'

i CHAPTER3

CARDJOARD_ARCKITECtURE

"House 1• and "House 11" were first drafted in November 1969 and April 1.910, respeclively. They were redrafted and necessarlly

condensed for later publlcation.

In thls edition the substance of the ideas remains the same as in the firstpublicalion. The only lntenlion in the changes

whlch have been made here has been to clarify thelrcontent.

Al presenl most buíldings are burdened by their very description as "museums" or "countty houses" with a weight of

cultural meanlng whlch Is here meant to be neutralized by the opposition of an equally loaded term. "Can!boan!;' usually a

derogatory term in architectural discussio11 {as Baroque and GotMc were when first us•d), is used here deliberalely asan iro·nic

and preemptive symbol for my argument.

ú rdb..,rd is used to questlon the nawre of our perceptioa ol realily and thus tbe meanings ascribed to realíty. Thus 11 Is

~~l so mucha metaphor describing the forms of the building but rather lls lntenllon. for example, models are oflen made of

úln!board, so the term raises the quesrion ofthe lonn In relallon to lhe proress ol design: fs lhis a building or is il a model?

úrdboard is used 10 shih the focus from ourexistlng conteption of fonn jn an aes!hetic aod funoiDnaLconttxUo..uoo· 1\ ;t,Wañon ot form as a mar1dn o o The use of cardboard anempts 10 dlstingulsh an aspee! of these forms

\ o::;a a~, gned 10 acl as a signa! ora message and al the same lime the representation of them as a mmage.

wc=ni f; used to slgnlfy the result of the particular way of generating and transforming a series ol primitive integer

-k:f ·;s· ;s mu-a m&re complex set ofspeciflc reJatlonshlps wbich become the actual building. In thls sense mdboard Is used

a ~::e ~riailudeployment of colomns, walls, and beams as they define space In a series of thin planar, vertical layers.

ltJl! ~s: iQld;¡ "::<al mogn!tion of 1he actual surfaces as tardboan!-líke and thus lnsobsrantlal but rather1smeant to slgnify

iz~ Jr ;;d'5'1?,pio-1 .. hlth Ts produced by the particular con~guration.

;;m ;;iiccc:- •-= ~-d iloose 11 are experiments whith attempt tv translale these concepts lnto a possible worting

wt?we• i:::l 1 ~ !2rirOCi.'T'r!fiL

House 1 and House 11

more abstract and fundamental nature. The purpose of this procedure was to provide an

¡¡w¡¡reness oí formal infonrumon latent in illl)' emironment thal pre' 1ously \\'35 unavailable

to the individual.

ffi One aspect of the first ~tep was an attempt to reduce or unlo.1d the existing mcaning

of the forms dictated b» function "º that the forms could be ~ren as a series of pcimitive a. ·f.<-. (..~JJ marks, This was auempted through a manipufation of the relationship ofthe color. t~, ,r . .,,q¡.,..,, ~ f. &J ,.,,._ and shape ofthe built forms. While fonns are used lit Hous~ 1 to shift our visual pcrception

u • ~ and conception of such fonns; írom the perception of a real. lwgible, white volumetric

(

architecture to the conccp1lo11 of an abstract, colored planar space; from the pokmk of the "whitc" ofthe 192o's to the neutraüty of"caidboard." The whilc color and lhe Aat texttl!e

are closer toan abstrae! planc than saya natural wood ora cut sione wall. Also the very fact

tl1a1 the white planes carry a specific meillling related to a known stylc (the lnternational

Sl)'le), makes thcm less likl"I)' to tlke on ncw meaning. lt should even be casier to reduce

their existing meamng. a> \\ill be sttn below, when thcy are placed In a different context.

To this end. color and material "ill be used in House ras ·markíng• devkes. Traditionally.

when white was uscd. "indO\\' mulüons aad haadrails were painted blad. .. aud planes of

primary or pastel colorq were introduced for aestheric effect In House l. white or black

planes are used simply as opposites in a formal strucrurc whlle grey or clear glass is

considered as neul ral.

