[1] Casabella nos. 359-360: The City as an Artifact
- December 1971, Editrice Casabella. This issue of the magazine was
produced entirely by K. Frampton, who, for the occasion, moved for a
brief period to Milan to work in contact with the magazine’s
editorial staff.
[2] Frank, Suzanne: IAUS: An Insider Memoir,
AuthorHouse AuthorHouse, - 2010; Förster, Kim: The Institute for Architecture
and Urban Studies, New York, 1967-1985: Networks of
Cultural Production, gta Verlag, ETH Zurich - 2017.
A fundamental testimony on the Institute is a documentary produced by
Diana Agrest: The
Making of an Avant-Garde: The Institute for Architecture and Urban
Studies 1967-1984 – 2013. See also: Rispoli,
Ernesto-Ramon: Ponti
sull’Atlantico. L’Institute for Architecture and
Urban Studies e le relazioni Italia-America (1967-1985).
Quodlibet - 2013.
[3]
The magazine «Oppositions: Journal for Ideas and Criticism in
Architecture» is only one, albeit the first, of several
editorial
initiatives that would be undertaken from 1973 by the Institute for
Architecture and Urban Studies.
The Institute's magazine OCTOBER came out in 1976 edited by the art
critics R. Krauss and A. Michelson, and is still available today.
In 1978, under the initial guidance of A. McNair, the monthly tabloid
Skyline was launched, dedicated specifically to events that animated
both the cultural life of the Institute and the New York scene,
complete with announcements, reviews, brief essays, and a calendar of
events.
That same year, publication began of a series of catalogues dedicated
to exhibitions organized by the Institute. A total of 16 would be
published and among these it is worth mentioning those dedicated to M.
Scolari - the first of the series, with an introduction by M. Tafuri,
to A. Rossi, the Texan houses of J. Hejduk, and to I. Leonidov, or
those dedicated to collective exhibitions such as Idea as Model and New
Wave in Japanese Architecture.
From ’81 to ’82, the Institute began publication of
OPPOSITIONS Books. Five of these would be published: the volume Essays
in Architectural Criticism by A. Colquhoun, the Scientific
Autobiography (the very first edition), and The Architecture of the
City by A. Rossi, Spoken into the Void by A. Loos and a translation of
the writings of M. Ginzburg, Style and Epoch. Among the volumes planned
were a second collection of essays by Loos, In Spite of, the collected
essays of T. van Doesburg, K. Frampton, M. Cacciari and A. Isozaki, and
The Sphere and the Labyrinth by M. Tafuri.
Like OPPOSITIONS, the graphics of all the Institute's publications were
by M. Vignelli.
[4]
See B. Colomina, G. Buckley: Clip, Stamp, Fold: The Radical
Architecture of Little Magazines 196X to 197X, Actar - 2011. The volume
contains a conversation and interviews with P. Eisenman, K. Frampton,
M. Gamdelsonas, and A. Vidler.
[5]
The rich collection of magazines assembled by Eisenman, including
pamphlets and original avant-garde documents, from the early 1920s to
the 1960s, is now preserved at the Beinecke Rare Books &
Manuscripts Library of Yale University. See the catalogue published for
the exhibition of the collection by the Library itself: Architecture in
Dialogue: The Peter Eisenman Collection at Yale, Beinecke Rare Books
& Manuscripts Library of Yale University – 2012.
[6]
For the Jersey Corridor project, see P. V. Aureli, M. Biraghi, F.
Purini: Peter Eisenman. Tutte le Opere, Electa – 2007, pp. 56
– 57. Also:
http://www.architectmagazine.com/videos/michael-graves-new-jersey-corridor-project
.
[7]
S. Anderson, CASE and MIT: Engagement, in A Second Modernism: MIT,
Architecture, and the 'Techno-Social' Moment, (Vv.Aa.) edited by A.
Dutta, MIT Press - 2014 pp. 578-651. For the story of CASE see also the
acts of the congress Revisiting CASE, held at the MIT in
2015.
