of two renowned architects
"Krier/Eisenman: Two Ideologies," the newest exhibition at the School of Architecture, presents two projects that exemplify the two sides of a great debate in post-World War II architecture.
The show, which will be on view Nov. 4-Feb. 7, looks at the work of two renowned architects, Peter Eisenman and Leon Krier.
On the one hand, Krier's drawings of an ideal village illustrate his deep conviction that architecture is a "relevant" enterprise, existing wholly within contexts -- historical, environmental, cultural and, most of all, human. On the other hand, Eisenman's design for House IV, one of a series of houses he numbered rather than named, epitomizes his attempt to disassociate architecture from all human context.
Robert A.M. Stern, dean of the School of Architecture, describes their differences historically: "In the repudiation of international modernism that followed the social unrest of the 1960s, two schools of architectural thought emerged." One, represented by Krier, advocates a return to traditional forms and classical methodologies and an emphasis on interconnectedness and context in urban planning, said Stern. The other, espoused by Eisenman, seeks to "completely throw aside all sense of architecture as a social enterprise and concentrate on architectural forms," he notes.
Self-described as a "new urbanist" and "traditionalist," Krier says his ideas have long been at odds with the post-World War II architectural establishment, which considered them "nostalgic or slightly out of the world."
Early on in his career, Krier says, he found the academic dogma of modernism stifling. He abandoned formal studies in Germany after only one year. "I left before I felt completely lobotomized," he says. Unable to find a "master" within the academy who would take him seriously, he says, he largely developed his theories alone.
By the 1970s Krier found himself among a growing number of critics who disagreed with the urban renewal dictated by International Modernism, which was taking place in cities all over the world.
"We were all friends," Krier says of his fellow critics, "but our ideas were still vague. We all believed that modernism was finished, but then to get out of it, that's where our ways parted." In the absence of any constructive ideas to replace modernism, Krier notes, he became an advocate of traditional forms.
Krier dates the schism between himself and Eisenman to this period, though he recognizes that their differences are deeply rooted in a dogma that emerged from the horrors of World War II. That school of thought of which Eisenman is an adherent, according to Krier, holds that every human endeavor must somehow reflect the tragedy of the Holocaust. The broader ramifications of this philosophy, Krier says, "forever spoiled the classical and vernacular languages."
In his refusal to give up the languages of tradition, Krier was paradoxically considered an iconoclast, and for a long time, he was unable to get projects on which he might demonstrate his theories of harmonious and fully integrated town planning.
In the early 1980s, Krier did get that opportunity when he was invited to lead the planning effort for the town of Seaside, Florida. More recently, Krier was commissioned by Prince Charles to design four villages that conform to the principles of ecological, social and historical harmony they both share. The completed town of Poundbury in Dorset, England, has drawn much attention from urban planners, architects and the general public.
The School of Architecture exhibition will use architectural plans, drawings and models to explore Krier's plan for "Atlantis," an "ideal town" placed in Tenerife, one of the Canary Islands. "Atlantis" was commissioned by Helga and Hans-Jurgen Müller as a place where intellectuals and visionaries might meet to reestablish "the humanistic values that transform individuals into citizens." Krier modeled the town, which slopes from the church at its pinnacle to the ocean, after the American Academy in Rome.
"Mine is not a utopian agenda," Krier says of the effort. In fact, he says, the project never was completed as it was originally conceived because the clients were too utopian. The exhibition has already appeared in 1988 in Stuttgart and Frankfurt-am-Main in Germany and Zurich, Switzerland.
Eisenman's deconstructionist approach to architecture sharply contrasts with the humanism of Krier. While Krier tries to create environments most conducive to human happiness, Eisenman maintains that ideas of security, comfort and shelter have no place in architecture.
From the late 1960s to 1980, Eisenman designed 10 houses to try to distill pure architectural form from the one structure that is the most closely associated with security, comfort and shelter. Eisenman numbered the houses in chronological order to emphasize that they were more intellectual exercises than proposals for dwellings. This exhibition is devoted to House IV, a project that Eisenman completed between September 1970 and May 1971. The work is considered to express most clearly the theories he had formulated in writing.
