'

CHAPTER3

CARDJOARD_ARCKITECtURE
House 1and House 11

"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 buldings 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 termin architectural discussio11 {as Baroque and GotMc were when first usd), is used here deliberalelyasan ironic

1\
\

and preemptive symbol for my argument.

rdb..,rd is used to questlon the nawre of our perceptioa ol realily and thus tbe meanings ascribed to realty. Thus 11 Is
~~l so mucha metaphor describing the forms of the building but rather lls lntenllon. for example, models are oflen made of
ln!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?
rdboard is used 10 shih the focus fromourexistlng conteption of fonn jn an aes!hetic aod funoiDnaLconttxUo..uoo
;t,Waon 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 andal 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 complexset 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!-lke 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

a..,,q.,..,,

f.<-.

,r.

more abstract and fundamental nature. The purpose of this procedure was to provide an
wreness o formal infonrumon latent in illl)' emironment thal pre' 1ously \\'35 unavailable
to the individual.
One aspect of the first ~tep was an attempt to reduce or unlo.1d the existing mcaning
of the forms dictated b function
that the forms could be ~ren as a series of pcimitive
marks, This was auempted through a manipufation of the relationship ofthe color.
and shape ofthe built forms. While fonns are used lit Hous~ 1 to shift our visual pcrception
and conception of such fonns; rom 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 ne utraty of"caidboard." The whilc color and lhe Aat texttl!e

ffi
(..~JJ

~ f. &
J

,., ._

"

t~,

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 markng devkes. Traditionally.
when white was uscd. "indO\\' mulons 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 st1uctural 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 columnsare in fuct non-s1roctural. Wheu this is uaderstood, a lirst step has beco taken to unload.
albet in a ,ery primltivc way, their stmctural meaning. While the apparcnt physical fact is
the same whether they are loadbearing 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 location 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.
The second ntc:nlion this work called for taking these marks and deploying them
in such a way so as to make a complete formal structure and to show that thisstmcture wa~

? ,,.<!'>
1

ti' tl'-11'..'
N v~

or

a. priman consideratlon tn

ttlt design of the whole building. To focus on 1h1~ required a

further sh1ftin the prlmJr} conccplion ofa11 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 overarticulated so that it would become a domiuant aspect of the building. One mearl!;

(J

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'ldbeams 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 >ossible 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 o f 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. 1f 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 se: 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 relationship of open to dosed space, of the center to the peri meter. and so forth. This information

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 indivdual 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 individua l 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.
Ths 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 universal in thc sensc that such formal concepts as solid and void. centro1dal and linear, pJa.
nar aricl volumeLrlc are prim itive notions which cannot be Tcduced and which exist In a
state of opposition in any spatial concepton. This secoud leve! indudes, in 3ddition to a set
of irre<luble 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
spccic 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 explit 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 mplied space. This contrast makes one intiall)' aware ofthe prcsence of another level offormal structure. Second
the two sets of fonnal notations whch are discernible (one reads as incomplete. the other
asymmetrical) beca use one can conceive of a symmetrica 1and complete structure of fonnJ
regularitics, are supcrimposed. These riotatlons. which are variations of the form ula
ABABA. appear in the actual environment in the following way. The rst 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 or the diagonal volumes ar be
~

..

\
..'".

"

1.

~ \'>

l! ~ ~ ~

~~
~ ~h
1

<.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 on ly thrnugh an embed<led relationship between t\Vo forma!
structures in the actual environment. Although one may perceive these two Struclures

m1

~1e actual environment, one is unable to perceive the deep structure bcquse g[its e:ristenceJ~ \u.:6\~NC 'b~ "! \i ~

in the environment as an irregular Cesta lt. These actua l sbuctures tbus have a common
relationship in a deep struct11re which is not perceptible but which can be underslood after

( )J/KIJ/'{I{

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, th ere 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 ma rking
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

tJ

this formal stm~ture to a <leep structure.

