The Last Romance: Architecture Without Human

Part 1.   Eisenman's Logic

"Radom" seems not an accurate word to describe Peter Eisenman's design.  Contrarily, Eisenman's design process is so rigorous that makes it like a mathematics game. Before we look closely into his design, let's turn our eyes to a new definition in the 1970s - Shape Grammar.

"Shape grammars in computation are a specific class of production systems that generate geometric shapes. Typically, shapes are 2- or 3-dimensional, thus shape grammars are a way to study 2- and 3-dimensional languages."                                 --------Wikipedia

A simple example can help us understand it better.

Figure 1

Figure 1 shows the 21 distinct spacial relations specified using the similar right triangles. If a given condition is that one and only one edge of a triangle equals one and only one edge of another triangle, all the 21 different shape relationships of these two right triangles have been listed above.

Figure 2

Circles in figure 2 are called marks which used to mark the variation/generation targets. Only one target can exist in one step of variation/generation. After you finish the step and before you jump to the next step, this circle will move the latest varied/generated object (the triangle in this example). 

From (a) to (u) in figure 2 are the 21 variation/generation movements (grammars) which corresponded to the 21 relationships of two right triangles.

If we apply the grammar (c) repeatedly, then we will create a shape as figures 3 shows;

If we apply the grammar (e) repeatedly, then we will create a shape as figures 4 shows;

If we apply the grammar (g) repeatedly, then we will create a shape as figures 5 shows;

If we apply the grammar (l) repeatedly, then we will create a shape as figures 6 shows;

If we apply the grammar (n) repeatedly, then we will create a shape as figures 7 shows.

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Figure 7

Some advanced examples, with two initial shapes and one or more grammars, show us the infinite possibilities and the consequences beyond imagination.

Since we understand the core of the shape grammar, then let us look back at Eisenman's design. I think his House VI is the best instance for us to understand his design logic - his specific grammar. He started House VI from only a cube, but used more than 10 grammars to go forward step by step, which included but not limited to Translation, Scale, Rotation, Incision, Extension. Each step was independent and only responsive to the target which it applied to. 

Similarly but easier, in Guardiola House (1986-1988, not built), Eisenman degraded his grammar from 3 dimensional to 2 dimensional. Most of the design steps were variated and generated on the plan view and elevation. In brief, his grammar is:

1. Introduce the initial shape - a square,
2. Scale and translate to right bottom,
3. Duplicate the plan, underlie the original, and translate a certain distance in the direction of left bottom,
4. Rotate the duplicated plan to a certain degree.
5. Carve the inner overlap area.
6. Duplicate and translate the carved part.
7. Scale.

As the following picture shows, after applying the same steps of grammar to both the plan and the elevation, a 3-dimensional geometry with complicated spaces had been created. 

Part 2.   Eisenman's Pursuit 

Mathematics is autonomic. Once the axioms have been confirmed and acknowledged, all the theorems then can be deduced only by the axioms and the logic. All the derivative and evidentiary progress is totally independent and does not relate to anything else which is outside of the math field. In other words, all the theorems and mathematics solutions of mathematics problems only rely on mathematics itself. Although human found "Parallel lines never intersect" thousands years ago, this theorem would still have existed there even human never exists. This extreme independence of mathematics allows people to study them - anywhere, anytime and under any situation - and get the same consequence. 

Comparing to Mathematics, Architecture seems not pure enough to be independent of the program, communication, society, politics, psychology, etc. When we have an answer to a mathematics problem, we can even deduce backward to the original condition. But we cannot do the same thing for architecture. Imagine that we know a final architectural design, and we also know the principles the designer followed, but we still cannot deduce backward the status quo where the design began.

So what Eisenman wanted to do was to abandon those dependent design principles such as site, program or human experience, but replace them with a pure, independent principle - Shape grammar. Ideally, all Eisenman's designs can be totally deduced backward from the final consequence to the initial shape (normally a square or a cube or grids).

Part 3.   Architecture without human

If human never exists in this universe, will mathematics exist? I guess you will say yes. "1+1=2" and "Parallel lines never intersect" do not have any relationship with human activities.

If human never exists in this universe, will physics exist? I guess you will say yes. Light still has the fastest speed in the universe. Gravity still decreases in the ratio of the square of the distance. 

But if human never exists in this universe, will architecture exist? 

I'm not sure about your answer. But at least Eisenman has tried to tell us romantically: YES! Architecture can also be autonomic and does nothing with the human.