish Museum, 1989-1999
Frank O. Gehry, Peter B. Lewis Building, 1997-2002
Just wait till you read the first few sentences on page 129. Apparently the book it interchangably tragic and comedic.
Odd dyslexical, editorical mistakes on pages 88 and 89 (etc.):
On page 88, the fifth floor is depicted, yet it is labeled and analyzed as if it were the fourth floor.
Likewise, on page 89, the fourth floor is depicted, yet it is labeled and analyzed as if it were the fifth floor.
The mistake is carried through on page 91 where "...the fulcrum for the spiraling movement in the second, third and fourth floors." should actually read "second, third and fifth floors."
Additionally, what is 'interpreted' as a central stair core of the building, is actually a stacked pair of up and down escalators. The stair "core" of the building is someplace else.
And it is unfortunate that the stage set is missed altogether within the 'canonical' analysis, as it would have offered the 'missing link' of clarity to the whole figure/grid development.
Hejduk, wo bist du?
In the Introduction, Eisenman emphasizes the notion of "close reading", yet, with the series of mistakes within (at least) the Palais des Congres analysis, I have to wonder just how closely Eisenman actually "read" these buildings and how much was simply relied upon the student analyses that the book is based on.
metamechanic(fan) asks:
do there have to be ten buildings?
A close reading of Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000 very much discloses a sublimated implicit nth canonical building, videlicet Quondam, a virtual museum of architecture: 1996-. [Elaboration forthcoming most likely elsewhere.]
The stars of Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000, somewhat ironically, are not actual buildings at all, viz. the Palais des Congrès-Strasbourg (1962-64) and the Jessieu Libraries (1992-93). In the Forward, Stan Allen refers to the Palais des Congrès as a "previously somewhat overlooked building." As it happened, Arcadia's 1991 published analysis of the Palais des Congrès became one of the corner stones of Quondam. Was Koolhaas aware of Arcadia's analysis within the Loeb Library at Harvard?
In a geometrically progressive sense, Eisenman describes canonical buildings as designs which themselves manifest a close reading. Albeit requiring a 'photo-finish', Stirling wins the "architect as close reader" award, with many close seconds. Stirling perfected the reenactionary architecturism kick.
While reading/skimming through Ten Canonical Buildings: 1950-2000, I often wish Koolhaas was the author rather than Eisenman (although Eisenman does indeed set a fine stage himself), but, alas, Koolhaas has already designed another nth canonical building, viz. OMA's Patent Office:
"Social Condenser" (1982)
"Strategy of the VoidI" (Planning) (1987)
"Timed Erasures" (1991)
"Loop-Trick" (1987)
"Strategy of the Void II" (Building) (1989)
"Stacked Freedoms" (1989)
"Inside-Out City" (1993)
"Disconnect" (1994)
"Everywhere and Nowhere" (1994)
"Variable Speed Museum" (1995)
"Inertness Modified" (1997)
Tall a& Slender (1996)
Skyscraper Loop (2002)
"Cake-tin Architecture" (2002)
"The End of the Road" (2003)
In 1972, the Musical Heritage Society offered a free recording of Pachelbel's Canon in D Major as performed by the Jean-François Paillard chamber orchestra when you(I) joined their record club. By the late 1970's, Pachelbel's Canon became very popular. Perhaps canons are best when consummately baroque.
Read a novel while enjoying the Schlittenfahrt.
[Close reading really shouldn't manifest intellectual property issues.]
"We understand Le Corbusier's Palais des Congrès in Strasbourg as canonical today primarily because it has sponsored several generations of work on the warped surface. In this case, Koolhaas's Jussieu Libraries confer a retrospective "canonical" status to this previously somewhat overlooked building."
--Stan Allen, 2008
Quondam, 2000.05.06
Chris, read the 'Introduction' and be aware of Eisenman's ongoing oppositional reenactment of Colin Rowe's analytical method (which ultimately reaches farce in the analysis of the 10th canonical building).
One could almost describe Eisenman's whole architectural design career as one oppositional reenactment after another, finally puctuated with bursts of intense originality (like the Max Reinhardt Haus, Haus Immendorf and the Staten Island Institute of Arts and Sciences).
"Take a look at Le Corbusier's Palais des Congres a Strasbourg (1964), and then look at OMA's Hotel at Agadir, the Library at Jussieu, the Educatorium, and then MVRDV's VPRO--a trail of design reenactments."
09/23/04 12:14
cf. 06/30/08 12:58 above
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.