The Inner Logic of Architecture

Here is a research I did before which takes Peter Eisenman’s project as an example to indicate how the architect uses the shape grammar to generate different buildings in different places, but still, keep the identity of the shapes and spaces. In my opinion, the inner logic of Eisenman's project can be concluded as the shape grammar. Form making is a significant and creative act in design. Actually, I feel Peter Eisenman can be looked as an early advocate of computer-aided design, especially with the application of computer-aid design combined with the shape grammar, we can get thousands of possible solutions with the same rules.

But, when Eiseman tries to use the shaping logic to imagine projects, it is always accompanied with function problems. Based on the feedback of the costumer’s, the building costs much more money over the budget, and even run out of the owner’s life savings. It was because that the poor details designed by Eisenman, lacking construction experience. Finally, the owner stated that “I have to admit that the problems with the house are as many as its merits”. That makes me feel Peter Eisenman was also somehow got trapped in structure and function. And that's maybe the reason why his buildings also named “cardboard building”.