Eisenman concludes (in 1984):
Therefore, to propose the end of the beginning and the end of
the end is to propose an end of beginnings and ends of value-
to propose an ~other "timeless" space of invention. It is a
"timeless" space in the present without a determining relation
to an ideal future or an ideal past. Architeture in the present
is seen as a process of inventing an artificial past and a
futureless present. It remembers a no-longer future." [end]
brian concludes (in 1999):
i think this means that there might be a thing or issue called-
architectural "literacy" -about which the reading of buildings
consists of a knoweldge system of material culture. that is
why, architectural and culturally, i think it is significant
to focus on the mundane buildings- in order to read the built
environment. places like fast-food restaurants, gas stations,
powerplants, ports, industrial ruins, in opposition to what is
considered "great Architecture" and great Architects.
steve replies:
i think it is important to note the 15 year differential between the two
about texts-opinions. Despite its erudition, Eienman's text is very much
also an attack on post-modern architectural design as well as propaganda for
his own "brand" of design (at that time). it is somewhat ironic that brian
receives an inspiration, a way of looking at today's built environment, from
Eisenman's 1984 text that may indeed be exactly opposite to what Eisenman
proposed 15 years ago. to more fully understand Eisenman's text it is
necessary to know Tafuri's texts as compiled in _The Sphere and the
Labyrinth_, particularly the notion of (classical) language being dead.
[unfortuanately, Tafuri's big example of dead classical language is/was
Piranesi's Campo Marzio, and it is there that Tafuri is entirely wrong,
which by extension undermines Eisenman's argument as well.]
brain, you are and have been looking to understand a design language that is
almost entirely ignored by the design profession, and that is (i think) the
greatest value of your work. at this point, be careful not to confuse your
own issues with other texts that may or may not apply. your own originally
is probably your greatest asset.
the above was more of a specific reply, and for a more general reply to
Eisenman's end-beginning-end text see www.quondam.com/1999/3/0259.htm --
there you will find a "design of a house 1983" accompanied by some real
schizophrenic text written by my brother (which is coincidentally a perfect
(non)reply to Eisenman) plus a small detail of my former living room. the
living room photo is merely incidental, but the plan and the text are there
precisely to be "read" with regard to classic(al) "literacy" (or the
end-beginning-end thereof).
mark wrote:
In the opening pages of Civilisation & Its Discontents, Freud makes some
interesting remarks about the nature of memory and psychic structure in a
metaphorical pasage about the architectural history of Rome. Malcolm Bowie
once memorably suggested that this could provide the basis for thinking
Freud as town planner!
another general steve reply:
see www.quondam.com/1999/2/0136.htm and follow the "eros and death" link to
encounter another "metaphorical pasage about the architectural history of
Rome" courtesy Piranesi (who knew exactly what "classic" architectural
literacy was all about, not to mention his knowledge of the dead language of
Latin).
Therefore, to propose the end of the beginning and the end of
the end is to propose an end of beginnings and ends of value-
to propose an ~other "timeless" space of invention. It is a
"timeless" space in the present without a determining relation
to an ideal future or an ideal past. Architeture in the present
is seen as a process of inventing an artificial past and a
futureless present. It remembers a no-longer future." [end]
brian concludes (in 1999):
i think this means that there might be a thing or issue called-
architectural "literacy" -about which the reading of buildings
consists of a knoweldge system of material culture. that is
why, architectural and culturally, i think it is significant
to focus on the mundane buildings- in order to read the built
environment. places like fast-food restaurants, gas stations,
powerplants, ports, industrial ruins, in opposition to what is
considered "great Architecture" and great Architects.
steve replies:
i think it is important to note the 15 year differential between the two
about texts-opinions. Despite its erudition, Eienman's text is very much
also an attack on post-modern architectural design as well as propaganda for
his own "brand" of design (at that time). it is somewhat ironic that brian
receives an inspiration, a way of looking at today's built environment, from
Eisenman's 1984 text that may indeed be exactly opposite to what Eisenman
proposed 15 years ago. to more fully understand Eisenman's text it is
necessary to know Tafuri's texts as compiled in _The Sphere and the
Labyrinth_, particularly the notion of (classical) language being dead.
[unfortuanately, Tafuri's big example of dead classical language is/was
Piranesi's Campo Marzio, and it is there that Tafuri is entirely wrong,
which by extension undermines Eisenman's argument as well.]
brain, you are and have been looking to understand a design language that is
almost entirely ignored by the design profession, and that is (i think) the
greatest value of your work. at this point, be careful not to confuse your
own issues with other texts that may or may not apply. your own originally
is probably your greatest asset.
the above was more of a specific reply, and for a more general reply to
Eisenman's end-beginning-end text see www.quondam.com/1999/3/0259.htm --
there you will find a "design of a house 1983" accompanied by some real
schizophrenic text written by my brother (which is coincidentally a perfect
(non)reply to Eisenman) plus a small detail of my former living room. the
living room photo is merely incidental, but the plan and the text are there
precisely to be "read" with regard to classic(al) "literacy" (or the
end-beginning-end thereof).
mark wrote:
In the opening pages of Civilisation & Its Discontents, Freud makes some
interesting remarks about the nature of memory and psychic structure in a
metaphorical pasage about the architectural history of Rome. Malcolm Bowie
once memorably suggested that this could provide the basis for thinking
Freud as town planner!
another general steve reply:
see www.quondam.com/1999/2/0136.htm and follow the "eros and death" link to
encounter another "metaphorical pasage about the architectural history of
Rome" courtesy Piranesi (who knew exactly what "classic" architectural
literacy was all about, not to mention his knowledge of the dead language of
Latin).