Part of the acts can be consulted at:
https://architecture.mit.edu/history-theory-and-criticism/event/revisiting-case
[8] C. Rowe: Mathematics
of the Ideal Villa in Architectural Review no. xx, March
1947; Mannerism and
Modern Architecture in Architectural Review no. xx, May
1950; both now in C. Rowe:
La matematica della villa ideale ed altri scritti, edited
by P. Berdini, Zanichelli Editore – 1990.
P. Eisenman: The Formal
Basis of Modern Architecture. Dissertation 1963, Lars
Müller – 2003; Italian translation by P. Eisenman: La base formale
dell’architettura moderna, Pendragon –
2009. Vv.Aa.: The
History, Theory and Criticism of Architecture.
Papers from the 1964 AIA-ACSA Teacher Senimar, edited by M. Whiffen.
The MIT Press - 1965. The volume contains essays by P. Collins, B.
Zevi, S. Chermayeff, S. Moholy-Nagy, S. W. Jacobs, S. Anderson, and R.
Banham.
[9] Mentioned in: Frank, Suzanne: IAUS: An Insider
Memoir, AuthorHouse- 2010;
[10] Vv.Aa.:
The New City: Architecture and Urban Renewal, The Museum of Modern Art
in New York - 1967.
[11]
Vv.Aa.: New Urban Settlements no. 1: analytical phase, Institute for
Architecture and Urban Studies - 1969; Vv.Aa.: Another chance for
housing: low-rise alternatives; Brownsville, Brooklyn, Fox Hills,
Staten Island: an exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art, The Museum of
Modern Art in New York - 1973; Vv.Aa.: On Streets: Streets as elements
of Urban Structure, edited by S. Anderson, MIT Press - 1978 ; Vv.Aa.:
Five Architects, Wittenborn Art Book, Inc. - 1972. 1972.
[12] S. Anderson: L’ambiente
come artefatto: considerazioni metodologiche in: Casabella
nos.359-360: The City as an Artifact - December 1971, pp. 71-77,
Editrice Casabella.
It is perhaps interesting to note how interest in the relationship
between cultural facilities and the construction of the physical
environment expressed by Sanford Anderson crosses, albeit in quite
different forms and with other objectives and results, a significant
part of the architectural culture of the ’50s and
’60s,
from an interest in the anthropology of the members of Team X like the
Smithsons, A. Van Eyck, G. Candillis and S. Woods, to the theme of
collective memory in the writings of Aldo Rossi and Vittorio Gregotti,
heirs of the urban analyses of Saverio Muratori and the thinking of
Ernesto Rogers.
[13] P. Eisenman: Appunti
sull’architettura concettuale - Verso una definizione,
pp. 48-57; D. Scott Brown: Il “Pop” insegna, pp.
14-23; K. Frampton: America
1960-1970. Appunti su alcune immagini e teorie della città,
pp. 24-38; D. Scott Brown: Risposta per Frampton, pp. 39-46, in:
Casabella nos. 359-360: The
City as an Artifact - December 1971, Editrice Casabella.
[14] J. Ockman: Resurecting
the Avant-Garde: the
history and program of Oppositions in
ARCHITECTUREPRODUCTION, Revision
n.2, edit by Beatriz Colomina, Princeton Architectural Press
–
1988, pag. 181-199.
[15] P. Eisenman, K. Frampton, M. Gandelsonas:
Editorial statement
in
Oppositions n. 2, The Institute for Architecture
and
Urban Studies – January 1974. «It must
have occurred
to the readers of our first issue that Oppositions present itself in a
similar vein as the so-called ‘Little Magazines’ of
the
twenties and thirties, and it is scarcely an accident since the editors
continue to be admirers of such polemical journals as De Stijl and
L’Esprit Nouveau. At the same time, it is patently obvious
this
is hardly an opportune moment for the spontaneous emergence of that
kind of polemical magazine; the time for this kind of polemical
discourse has passed and we have no interest in resurrecting
it.”
