A new semester, a new project. Our first project focuses on doing precedent analysis of any of the 13 listed modern homes (below) and then creating a 3-D model derived from what we learned in our analysis.

1. Schroeder-Schrader House, Gerrit Rietveld, Utrecht, Netherlands, 1924-25
2. Villa Stein, Le Corbusier, Garches, France, 1927
3. Lovell Beach House, Rudolph Schindler, Newport Beach, CA, United States, 1926
4. Tugendhat House, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Brno, Czech Republic, 1930
5. Fallingwater, Frank Lloyd Wright, Bear Run Creek, PA, United States, 1936
6. Villa Mairea, Alvar Aalto, Noormaku, Finland, 1939
7. Stretto House, Steven Holl, Dallas, TX, United States, 1989-92
8. Margaret Esherick House, Louis Kahn, Chestnut Hill, PA, United States, 1961
9. Villa Dall'Ava, Rem Koolhaas, Paris, France, 1991
10. E1027, Eileen Grey, Roquebrun-Cap-Martin, France, 1924
11. Bianchi House, Mario Botta, Ticino, Switzerland, 1971-73
12. House VI, Peter Eisenman, Cornwall, CT, United States, 1972-75
13. Double House, MVRDV, Utrecht, Netherlands, 1997

Objective: Use our analytical insight to find spacial order and interesting organization from our chosen precedent study to then become a starting point for an open 3-D spacial model.

In beginning this process, an assigned reading of Colin Rowe and Robert Slutsky's Transparency: Literal and Phenomenal is required. After full comprehension of the text, we must create twenty or more trace overlays of the inherent compositional and organizational qualities of our precedent as stage 1 preliminary work.

My chosen modern home is House VI by Peter Eisenman, which I found to be a suitable home to connect the reading with. Rowe and Slutsky give us a 3D and 2D understanding of literal and phenomenal transparency in their theoretical essay. From my understanding of the subject, literal transparency is a basic understanding of transparency, where materiality enables layering to be seen and interpreted visually, while phenomenal transparency is a more comprehensive process where a reorganization of geometries, often contradicting each other and thus creating ambiguity, is cognitively perceived in  multitude of interpretations.

In cubist paintings, layering with a clear use of foreground, middleground, and background create a naturalistic sense of space that does not leave much imagination as to where these elements are positioned. Paintings that use a shallow and abstract space to organize elements create better illusions which can generate more interpretations of placement behind the viewing plane. Glass in architecture creates literal transparency, so that glass curtain walls then give a plain view of where the spaces are behind it. Phenomenal transparency can occur in architecture with arresting juxtapositions. There must be some contradiction of elements, pushing and pulling, and fighting for attention to evoke ambiguity which leaves traces of wonder, and infinite reinterpretations.

House VI is just that. It is Peter Eisenman's play with interpretation of form and function. Columns and beams are designer elements where some are not really functional, openings dictate spaces in unconventional ways, upside stairs highlighting the home's axis give no purpose... It seems transparent on the surface, until it is contradicted, and questioned. Eisenman manipulated what was once a simple cube to what he calls "an object and a kind of cinematic manifestation of the transformational process..." This house is not only a design, but a symbol of the process of design, as function follows form.

I am excited to be working with this house and will check in later with further progress.