The Structuralist Debate
Conceptual Architecture (1969-1974) between Formalism and Ideology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59490/footprint.19.2.7809Abstract
In 1967 structuralism underwent a theoretical acceleration, establishing its scientific basis through linguistics and semiotics, which allowed it to question its metaphysical and anti-historical premises through its critique of anthropocentrism, and it began to enter into relations with other disciplines, including architecture.
Peter Eisenman’s interest in the conceptual began with the various versions of his manifesto ‘Notes on Conceptual Architecture: Towards a Definition’, published between 1970 and 1974; in all these texts, he speaks of formal universals, deep structures, conceptual structures and sign systems capable of generating meaning.
The Conceptual Architecture was immediately criticised by Diana Agrest and Mario Gandelsonas, who denounced this structuralist appropriation as an ideological consumption of theory. From 1974 onwards, Conceptual Architecture began to show signs of weakness, but it was only after the critique by Agrest and Gandelsonas, which questioned both its assumptions and its entire intellectual trajectory, that Eisenman's theoretical agenda evolved towards a new, hermetic and unknowable code: the exact opposite of what had been advocated.
References
Agrest, Diana. ‘Design versus Non-Design.’ Oppositions 6 (1976): 45–68. Republished in A Semiotic Landscape: Proceedings of the First Congress of the International Association for Semiotics Studies, Milan, June 1974 = Panorama sémiotique: actes du premier congrès de L’association internationale de sémiotique, Milan, juin 1974, edited by Seymour Chatman, Umberto Eco, and Jean-Marie Klinkenberg. Mouton, 1979.
Agrest, Diana and Gandelsonas, Mario. ‘De la semiologia, los objectos perversos y los textos ideologicos.’ Summa 32 (1970): 73–74.
Agrest, Diana and Mario Gandelsonas. ‘Critical Remarks on Semiology and Architecture.’ Semiotica 3 (1973): 252–271.
Agrest, Diana and Mario Gandelsonas. ‘Semiotic and Architecture: Ideological Consumption of Theoretical Work.’ Oppositions 1 (1973): 93–100.
Barthes, Roland. ‘L’activité structuraliste.’ Lettres nouvelles 32 (1963): 71–81. Republished in Essais critiques. Éditions du Seuil, 1964. English edition: ‘The Activity of Structuralism.’ Form 1 (1966): 12–14. Republished in Critical Essays. Northwestern University Press, 1972.
Chomsky, Noam. Syntactic Structures. Mouton, 1957.
Dosse, François. Histoire du structuralisme. Vol. 1, Le champ du signe, 1945-1966. Éditions La Découverte, 1991.
Dosse, François. Histoire du structuralisme. Vol. 2, Le chant du cygne, 1967 á nos jours. Éditions La Découverte, 1992.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘The Formal Basis of Modern Architecture.’, PhD diss., University of Cambridge, 1963. Facsimile reprint as The Formal Basis of Modern Architecture. Lars Müller, 2006.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Mini-Museum.’ Progressive Architecture 49 (1968): 171.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Building in Meaning.’ Architectural Forum 133 (1970): 88–90.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Notes on Conceptual Architecture: Towards a Definition.’ Design Quarterly 78–79 (1970): 1–5.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Dall’oggetto alla relazionalità: la casa del Fascio di Terragni.’, Casabella 344 (1970): 38–41.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Object to Relationship II Casa Giuliani Frigerio: Giuseppe Terragni.’ Perspecta 13/14 (1971): 36–75.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Notes on Conceptual Architecture: Towards a Definition.’, ‘Appunti sull’Architettura Concettuale. Verso una definizione.’ Casabella 359–360 (1971): 48–58.
Eisenman, Peter. “From Golden Lane to Robin Hood Gardens; Or If You Follow the Yellow Brick Road, It May Not Lead to Golders Green.” Architectural Design 42, no. 9 (1972): 557–573, 588–592.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘House I, 1967.’ and ‘House II, 1969.’ In Five Architects. Eisenman, Graves, Gwathmey, Hejduk, Meier, edited by Peter Eisenman, Michael Graves, Charles Gwathmey, John Hejduk and Richard Meier. George Wittenborn & Company, 1972. Republished, Oxford University Press, 1975.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘From Golden Lane to Robin Hood Gardens; Or, If You Follow the Yellow Brick Road It May Not Lead to Golden Green.’ Oppositions 1 (1973): 27–56.
