Kindle Peter Eisenman ä Kindle Ten Canonical Buildings 1950 2000 PDF Ø Ten Canonical ä

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

10 thoughts on “Ten Canonical Buildings 1950 2000

  1. says:

    To my understanding there are two major theoretical undertakings Eisenman has undertaken as a thinking architect The first is an attempt to deprive buildings of any kind of symbolic meaning and instead substitute a formal poetry The second represented in this work is his development and application of a method for systematically analyzing modern architectureThe ten buildings it should be mentioned are not his own There is a relatively short theoretical passage at the beginning followed by a series of meticulously drawn diagrams The diagrams actually do serve to justify many of the exciting and abstruse points he makes in the passage Further one becomes well acuainted with his basis for architectural analysis which I am convinced is a powerful tool to have handySome of the issues addressed did not seem powerful or pertinent For example while structure seems an obvious candidate for an important design element that can be systematically analyzed some of the distinctions he makes in this category seem minute and hairsplitting I am tempted to believe that such abstract perfection is indeed worthwhile even if no one really notices Nonetheless my design conscious tells me that it would best off to restrict attention to the differences that make an impact

  2. says:

    One of the first books I purchased whilst a student at the Architectural Association in London in the Eighties was a book called Five Architects Peter Eisenman was one of those architects and his drawings and buildings in the book struck me at the time as both sophisticated intriguing and thoughtful architectural explorations Eisenman has built an impressive career as a teacherintellectual as well as architectbuilder His theoretical approach engages with philosophical thought and enuiry and occasionally he publishes his latest musings I find reading Eisenman is a challenging and difficult task at the best of times When I do make the effort to 'study' and penetrate his texts i find the ideas implausible and not worth the effort of having to plough through his often turgid text for example ''The idea of ambiguity lodges itself in a dialectical notion of eitheror and determinateindeterminate which as decidable characteristics possess a supposed clarity which belies any need to examine their repressions'What i do understand of his work is best expressed in the drawings The drawings in this book are exuisite; analytical studies of ten buildings by eminent modern architects the book earns it's three stars on the basis of these drawings

  3. says:

    I may not be the only one to find this book a little heavy handed Eisenman takes great pains to stuff what seem to be his favorite buildings into already well established theoretical frameworks of his undecidability indexicality textuality and the results are sometimes surprising sometimes trite The theoretical clothes fit best in relation to Eisenman's generation Libeskind Gehry Rossi and less so with earlier generations Moretti Corb Kahn and those with whom he disagrees Venturi It's simply difficult to believe in the intentionality of the theoretical engagement Eisenman projectsThe formalism Eisenman maintains throughout this book is admirable rarely veering into uestions of context or culture Eisenman's entire oeuvre theoretical and architectural is dependent upon such autonomy essential in his mind to maintaining the integrity of architecture as an intellectual pursuit This book fits cleanly within his overall trajectory and exploring its applicability to the work of others is a worthy exercise if somewhat clumsy in execution