Columbia University (1960] .Intro«. Architecture. Cornell University (1955] ‡ M. in Architecture. ‡ Peter Eisenman born in 1932.S. ‡ B..

who set out to return systematically to the found architectural conventions that had developed in the 19th century. not only were concerns abandoned but there was a reaction against technology. the environment and community. .INTRO« ‡ By the end of the 1960s a small group of architects appeared. ‡ As a result.

to try to explain form and find rules of its use beyond those that relate to purely functional. . practical and physical needs.INTRO« ‡ One insight into this break with the concerns of the 1960s was expressed in a study published by the architect Mario Gandelsona ‡ in Galdesona¶s words its aim was to find cultural meaning in architecture.

INTRO«. . The article presented for the first time in the united states the work of 2 young architects Peter EISENMEN & Michael Graces who had at that time devoted most of their architects to teaching this article argues that in spite of there small scale. their work marked a new approach to architecture. Among his examples one is Eisenman's house (196971).

. In their abstraction. they approved more like threedimensional analysis of buildings than buildings that had come out of an analysis . ‡ Eisenmen¶s projects approved to be the most abstractly related to Corbusiers purism.Intro«. The buildings looked like a formal analysis.

.ft. Budget : $ 80.000 Sq.Richard Falk Build Area : 2.000 Site Characteristics: It is situated on top of a 100 acre site with broad panoramic views on 3 sides which extend for 20 miles. & Mrs.Project specifications House-II ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ Location : Hardwick Vermount 1969-71 Client : Mr.


House II Hardwick. Vermount (1969-71) a second house for an academic couple. was designed and built at the ebb of a number of radical tendencies that shook established ideas and practices of architecture. not only in USA. . but also in Europe and Japan.

. and the transition from the extroverted summer life to the introverted security of the neither fireplace.House II ‡ House-II demonstrates this new direction in a most extreme and forceful manner ‡ The architects describes the project brief as an attempt to simulate the presence of trees and hedges which were non-existent on the barren hilltops through the sequence of columns and walls.

construction technology.‡ The house appear to be an intricate spatial configuration resulting from a number of formal operations on geometrical elements devoid of any external reference to function or to site. but they constitute basic shape objects to relate to space constraining systems. such as shifting square volumes along a diagonal given line while ignoring function. . The elements used are the column and the wall. such as grids and p-lanes to be organized by elementary design operations. symbolism and iconographic value.

. Eisenman has argued to justify his disregard for function and meaning in house-II that the programme of the house is known an infinite set of combinations for its solution in physical terms its importance to me is that it allows the concern for function to be reduced. There is new meaning available in the particular arrangement of its functions.Clearly the results are so abstract that one has the impression that the house has nothing to do with a real building cardboard architecture said Eisenman.

There is a passionate. But there is also a failure of imagination in this contempt for program and function a failure not of an imagination of forms. . but a failure of that most human of all human activities. spirit in this purposely meaningless building that seeks to identify a pure core of architecture.

000.Project specifications The Wexner center for the visual arts and fine arts library. Location Client: Built area Budget : Columbus Olio (1983-89) Olio State University : 140. : $ 43.ft.000 Sq.000 .

5 degrees asked. The central circulation spine of the new building resolves the 2 existing geometrics with two grid 12. .Site Characteristics: Building connects the Columbus community with university community by the introduction of a new central axis. The building presents a minimal intervention between two existing and adjacent campus buildings.

It was a unanimous jury decision that awarded the contract for the scheme in an invited international competition. as Eisenman saw it. this project on the campus of olio state university is an intricate complex of construction and landscape. . indeed.Intro««. rather than a regular institutional building. an archeological earthwork.

. The site is tipped up and down. The space between the gate and the campus oval is filled in by a ¶bosque·. Laurie Olio designed a project loaded with contexture meanings and rich in symbolic references. In this collaborative project with the landscape architect. The project broke with the repose and regularity of the traditional pastoral ¶American Campus·.Eisenman. toward and away from the building.

MATERIALS: Physical materials used for the synthesis are lines of colour ² coded granite. real sandstone. plinths that contain ornamental grasses are employed in the project not as abstract or decorative landscape elements. but a design objects to produce an abstract representation of the praise. . Flowers. pre-cast concrete red pavers. cobbles that run across integrally coloured. shrubs. Cafinkes and linden trees underline the slightly banked intersections of the grids. large tilted.

a choral hall.The contents 140. a film centre. studio spaces. a block box theater. The wexner centre·s most memorable image is of its rigorous coupling of architecture with landscape. music practice rooms. a graphics library. in a manner that revives the formal geometric integration of garden and building of 17th century European palaces. performance and viden. a café a bookstore and administration spaces. . storage. exhibition space. lasers.000 foot square building houses the experimental arts of computers. There are permanent. temporary and experimental exhibition galleries.