Eisenman characterized one home as “a dumb little apartment” in New York City with “a kitchen that’s not comfortable for two people to be in at the same time.” He characterized the other as a “wonderful old New England house, made of stone, brick and tile,” which was an 18th-century mill and is built over a waterfall. “No architect has ever worked on it,” he said. “You couldn’t design like this. It happens over time,” as successive owners altered it to meet their needs. — Katherine Salant, Washington Post
Remember the rumor circulating around that Rem Koolhaas lives in a prim-and-proper 19th-century home? Eisenman is apparently no different. He sat down with Katherine Salant of the Washington Post to talk about his home life.
Why does Eisenman choose such banal and vernacular digs? Because at the end of the day, he just wants something cozy. The irony of this is truly dumbfounding.
3 Comments
I love this part:
Of that era in his professional life, Eisenman said, “I was a cerebral cat.” But his work and life changed drastically in 1976 when he was working on House X, the biggest and most complex in the series. After Eisenman spent the summer participating in the Venice Biennale instead of meeting the deadline for construction drawings, the client fired him. In ending the job, Eisenman recalled: “The client said, ‘You are not interested in my house. You are interested in designing a house and not building a house.’ I was crushed. I realized something’s very wrong with my life. I was up in the clouds and I needed to change. I was in Jungian analysis for 20 years,” 1976 to 1996.
"No architect has ever worked on it,” he said. “You couldn’t design like this. It happens over time,” as successive owners altered it to meet their needs.
Eisenman gives the nod to Stewart Brand:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8639555925486210852#
http://www.amazon.com/How-Buildings-Learn-Happens-Theyre/dp/0140139966
It's almost like that article is saying it's more important to design a building specifically for the site to meet the needs of the occupants than to explore some concept which leaks, is barely usable, and wears out prematurely. No need to stop innovating just keep in mind it is going to be a building.
This is part of the reason why I tend not to get off on many of the great architects. Mies was the same way. Why does everyone else need it so bad if you don't even want it yourself? Eisenman is a great architect, and I'm glad his early houses were built, but his client was right. His early work was really best suited to paper, and that was what it was designed for. I've worked on more than a few houses that resemble Eisenman's current residence. Actually this makes me feel better about my own career.
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.