At the end of the next section, after listing the points the magazine
would be structured around, the authors commented, “For us,
the
sum total of these efforts constitutes a new polemical form which is
dialectical in nature rather than rhetorical».
[16] P. Eisenman: Robin
Hood Garden London E14,
Architectural Design n. 42 – settembre 1972, pag. 73
– 92.
[17] P. Eisenman, K. Frampton, M. Gandelsonas:
Editorial statement,
in
Oppositions n.1, The Institute for Architecture
and
Urban Studies – September 1973. «Oppositions is an
attempt
to establish a new arena for architectural discourse in which a
consistent effort will be made to discuss and develop specific notion
about the nature of architecture and design in relation to the man-made
world».
Further on, the authors concluded «[…] our
respective
concerns as individuals for formal, sociocultural and political
discourse will make themselves felt in our joint editing of
Oppositions. The opposition alluded to in the title will first and
foremost begin at home.»
[18] On this topic, see J. Ockman: Resurecting the
Avant-Garde: the history and program of OPPOSITIONS in
ARCHITECTUREPRODUCTION,
Revision n.2, edit by Beatriz Colomina, Princeton Architectural Press
– 1988,
pag. 182.
[19] P. Eisenman, K. Frampton, M. Gandelsonas:
Editorial statement
in Oppositions
n. 2, The Institute for Architecture
and
Urban Studies – January 1974. “In short, what we
are
striving for is the inducement of a number of specific discourses;
namely, the critic of built work as a vehicle for ideas; the
reassessment of the past as a means of determining the necessary
relations existing between built form and social values; the
establishment of a spectrum of theoretical discourses linking ideology
and built form;” the text continued “the
documentation of
little known archival material as a means for advancing scholarship and
thought in the field as a whole; and finally, the publication of
reviews and letters that have a direct bearing on the discourses at
hand. As to the last they seem to us to be primarily twofold: firstly,
an ongoing discourse on the place of physical form in architecture and
planning today; and secondly, the indivisible ideological and
socio-political implications of architectural production as a
whole.”
[20] P. Eisenman, K. Frampton, M. Gandelsonas:
Editorial statement
in Oppositions
n. 3, The Institute for Architecture
and
Urban Studies – May 1974. “[…] we are
more than
commonly aware of the need to justify the existence of a magazine,
which persists in attempting to offer a critical discourse on a subject
matter whose essence and meaning are only too marginal to the basic
interest of the society at large.” Further on “It
has
gradually become clear that we are sharply divided as to the importance
which each of us attaches to the relationship of architecture and
society. […] our respective positions as editors are of more
consequence for the way in which they differ than for what they have in
common. In short, we have become increasingly aware of the
impossibility of writing a joint editorial with the result that we have
come to the resolution that this will our last common effort.”
[21]
In reality, Tafuri, only a few years earlier had already published a
critical essay in English in the catalogue of the exhibition dedicated
to the architecture of Italian Radicalism, mounted in the summer of
1972 at the MoMA by E. Ambasz and entitled Italy: New Domestic Landscape.
Achievements and problems of Italian Design.
M. Tafuri: Design and
technological utopia in Italy: New Domestic Landscape.
Achievements and problems of Italian Design edited by E.
Ambasz, The Museum of Modern Art in collaboration with Centro Di
– 1972.
[22]
Browsing through the indexes of these 4 issues of
«Oppositions» gives an idea of the amazing, and at
the same
time disorienting, variety of positions expressed in the magazine's
pages.
«Oppositions» n. 4,
Wittenborn Art Book, Inc. – Ottobre 1974: Editoriale di K.
Frampton: On
Heidegger; P. Eisenman: Real and English: Robert A.M.
Stern: Yale
1950-1965;
Mimi Lobell: Kahn, Penn, and the Philadelphia School; E. Ambasz: A
Selection
from Working Fables; A. and P. Smithson: The Space in between.