Eisenman, Peter. “Cardboard Architecture/Castelli di carte. Due opere di Peter Eisenman.” Casabella 374 (1973): 17–31.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Cardboard Architecture.’ A+U Architecture and Urbanism 35 (1973): 177–184.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Notes on Conceptual Architecture II A.’ On Site 4 (1973): 41–44. Republished in Environmental Design Research: Fourth International Edra Conference, edited by Wolfgang Preiser. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, 1973.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Conceptual Architecture: from the Perception of Form to its Hidden Meaning.’, ‘Architettura Concettuale: dal livello percettivo della forma ai suoi significati nascosti.’ Casabella 386 (1974): 25–27.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Conceptual Architecture (II): Double Deep Structure I.’ A+U Architecture and Urbanism 4, no. 39 (1974): 83–88.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Notas sobre arquitectura conceptual: estructura profunda dual.’ In Arquitectura, historia y teoria de los signos. El Symposio de Castelldefels, edited by Tomás Llorens. La Gaya Ciencia, 1974.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Real and English. Destruction of the Box I.’ Oppositions 4 (1974): 5–34.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘Conceptual Architecture. From the Perception of Form to its Hidden Meanings.’ In Contemporanea. Incontri internazionali d’arte, edited by Achille Bonito Oliva, Paolo Berretto, Giuseppe Bartolucci, Alessandro Mendini and Umberto Eco. Centro Di, 1974.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘House III: to Adolf Loos and Bertolt Brecht.’ Progressive Architecture 55, no. 5 (1974): 92–98.
Eisenman, Peter. ‘PostFunctionalism.’ Oppositions 6 (1976): i–iii.
Foucault, Michel. ‘Qu’est-ce qu-un auteur?’ Bulletin de la Société française de philosophie 63, no. 3 (1969). English edition: ‘What is an author?’ In Textual Stategies: Perspective in Post Structuralist Criticism, edited by Josué V. Harari, Cornell University Press, 1979.
Gandelsonas, Mario. ‘On Reading Architecture.’ Progressive Architecture 3 (1972): 68–87.
Gandelsonas, Mario. ‘Linguistics in Architecture.’ Casabella 374 (1973): 17–31.
Gandelsonas, Mario. ‘Neo-Functionalism.’ Oppositions 5 (1976): i–ii.
Gandelsonas, Mario. ‘Semiotics as a Tool for Theoretical Development.’ In Environmental Design Research 2, edited by Wolfgang Preiser. Dowden, Hutchinson & Ross, 1973.
Gandelsonas, Mario. ‘Linguistics, Poetics and Architectural Theory.’ Semiotexte 2 (1974): 88–94.
Gandelsonas, Mario. ‘The Architectural Signifier.’ In A Semiotic Landscape: Proceedings of the First Congress of the International Association for Semiotics Studies, Milan, June 1974 = Panorama sémiotique: actes du premier congrès de L’association internationale de sémiotique, Milan, juin 1974, edited by Seymour Chatman, Umberto Eco and Jean-Marie Klinkenberg. Mouton, 1979.
Krauss, Rosalind. ‘Death of a Hermeneutic Phantom: Materialization of the Sign in the work of Peter Eisenman.’ A+U Architecture and Urbanism 112 (1980): 189–219 (written in June 1977). Republished under same title in Peter Eisenman, House of Cards. Oxford University Press, 1987.
Markuzon, Vladimir. ‘An Attempt to Redefine the ‘Language of Architecture’ in terms of Sematics.’, Architectural Association Quarterly 4 (1972): 41–48.
Patin, Thomas. ‘From Deep Structure to an Architecture in Suspance: Peter Eisenman, Structuralism, and Deconstruction.’, Journal of Architectural Education 47, no. 2, (1993): 88–100.
Reichlin, Bruno and Fabio Reinhart, ‘Die Aussage der Architektur. Werk-Umfrage über Architektur und Semiotik – Teil 1.’ Werk 58, no. 4 (1971): 242–54, 269–70.
Reichlin, Bruno and Fabio Reinhart, ‘Die Aussage der Architektur. Werk-Umfrage über Architektur und Semiotik – Teil 2.’ Werk 58, no. 6 (1971): 384–99.
Reichlin, Bruno and Fabio Reinhart, ‘Die Aussage der Architektur. Werk-Umfrage €uber Architektur und Semiotik – Teil 3.’ Werk 58, no. 10 (1971): 682–92.
Tafuri, Manfredo. ‘Design and Technological Utopia.’, in Italy: The New Domestic Landscape: Achievements and Problems of Italian Design, edited by Emilio Ambasz. The Museum of Modern Art, 1972.
Tafuri, Manfredo. ‘L’Architecture dans le Boudoir: The Language of Criticism and the Criticism of Language.’ Oppositions 3 (1974): 37–62.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Andrea Canclini
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