A second aspee! of thc iniLial markiug process in volved lhe st1·uctural elements- the

columns and bea111~. They appear iuitially lo be rather convcntional parts o( a s~tt"tural system, Howe"er. upon doser inspection this is round not lo be lhe case. 1t is actuaUy 1101

possible to determine how the structure functions from looking at Uu: columns and beams.

Ali ofthe apparent struclu1'3l apparatus- the exposed beams, the freestmding columns­

are in fuct non-s1roctural. Wheu this is uaderstood, a lirst step has beco taken to unload.

albeít in a ,·ery primltivc way, their stmctural meaning. While the apparcnt physical fact is

the same whether they are load·bearing or nor, their meaning h3S changed because they are in fact not load-bcaring. and thus the intention lmplied in rheir use in a particular loca­

tion must now be considered in a different way. Once one has undcrstood that they are 1101

structural one musr ask what are tbcy? Why are they where they are? 13ke them away, or

d1a11ge their shape, 3nd what have you got?

IL can also be asked. why go 10 nll this trouble? lfthe columns nre supposed to be 11011-

, structural, why not just cut them off at the top so that we know immediately by the fact tllat

tlley do not continu" to the ceili11g that they are uot colmnns but merely a uotatlon for

some other purpo~c? Bul cutling Lhe columns short of the ceiling would in fact do the

opposite of "h;it is intcnded. lt would give thc columna further mcaning by ob\'ioUSI)' call­ing attenrion to itSelf ;is a non-supporring column, whercas il is supposed to be merely one

mark ora primitive element 111 a formal scheme. m The second íntc:nlion or this work called for taking these marks and deploying them

? 1,,.<!'Ñ> in such a way so as to make a complete formal structure and to show that thisstmcture wa~

ti' tl'-11'..' a. priman consideratlon tn ttlt design of the whole building. To focus on 1h1~ required a

N v~ further sh1ftin the prlmJr} conccplion of a11 environmcnt; this lime from a concern merely

CAR080A1t.l> AACHrrttru ltl

for marking elements and their meaning to a concern for tbeir relationship in a fom1al

structurc. To force this shift in House J. th<! formal strutture was in a sensc over-strcssed

or over·articulated so that it would become a domiuant aspect of the building. One mearl!;

to over-stress Sud1 3 Slructure was 10 sugges~O simulta1~ Structures which overey and

interact These were based on a simple combination oftwo pairs offonnal references: planes

~1d volumes on the one hand , frontal and oblique relationships ~ th~ ol;lier. _

The two formal structures are marked by the columns and beams. These are not

deployed in a regular pauern such as a colurnnar grid, wh ich in such a condilion could be

seen as a neutral referent, nor are tbe¡• to he seen as the residue of such a gricl but rather

thcy are intenlionally placed itl an apparc11tly random ordcr. 111is intcntion can be

explained i11 the following way. ln the lirst instance, the space is concelved of as a la~ering

O!_plaiding (cross hycring) of planes. 111c rcctili11car columus al'ld beams are placed so tba1

they will read as a residue ofthese planes. Conversely. the ro1IDd columns are used to mark

the intecrsections oftwo plaues, whicb migbt possibly be read as joined atthis in tersection.

thus forming volumes if the columns were square. The round column preve1lls lhe ¡>ossi­

ble interpretation of columns as residual ·corners" of volumes. In the second instance, the

tbree columns (afourth is ma rked in the Hoor). because oftherr particular disposition. also "

mark a diagonal system. They can be interpreted in the following way. Lfboth pairs of round

columns and bcams wcrc sccn to spa11 thc cntirc space {fig. 3-5) lhey would read. despite

the roundness of the columns, as part of the frontal layeiing. By taking away two columns.

a round one in the space and one attached to the waJJ (fig. 3.6) as well as the portions of the

beams connecting to these columns, an implied diagonal is created.

Thus the intcmion was lo use thc columns and beams to mark two systems without

giving preference to either. Together the counterpoint of these two formal systems, the

frontal planar Jayering and the diagonal volumetric shifl, overlaid and interacting with one

another, mal<e it more difficult to read a sit1gle coherent formal system directly from thc

physical fact. Rather they reinforce the intention thal these marks. in order 10 be under·

stood, first require disengagement of the two systems from one another. an activity which

takes place in the mi11d.

