"Couldn't care less"

In many ways, Eisenman relates to the modern architects due to his lack of concern for the real and by real, I mean the physical, constructive and site-specific aspects of architecture. He has often designed without a site using his own understanding of what architecture should be, rather than what it is. While his agenda was not a moralistic one, it still was based on a misunderstanding of the world and architecture’s place in it.

An interview in ArchDaily helped shed some light on Eisenman for me and it was interesting to see what he thinks now of his earlier beliefs and how his thinking about architecture evolved. “Thinking about architecture” is exactly what Eisenman felt most comfortable doing and it was only at the insistence of Manfredo Tafuri that he realized he must build in order to become a historically significant architect. Eisenman’s emphasis on the unrealized building through the drawing and the model was so strong that he says he didn’t even visit his buildings for 6 months or a year after they were built.

A lack of concern for site and for the architecture details means that Eisenman is missing a massive point of architecture. Eisenman says, “I'm not interested in Peter Zumthor's work or people who spend their time worrying about the details or the grain of wood on one side or the color of the material on the surface, etc. I couldn't care less". A visit to Santiago de Compostela’s City of Culture of Galicia, will convince anyone that Eisenman’s inattention construction details has consequences. The poor detailing of his collage of materials shows how little he cares- he could have used a more Zumthoric approach to reconcile his philosophy, expressed through drawings with real architecture.

This discussion brings up a point that I personally find overwhelming about architecture: a good architect is a philosopher, theorist, artist, graphic designer, urbanist, historian, politician, salesman and engineer with an understanding of building sciences, materials, social responsibility, cities, climate, soil conditions and poetry. Because architecture must be so many things, many architecture theorist and historians don’t build and architects who build don’t have time for theory. Simply put, most architects aren’t good architects- even the famous ones. Eisenman fails in many of these categories because he doesn’t have time for the details. Eisenman himself acknowledges that “[he has] lost faith that language could be somehow an analogous model for architecture”. While redefining architecture, Eisenman forgot about one of its most important aspects. What he does may be better defined as something other than architecture. Thinking about architecture isn’t enough but neither is architecture without thinking (that would be simply construction).

Stair detail, Kolumba Museum by Peter Zumthor

Kolumba Museum facade, blending new construction with old church

City of Culture by Peter Eisenman, a collage of material