Before he describes his differences with Krier, Eisenman talks about what they have in common. "We both believe in architecture," he says. "We both believe architecture has redemptive value in society." He contrasts this shared belief to the "cynicism" of some of their colleagues.
Krier, Eisenman asserts, has a fixed idea of the city as an ideal place for people who never change. Eisenman says he doesn't believe that there is one human nature that exists for all times and in all places.
"People thought that the earth was flat; they believed in an 'anthrocentric' world," Eisenman says. As people's knowledge increases, he argues, they evolve and their needs evolve -- one idea of the city does not fit all. "There have always been various strategies and structures for organizing people," he says, and these reflect changes in ways of thinking.
Eisenman credits Freud especially for having changed the way humans think about themselves. "Our buildings must be modified" to manifest our increased understanding of the unconscious, he says. The abstract theorist also acknowledges his intellectual debt to Paul de Man, a major proponent of Deconstructionism.
A longtime New Yorker, Eisenman views his evolving city as most appropriate for evolving humans. In contrast, Krier, the planner of ideal cities, finds New York terrifying, he says, noting he has avoided it altogether on his recent trips to New Haven.
The multimedia installation that makes up this exhibition consists of a full size conceptual model of House IV with original drawings by Eisenman, photographs and a film created for the 1973 Triennale of Milan. The exhibition is being produced in collaboration with the Canadian Centre for Architecture. Louis Martin is the curator and Peter Fianu of Atelier Braq in Montreal is the designer of the house module. The exhibition will travel to schools of architecture in North America.
On Friday and Saturday, Nov. 8 and 9, the School of Architecture will host a symposium at which Krier and Eisenman will meet in a public forum for the first time since 1977, when they debated at Princeton University. The two architects have become renowned for making their differences a matter of public dialogue, and both agree that these public debates provide a valuable public service.
"We have always been debating and talking and doing this in public," says Krier. "We don't agree, but we're still friends. That's democracy."
Noted literary critic Roger Kimball will give the keynote address at the opening of the symposium. On Saturday, leading architects and critics from Europe and North America will present papers in panels related to the four major areas of interest -- and contention -- between Krier and Eisenman: history, urbanism, politics and language. Stan Allen, Kurt Foster, Demitri Porpyrios and Mark Wigley will be among the presenters. Following the panel discussions, Eisenman and Krier will meet face to face to discuss the ideas they share and debate their differences. Vincent Scully, the Sterling Professor Emeritus of the History of Art, will provide the final commentary.
The exhibition will be held at the gallery of the Architecture Building, 180 York St. Hours for the gallery are Monday -Saturday, 10 a.m. -5 p.m.
The symposium is free and open to the public, but pre-registration is required. For more information, contact the School of Architecture at (203) 432-2288, or visit their website at www.architecture.yale.edu.
-- By Dorie Baker
T H I S
Bulletin Home
W E E K ' SS T O R I E S
$18.1 million NIH award will fund proteomics center
'Ask! live' offers online access to reference librarians
Two sets of twins have cross-country fans seeing double
Exploring New Scientific Vistas at Yale University
ENDOWED PROFESSORSHIPSHolford appointed as Bliss Professor in EPH
Morse named to Dudley chair in engineering
Ruddle designated as Paul Professor in EPH
Engineering alumni ponder the field's future
Tetelman Fellow describes engineering's role in drug development
Cosby to take part in Teachers Institute benefit
Exhibit explores differing ideologies of two renowned architects
Physicist offers 'Yogi Berra' guide to quantum world
Iroquois singer, workshops highlight tribute to Native American culture
NSF grant to Peabody Museum will help bring Machu Picchu to life
Religious divide is topic of former senator John Danforth's talk
Works capture pain and joy of life in Africa
MEMORIAL SERVICESCampus Notes
|Visiting on Campus|Calendar of Events|In the News|Bulletin Board
Yale Scoreboard|Classified Ads|Search Archives|Deadlines
Bulletin Staff|Public Affairs Home|News Releases|
E-Mail Us|Yale Home Page