Such a marking of formal relationships, in the actual en"ironment. has usually been

the extent of the ard1itect's concem with formal systems. But the presem work tak•'S one

further step. 1 f we analyze the nature of meaning in an¡• specific context we realize it has

two aspccts. Th<' first is meanini!, which is ico.nographic and svmbqHc and derives from the ~ .

relation of the fom1 to some reference whid1 is e>.ternaJ to it. For example, the partkular

juxtlposition of solids, columns, windows, and railings in Le Corbusier's Villa Savoye is

intended as direct recall of the superstructure of the modem ocean liners, and with it all

the implications of the seá: discover)'. newness. a:nd Liltimately marts conqucst of nature.

But 1111derlyi11g that level of meaning there is another aspect. itself a potential source of l, information, which conditions any iconographic interpretation; it is derived from, and is in

a sense inherent in. the structure of the fomL Por example, the same juxtaposition of solids,

voids, and columns at Poissy gives us cues to emry. sequence of movemenl, the relation­

ship of open to dosed space, of the center to the peri meter. and so forth. This information

-

(J

,

1

•

• • . ..

1 ·: •

• \ 1. ·~ • . "

'" . .

~ \'> l! ~ ~ ~

~· ~ 1

~ ~h

can be said to be the product of the interaal structure of form itself. While formal rda­tionships can exist in an cnvironment ata real. actual leve!. where an indivídual is aware of thcm through bis senses-perception, hearing, touching-thcy can also exist at

another leve! in whkh, though not seen, they can be known. This second level is inhercnl in any cm~ronmenl and is used by an individual wh~ther or not he is aware ofit. TI1is scc­ond leve! conditions the way we perceivc the fust level by providing a structUie for the visual cues which exist in the lirst ~ And smce it has lhe capacity to be known, we must be concemcd with how th1s happens. lf we mark both these levels in thl? environmenl they can

~ explkitly perceived and understo;;;i. This is the third aspect ofthe work- a shift in focus ~from an actual structiirc toan implied structure and to the relationship between the two.

Thís second leve! may be thought of as a range of abstract and more universal formal regularitics 1hat exist in any conception of physical space. Thcse formal regul;irities are uni­

versal in thc sensc that such formal concepts as solid and void. centro1dal and linear, pJa. ~

nar aricl volumeLrlc are primitive notions which cannot be Tcduced and which exist In a state of opposition in any spatial conceptíon. This secoud leve! indudes, in 3ddition to a set of irre<luáble formal regularities, the transformations of these regularities necessary 10 produce a specific environmcnt Transfonnations may be described by such formal actions

as shcar. compression, and rotation lo produce a new leve! of fonnal information in any spcciñc physical envlronmcnt. Again thc marking is used to signa! the interacrion betw~en these two levels. U1e physical cnvironment can then be secn not only in its functional and iconogrnphic dimensions but also in 1ts formal one-as being generated from a series of

abstract formal Tegularities that may be described as a deep structure. These transformations and reg11larities have 110 substantial exislence but are mcn:ly a description ofthis second leve! of formal relationships, In other words, a possible model for an architectural deep structure.

One means of making the deep structure in a particular environment expliát is to force an mdMdua.l 10 expcricncc the emironment as a notational system thar has a rttagniz· able relationship 10 a deep structure. This is attempted in House J in the following mauner .

b'i First, thc series offormal relationships that are marked in thc actual spacc (the parallel layers 1 and diagonal •olumes) crea te a contrast between actual space and ímplied space. This con­

trast makes one inítiall)' aware ofthe prcsence of another level offormal structure. Second ¡ the two sets of fonnal notations whích are discernible (one reads as incomplete. the other

asymmetrical) beca use one can conceive of a symmetrica 1 and complete structure of fonn¡J regularitics, are supcrimposed. These riotatlons. which are variations of the form ula

ABABA. appear in the actual environment in the following way. The ñrst of these corre­sponds to the formula A.e.AA. (lig. 3.3) and the second to the formula A.B,A,BA. (fig. 3~ the middle terrns B.A. being common to both. When they are overlaid on one another ·h,

underlying sLructure is seen as comprcssed, but wbcn they are slipped apart in the mmd it re\'eals itself 10 be a simple symmetrical structure.

