I am Guilty

Eisenman describes modernism as a “tendency is to presume architectural form to be a recognizable transformation from some pre-existent geometric or platonic solid... Here, form is understood as a series of fragments—signs without meaning dependent upon, and without reference to, a more basic condition.”

As I look around studio at the majority of people’s models, including my own, I notice that the majority of us have begun with little programmatic boxes that are the “perfect” sizes for all of the many programs we have in our high schools. (Although, in our defense, a high school does have numerous of programs and, at first, it was quite daunting.) Innocently, we cut little boxes and arranged/stacked them together on site as the way we best saw fit.

But, have we forgotten?? All of the years in undergraduate when we did all of the experiential studies, diagrams, and so many models! I think we were all a little overwhelmed by the program and making sure that the square footage was so perfect, but we need to remember why we are in this profession. I can’t speak for everyone, but, personally, one of the main reasons I wanted to become an architect was being able to create spaces that have unique experiences that will be remembered. We need to remember a little bit of our design innocence and put it back into our designs.

Conversely, Eisenman defines Post-functionalism as “a term of absence. In its negation of functionalism it suggests certain positive theoretical alternatives—existing fragments of thought which, when examined, might serve as a framework for the development of a larger theoretical structure—but it does not, in and of itself, propose to supply a label for such a new consciousness in architecture which I believe is potentially upon us.”

I think we are stuck in a “modern” mindset and need to develop our designs passed “the product of some oversimplified form-follows-function formula.” Although, Eisenman is critical of the form follows function ideals, I think he understands its significance but wants us to layer a palimpsest of ideas to help create a unique experience intended for our specific site. He loves to compare architecture to language:

 “It is this condition of displacement which gives rise to design in which authorship can no longer either account for a linear development which has a “beginning” and an “end”—hence the rise of the atemporal—or account for the invention of form—hence the abstract as a mediation between preexistent sign systems.”

We can’t forget the design process and allow it to help us fuel the design. Process and design should integrally build off one another. I know I am guilty of getting caught up in this game of finding the perfect solution of the best combination of program and square footage, but, after reading this passage, I think I need to re-examine the design and instead of over-calculating every move, try to create the best experience for the students, teachers, administration, and visitors. I need to start discovering what happens as programs begin to blend together and see how that informs the design and journey through the space.