Sucb a conceptioo o design atlempts to change the primary intention of architectural
form from the perception of space to underst anding 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 sbucture, 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 sbucture approximates a purely formal
environm ent, 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 perception 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.

TYRICt

20

jl

'

.lJ..
! . 1 1
10

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$-

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, a1chilccls
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 lh:'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 stnictu re 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 cen ter cond.ition is arbitra1il) defined by a square volume. From this tbe original square is divided in to
nine squares. These squa res 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 squ are 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 .o f 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 ofplanes 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
oppos ition 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 following from the in itial deployment of lines, planes. and 1olumes, 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 diagonally 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 o 1he columns. The column grid also acts as a neutral referent 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 o 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 positve or sold. This can be seen in figures 3.17-3.21. Tis layering 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 rela
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 calectic 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 compression ofthe usuall) diferentiated 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 upperlevel 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 othe movement.
'fhc use of yet another formal titralegyf bivalcncy"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 mportmt distinc
tion must be made between pcrccptual and conceptual bi.valence. A pgggtua1 b-valenc$ is
one lhat resides in the object it~lf. such as the figureground ;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 whch 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 obect. 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 bivalent 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 o 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 bivalent 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 o a
structural redundancy. Because of our experience with thc particular nature o wood con
struction. we know that a certain positioning of either loadbcanng 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 1ead 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. lfetthtr the coh1mn or .....rr s,s..ems an
be read as nonstructural 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 bivalency 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 rcerence for readings along tbe "olumes in a nonh-sou th d1rection and across the
volumts in an eastwesl 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 wth 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 3C1 1hat th<.' bottom edge o the walls m
figures 3.24 and 3.25 s tep up, both A (ond itions approach zero hc ighL Thu s whle both A
marks are similar, 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 rom 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 s hfted. and vice ve1sa. By virtui: of this, eaclt wall is givcn n bivalent wC!igh ting. In
one sense there io a dematenalizino" 9f1hc nhject, not for aeslhetk rcasons but rather to

focus on a set ol !onn al notauons.

The fo~des act in a similar 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 a~ade
httom<$ a series of paralltl layt'l'S.
The essence o 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
lclhand "olwne is pressed into the plane of columns. and l>ecausc of the "Y it is articu
as variams of a planl'. The fact that
lated. causes borh the volume and columns to be
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 througl 1 ll1em se1vt'S to ftnther rcu'orce thc id<.>a of com
pn:>sion of the lefi 'Jume 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 o 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. Wble thc diagonal shif
forces tite two la)ers apart, now a pressurl;' is c.reated for the individual to reacl the m as onc.
Thu there ~ a mutation of Lhe whole objeet, ;n expansion o the m arking srstem
irol" merel~ a numbers game to a stalcment of thc potential o ''llrious elements 10 be
infu<t'd \\1th dual and implied fC'adings tbrough a stries oftransformation~. Cornpresson
4nd dongation charge thc s pace ' 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 1structure.
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 ts particular relationship to a deep srructure from which 1e ctual form is uriderstood.
tn 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 pwely aesthetic 01' polemk?l reasons ra1her than to lnvesrigate inherent

fonnal p1inciples. TI1e suggestion i lhis work ls 1J1~1 the1elatio11snip 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 structtral 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'efS~ they are

-~--

potentially an in tegral pan of the design process. In addition, Uie

d iagrams actas a ~et ofjnstructions; they attempt to make legible the relationships which

~t-k. /11r/l.~e.

:k
"r.,. . : '/,,,_h.~ 4,,._ ""
'7 '~"'" .,,

~e.

an individual m"y nol

Tiwy pro\ide what can be called a conceptual framework for
this understanding.
Finally. it may be in thc nature of arch.itectue to present the relatiomhip between what is actual i11 an environment and sorne form of deep structuJe. lt may be a fundamental actin
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.
lf there is an inherent meaning implied or con trolling any initial dtoice and subsequent

J1i,j;t,,,,,_,

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

for space as l11e SLtbject o 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.