The basis for creating this relationship of actual structure to deep structure is ow~

pnm1uve. lt depends on an initial shifi along a diagonal to create two implied squ;ire ,-oi. umes tfigs. ). t and ) . 2). One square may be seen as shifted out of the other on~ce '= <o

th.lt the notations both for the plaid frontal layering and íor the diagonal volumes ar be

<.UD&OilDARCJ!lT!CTllR!

seen as deriving from one. more basic, system. Tbe diagonal is reacl .il<S a resolution of the

two directions in theplaid, or the plaid is read as the resull of the diagonal shift. Thus the

deep stmcture is revealed only thrnugh an embed<led relationship between t\Vo forma!

structures in the actual environment. Although one may perceive these two Struclures m 1 [~1e actual environment, one is unable to perceive the deep structure bcquse g[its e:ristence J~ \u.:6\~NC 'b~ "! \i ~

in the environment as an irregular Cesta lt. These actua l sb·uctures tbus have a common . .

relationship in a deep struct11re which is not perceptible but which can be underslood after ( ¡)J/KIJ/'{I{ T YRI Ct both structures have been perceived.

Any physical environment has this second or dccp stmclural leve] , which not only has

the capadty to convey iufonnation but does so continually ata less-than-conscious leve!. lt

exists without being consciously desjgned, and there is a conceptual capacity within each

individual to recejve this information. Ma rking the deep stn:icture in the acrual environment

may bring it to a more conscious leve!. As was sa id above, there is no reason or meaning

intended in the use of this particular fonnal strategy. The tvvo overlaid systems are neither

good nor bad in themselves. They are in tended merely to exemplify the logic inherent in any

formal structure, and tlle potential capacityofthatlogk to provide an area o[new meaning.

In summary, three shHis were attempted in Honse l. Ead1 conc.emed an attempt to

separate the actual physical environment from its traditional relationship to fuuctlon and

meaning. to neutralizc the influence ofthese on the viewer. TI1e first concerned the marking tJ ofthe elements ofthe actual environment; the second concemed the marking ofthe formal T structure in the actual enviromnent; the third conc.emed tbe marking of the relationship of

this formal stm~ture to a <leep structure.

Sucb a conceptioo oí design atlempts to change the primary intention of architectural

form from the perception of space to understanding the relationship of ma:rks in that space

to what is called here a deep structure. The capacity to understand, as opposed to e~'J)erience,

this intention does not depend entirely on the observer's particular cul tural background,

his subjcctive perceptions, or l1is particular mood at any given time, all of which condition

his usual expe1ience of an actual em~ronment, but rather it depends on bis innate capacity

to u nderstand formal structures.

Such a position introduces. as a primary concern of architectu.re, the use of physical

form as a marking to produce, as it were. a new mental image of an environmenl different

from that which we are actuall y seeing. The deep sb·ucture, when it is combined vvith the

perceptible physical reality. has the potential, ifit is structured in a precise fashion, to make

available a new leve! ofinfom1ation. The more tbis sb·ucture approximates a purely formal

environment, the less traditional the meaning it possesses, and thus the closer it is to an

environment that might be a vehide for such new information.

To do th is. fom1 must be fii:st c.onsidered to be potentially separable from existing per­

ception and conception, alld second, it must be considered as capable of changing or raising

the leve! of consciousness by proposing a critiqu~o[ the existing situa tion in architecture.

