"Fixing a Hole": A Commentary on the Architecture of Peter Eisenman

Although the exceptional interdisciplinary nature of Peter Eisenman's architectural theory certainly qualifies him to speak to a broad cross-section of disciplines, his buildings have been repeatedly criticized for their lack of humanity. Perhaps the most flagrant, if tongue-in-cheek instance of the "tyranny of his theory" over the functional and practical requirements of a building occurred when the Wexner Center for Visual Arts, in Columbus, Ohio (1983-89), opened without its art. Few architects have exposed, or excavated, to use his own word, the dark side of architecture as has Eisenman. He speaks of "deconstruction," "repression," "texts," and "between," and his architecture epitomizes "fragmentation," "incompleteness," and, most disturbing, "loss of center." He draws on psychoanalysis and literary theory to explain his designs, and ascribes his own experience as a Jew living in New York to the ever-present sense of "dislocation" in his work. Like many twentieth century architects, Eisenman has invented a language which captures the angst of contemporary societies. <br>
&nbsp;<br>
Eisenman's efforts to weave language and architecture is as old at least as architecture, but especially prevalent in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Frank Lloyd Wright adopted metaphors, similes, analogies, and other linguistic devices to eradicate the separation between words and building, ideas and forms, to achieve some ideal connection beyond the building itself. Le Corbusier's infamous line that "A house is a machine for living in" exploits a similar strategy, but with greater shock value. And Louis Kahn's writings verge on the poetic, if somewhat arcane. In each case, theory preserves and expresses a personal vision of architecture. And in each case, the building's intrinsic aesthetic values ultimately dominated any theoretical position, establishing their strong bond to the history of architecture.