-

1-1-J.30 9'!".Y!-.5!:"8Z\, '"..!:R

t.I• "i.'IJU"t- : ~fJli - ]ICr 1

tf!"'!tO"t. ig;;- '"il. n.tst.Jc:ww.W o-¡Jl'ir-i$-

1

•

1 1 j l 1 '

.¡l¡J.¡. ! . ¡1 ¡1

10

u r

,

20 •

CAll.D&OARD ARC-HrTECTURf

House 11 In the past, eve.11 when Jjm.ited by the const:raints posed by a1<ailable mate.dais, a1·chilccls soughl to use structural clements in ways other than those dictated by pitrely fi.mctional

requirements. Mo<lern technology provided ard1itecture with new means of conceiving of space. In a sense, space was no Jonger necessarily Jimited or defined by structure. lt was

possible to examine such elements as the colunm a nd wall as other than the resolution of

functional problems. This was espedally true with respect to the use of the Joad-bearing wall; the column became a primary str1.1ctural elemem and, a long with the non-load-bearing

wall, a potentially irmovative formal dcvicc. Ho1.1se l was concerned 11~th using columns and waJ!s to mark a set of formal re!a·

lionships. Continuing from this. House lf is concerned 11~th a systematic development of

two ways in wbicb information may be conceived of and dcrived from thc intcraction of fom1al relationships.

To a1t iculalc lhí:'sc ways of concciving and producing formal information in House JI. certain fonnal means were chosen, each involving an overloading of the object witb

forma 1 references.

This <levelopment can be seen first from a s.et of analytic diagrams (figs. 3.7-3.21). TI1ese

diagr3ms describe the development of a set of abstract fonnal propositions as a possible con· dition of an m1del'l)~ng stnicture and their initial lransformation in to a spec.ific enviroiunent.

Any given coordinates of spacc can bt• dcscribcd as linear, planar, or volmnctric. Thc

coordina tes of a ntbic space are described b)' its edge or its ce111er; the edge composed of

lines or planes, the center by a linc ora volumc. In this partintlar house thc center cond.i­tion is arbitra1il)• defined by a square volume. From this tbe original square is divided in to

nine squares. These squares are markcd by a matri.x of sixlcen square columns. The first

six diagrams present one set of conditions lJOssible from this initial definition. l he selec­tion of the conditions, as opposed toan)' other condition of such a deep structur.e, is al this

stage of work. arbitrary. Figure 3.8 shows the gridded nine square arrangement Figures

3.9. 3.10, and 3.11 select and isolate three possible conditions of that gridding: as a rna.trix of sixteen columns. as a series of four planes, or a.s a series .of three voh1mes seen as solids

between the planes. It is to be noted that the planaT and volumetric conditions are linear and directional in opposing axes. While there are obviously other combinations of planes and

volumes. lhese choscn oppositions suggest one prior condition of an underlying structure which when transfonned will produce a level of imp~ied or virtua l inronnation in tbe actua l

space. Thus while the grid of ni ne squares can be seen asan underlying structure. the axial

opposition of planes and volumes will be seen to create a transformation of this structure.

The assurnption here is that these initial S]Jatial oppositions in some way pem1it the articu­lation of a virtua l relationship bctwccn the aciual c1wironmcnl and undcrlying slntcturc. (How or wh)• this happens is a subject for future work.)

The fmther diagrams concern the development of one possible transformation, from this tmderlying structure toan actual environment. There was a second transformation fol­

lowing from the in itial deployment of lines, planes. and 1•olumes, whid1 was a dislocation

in the form of a diagonal shift. (This can also be seen in tbe dotted ouiline of two bound-

-

('f':IC'•~

mg volumes in figures 3.8-3.12). n1is shifi created the potential for developing another set

of oppositions in the actual environment by articulating two squarcs, one dcfined by the

planes and the second defined by the matrix of co!UJ1llls. The panicular location of

columns, walls, and volumes produced by the diagonal shifi: creates two datum rcferences.

lt is possible to read the shear walls as a neutral referent, especially when seen from tbe

north , whereupon the columns can be rcad as the residue of these planes, transposed diag­

onally from them (fig. J-15). i\lternatively, the columns can be read as a neutra l referent,

especially when seen from thc south, whereupon the shear walls may be read as having

been shifted from the plane oí 1he columns. The column grid also acts as a neutral refer­

ent for a second set of formal readings involving a diagonal cross-layering. One diagonal is

artkulated by the volumes of the upper leve!, which step up and back from left to riglit.

TI1is movement crosses at righi angles fue diagonal established by the shear walls, wbid1

repeat and reduce in length as they move along the diagonal from lhe full-length shear wall at the north. Because oí this diagonal shifl the implied planes formed by the columns and

bearns cut through the volumes in such a way as to create a condition in space where the

actual space can be read as layered. The layering produces an opposition between the actual

geometry and an implied geometry: between real space which is negative or void and

implied volume which is positíve or solíd. This can be seen in figures 3.17-3.21. Tiús lay­

ering also produces a plaiding in both axes. lmplied solid volumes can now be read on

either sidc of the original column datum. The residual volumes are furtltcr arliculated by

the location of the roof skylights, which are placed directly over them in the north-south

axis (fig. 3.22).

Other ways were explored to create a dialectic oran opposition between an actual re la·

tionship and an implied relationship in tlie environment using tbe column and tlie wall, and the wall and the volume. First, the columns, 'valls, and volumes were treated as cqually

weighted in terms of disposition and number. and second. they were seen as variants of

one abstract planar systcm. In othcr words, througb a formal device using tbe planeas a

fulcrum, a cüalectic was created between the real column, wall. and room volume, and that

which is implied line, plane, and solid. In this context, a room volume is seen as an exten·

sion ofthe wall, while a column appcars as a rcsidue ofthe wall. nie deliberate compres­

sion ofthe usuall)• difíerentiated fol'n1al systems-the column system, the wall system. the

window system-into an undifferentiated construct reinforced a condition where iL was

difficult for these conventional architectural elements to be considered individually as

objects; they became merely parts of a total structure of relationships. Tite focus is thus

transferred from t.hc physical object itself to the understa nding of its rclationship to an

underlying structure.

One way to makc someone aware of these relationships is to control the direction of

lus movement in contrast with the direction of tbe architectural space. In House l l. the

columns on the ground leve[ are extended to become implied planes which layer the

ground-level s:pace parallel to the volumes above. ln the upper leve] the colwnns are

extended a1 right angles to the volumes (fig. 3.23), thus layering the space perpendicular to

tbe .-olumes. Tite intention of this extension of the colunms to form implicd planes on the

WDHUD llKMlTlmllU

ground leve! is 10 define someone's movemenl perpendicular to the upper·level volumcs; and on the upper leve), since movement is now parallel and within thc volumes, to define

it by creating layers whkh run couuter lo the major axes oíthe movement.

'fhc use of yet another formal titralegyf bi·valcncy"l-can be seen in figures

3.22 - 3. 30. '1!1-valency is ~ form;tl cond ilion where an eleme1lt 9r a r¡;latjonship \¡¡'l,)l:e~i:Le·

mcuts has two notations. marks, or weightings of rebtivc eauiv;il1:nce. An ímportmt distinc·

tion must be made between pcrccptual and conceptual bi.valence. A pgggtua1 bí-valenc$ is

one lhat resides in the object it~lf. such as the figure·ground ;imGiguity between solid and \'Oid, between wiadow and waU. or sorne of the examples use<! in Gestalt psychology. A con· -ce tual bi-valence is one whích is in the relationshi between 1 ·

ns it may not be perccived in the actual environmenl, but rather may be

understood as a mental constn1ct. In a conceptual bi -valencc, thcre is not necessari ly a11

ambiguity in the perception of 311 ob¡ect. Rather it is through tJ1e particular placement, size,

and numb~r of elements that a rel;itionship between elements may take on an ambiguous

or bi·valent nature.

One way bi-valency can be devcloped is to glve 10 a particular column or wall two nol2·

tions o( a similar character and emphasis so that the specific column or wall can never be hcld in the mind as a single element, but rather ls in a state oí tension between two con·

ceptual relationships. Even though thc perception of the colum n or wa ll may be constan t. the p~rticular juxtaposition of thesc clements may produce an oscillation bctwecn 1wo

equivalent mental constructs. This condition of possible bi·valent readings in the same ele·

nient or relationship of elements provides an oriemation in which the beholder is primarily

concemcd with thc formal relationships and not the elemenl itself.

This was demonstrared in House 11 through what might be ~'t called thc u<e oí a

structural redundancy. Because of our experience with thc particular nature oí wood con·

struction. we know that a certain positioning of either load·bcanng walls or a gnd of columns produces in each cast> a reading of a complete s1ruclur111I systern. lftwo such siruc·

lurnl systems are coupled in such a way lhat both can be 1·ead as structural. thert i< an ob,,.

ous redundancy which forces eacb system to be read in a new wa)'. Jf one system 1s 1tad ¡s

srructural. then tbe olher must be read as belng something else and 'ice v.ma. lf the iwo

have equal importance in term~ of sizc, number. imrn'31. and po.inoP men oo:h an be rcad at lhe same time as elther structural or not. lf etthtr the coh1mn or ... ..rr s,·s..ems an be read as non·structural al an)' time. they then can be secn perlups as m.arics. In House

11 thcse marks ha ve two purposes. First, because oftheir plrncuhr placement they produce

a concepn1al bi·valency between lhe elements themselves and. second. they act as an

implied r1:forence to somc underlying structure.

For example. figures }24 and 3.25 show 2 smes of walls "hich aci as a horizontal

datum rcíerence for readings a long tbe "olumes in a nonh-sou th d1rection and across the

volumts in an east·wesl direction. In figures J.20 and 3.~ 1. a series of walls step down in thc vertical dimensioo as they move se.quentially across the \'Olumes. \Vhcn read wíth the

walls in figures 3.24 and 3.25 thcy take on a bi-valent notatlon. The top edge ofthe walls in figures 3.24 and 3.z5 are at the same height from ground le\•el and can be given 1he nota·

-

non AAA. The top edges of t.be walls in ligures 3.26 :rnd 3.27 step down and thus can be nored from righ1 10 left as A8C. Because of lhe Í3C1 1hat th<.' bottom edge oí the walls m

figures 3.24 and 3.25 s tep up, both A (ond itions approach zero hc ighL Thus whíle both A

marks are s imilar, their int~rpretalion is differe11t, much as the diRercnce in the valuc of

bol and bot-cold and bot·\\arm-lukewarm.

Figures 3.28 und 3.29 show the same sequence of walls as in figure 3.26, again with

two alternate read ings. lf thc mlddle wall of figure 3.28 is read .1s a dan.un. thcn ali olhcr

walb iu the series are read as shil\cd írom that datum. lf the end w:tll is rt"ad as a datum

(fig. 3.29). then ali other walls are read as shifted. In the first case. the middle wall cin be read as A and the two end wall s read off the fulcrum as A, and /\ 2. In the sccond case, the

end '""" is read as A; then Ule o lher 1wo are read as a sequence B and C. Figure 3.30 is

merel) another variation of this thenie

In both examples. one serles of walls l,:. acting as a dahtm for a second series of walls

scen as shífted. and vice ve1·sa. By virtui: of this, eaclt wall is givcn n bi·valent wC!igh ting. In

one sense there io a ·dematenalizino" 9f1hc nhject, not for aeslhetk rcasons but rather to

focus on a set ol !onnal notauons.

The fo~des act in a s imilar capacity in that they 1'1'Cord a nu1l1ber of nolal ions sim tt!tane·

ouSl). ·n1e south fa~de is in a scnse a paradigm of ali vicws. The seis of interna! oppo.5irions

which :ice different and re-enaCled in each fa~ade are most legible 011 thc south fa~de.

Since the building is conccivcd of as a progression [rom outsldc to instdt:< there is no

fa91de. in the ~tmse of a plane ora surface of the bu ilding. which is used to marl< ll1e in te·

rior arrangements. In fact. 1.11 concepbon thcre is a series oflay<'rs mo•;ng from outside to

lnside. Tilis is differenl from the rcadh1g of i11side to out~ide. whlch is fundamental to a

cubist aesthetic. Again. the original diagonal s.hifi prod uces the condHion whcrc lhe ía~ade

httom<$ a series of paralltl layt'l'S.

The essence oí vi<"\ing 1hese layers 1s as another set of contradictions. or bi·\'<llent

readi ngs. For example, on rhc soul h the culunrn grid is bro11ght to tbe outside !ayer. Thc

lcíl·hand "olwne is pressed into the plane of columns. and l>ecausc of the "ªY it is articu·

lated. causes borh the volume and columns to be "ªª as variams of a planl'. The fact that

the shear \\':l lls behind ~re placed in such a manner as to cause 1ne middlc: and righl vol·

ul\l('S to apj)('ar tCl be pmteh ing througl1 ll1em se1vt'S to ftnther rcuú'orce thc id<.>a of com·

pn:>sion of the lefi 'ºJume flatll:ned agamst and caged "ithin the oubide !ayer. But further.

th~ final shear wa 11 to thc rlgh t is the same "idlh as tbe fascia oí the south fa~ade and is

placed in such a way in rela tion to lhc articulation (the way il is cut 011 thc right) of the fas·

cia !'O as to force the most e.\1erior plane to he seen as completing itself "i1h this shear wall

behind. Tu.is Sl'l• upa wa rping or distonion in lhe frontal planc. Wbíle thc diagonal shifí

forces tite two la)•ers apart, now a pressurl;' is c.reated for the individual to reacl them as onc.

Thu• there ~ a mutation of Lhe whole objeet, ;n expansion oí the marking srstem

irol" merel~ a numbers game to a stalcment of thc potential oí ''llrious elements 10 be infu<t'd \\1th dual and implied fC'adings tbrough a stries oftransformation~. Cornpressíon

4nd dongation charge thc space 'vith both positivc and negativc readings wh lch intensify

the indjvidual's experience of the space and hcighten his awareness of its relationship to a

previously unconscious level of forma 1 structure.

lt must be pointed out that this unconscious Jevel, while always potential in any

environme1H, may no! be available or may not be presenl al aJJ. For e~ample, there may be

no graining or implied volume. A wall and a volume may be just that and rto more. 111is

dcpends 011 the design of the specific configuration and the marking in that conliguration

of íts particular relationship to a deep srructure from which ü1e •ctual form is uriderstood.

t n conclusion thE>re are three points which could be made. First, although th~ Renaissance

and the Modero Movemen! were concerned with the implied aspects of architcctural space.

they were often so for pw·ely aesthetic 01' polemk?l reasons ra1her than to lnvesrigate inherent r fonnal p1inciples. TI1e suggestion iñ lhis work ls 1J1~ 1 the1·elatio11snip ofd1e implied aspects of architec1Ural space a11d the.ir potential mearung nee<l re-examination and perbaps redefinition.

The particular way that the formal stmcture is developed tbrough a diagonal shift

manifested in a structt•ral redundancy is perhaps only oue means to make such formal

concepts as compression, elongation. and &ontalil)' become operative. lt remains for

future work t;;-;;amine the nature of the general pri ncipies or architectonic rules Wlderl}'·

ing these relationships whkh might help define a broad nmge of formal structures and

their transformations.

Sec9n<1~ while thj! diagrams whicb attempt to describe thesc relationship,s are analytic, \ \

ne\;~rth'eféS~ they are potentially an in tegral pan of the design process. In addition, Uie -~-- ~t-k. /11 r/l.~e. d iagrams actas a ~et ofjnstructions; they attempt to make legible the relationships which '7 '~"'" .,, an individual m"y nol ~e. Tiwy pro\•ide what can be called a conceptual framework for :k" ., .... : '/,¡,,_h.~ 4,,._ • "" this understanding. r

Finally. it may be in thc nature of arch.itectu• e to present the relatiomhip between what -

is actual i11 an environment and sorne form of deep structuJe. lt may be a ·fundamental actin 1

the making of architecture and _!?eyond a mere fom1alism to take certain !fillUlarities whicb .

~xist in a deep stmcture and present them systematically so that the user is aware of thern. J1i, j;t,,,,,_, lf there is an inherent meaning implied or con trolling any initial dtoice and subsequent

trausformation oí a deep struc:ture, it is a purely formal one. l n House 11 there is a concem

for space as l11e SLtbject oí Jogical discourse. Such a logical sl'ructurc of space aims not to

comment ou the countey housc as a cultural symhol but to be neutr:al with respccl lo ils

existing social meanings.

-