Nella
sezione
Documents: Karel Teige’s
Mundaneum, 1929 and Le
Corbusier’s In Defense of
Architecture, 1929, Introduction
by George Baird; Luigi Moretti: The
Values of
Profiles, 1951;
Structures and Sequences of Spaces, 1952, Introduction
by
Thomas Stevens; Paul Rudolph: Alumni
day speech: Yale School of
Architecture,
February 1958.
«Oppositions» n. 5,
MIT Press – Estate 1976: Editoriale di M. Gandelsonas:
Neo-Fuctionalism;
R
Moneo: Aldo Rossi: The
Idea of Architecture and the Modena Cimitery; A.
Rossi:
The Blue of the Sky;
M. Tafuri: American
Graffiti: Five x Five =
Twenty-five;
A. Vidler: The
Architecture of the Lodges: Ritual Form and
Associational Life
in the Late Enlightenment; D. Scott Brown: On Architectural Formalism
and
Social Concern: a discours for Social Planners and Radical Chic
Architects.
Nella sezione Documents:
The magazine
Veshch/Gegenstand/Object.
Commentary,
Bibliography,
and Translation
by Kestutis Paul Zygas.
«Oppositions» n.6 MIT
Press – Autunno 1976: Editoriale di P. Eisenman:
Post-Functionalism;
C. Rowe:
Robert Venturi and the
Yale Mathematics Building; C. More: Conclusion;
V
Scully: The Yale
Mathematics Building: some Remarks on Sitting; K.
Frampton:
Constructivism: The
Pursuit of and Elusive Sensibility; D. Agrest:
Design
versus Non-Design; Nella sezione Documents: William S. Huff: Symmetry:
An
Appreciation of its Presence in Man’s Mind; Gruppo Sette:
“Architettura” (1926)
and “Architettura (II): The Foreigners” (1927)
– Introduction by Ellen R.
Shapiro.
«Oppositions» n.7 MIT
Press – Inverno 1976: Editoriale di A Vidler: The Third
Typology; W. Seligmann:
Runcor: Historical
Precedents and the Rational Design process; M.
Pawlwy: “We
shall not bulldoze WestminsterAbbey”: Archigram and the
Retreat from Tecnology;
J. Rykwert: Classic and
Neo-Classic; B. Tschumi: Architecture and
Transgression. Nella sezione Documents: i 10
– Commentary,
Bibliography and
Translations by Suzanne Frank.
[23] «Oppositions» n. 8, Paris
under the Academy: City
and Ideology a cura di A. Vidler -Primavera 1978, MIT
Press; «Oppositions» n.
15/16, Le Corbusier
1905-1933 a cura di K. Frampton – Winter/Spring
1979,
MIT Press; «Oppositions» n. 19/20, Le
Corbusier 1933-1960 edit by K.
Frampton – Winter/Spring 1980, MIT Press; «Oppositions» n.25, Monument/Memory
edit by
K. Forster – Autumn 1982, MIT Press.
[24] A. Vidler: Editorial
– After Historicism
in «Oppositions» n. 17
– Summer 1979, MIT Press.
[25] P. Eisenman, K. Frampton, M. Gandelsonas, A.
Vidler: Editorial,
in «Oppositions» n. 9
– Summer 1977, MIT
Press, pg. 1. «[..]
the
ontological bases of contemporary architecture: the nature of its
practice and
the foundations of its formal and technical production».
[26] P. Eisenman, K. Frampton, M. Gandelsonas, A.
Vidler: Editorial,
in «Oppositions» n. 9
– Summer 1977, MIT
Press, pg. 2.
[27]
The vicissitudes of the magazine Assemblage, and in particular those
that would lead to its voluntary closure, became intertwined starting
from the ‘90s with the debate on the emergence of digital
technology, and deserve a thorough analysis that is yet to be made. The
same goes for the editorial products – the magazine,
conferences
and books – on that cultural operation, also begun in the
early
‘90s, that went under the name of «Any»,
and which,
although directed by Cynthia Davidson, had the direct input of Eisenman
behind it. ANYONE Corporation is still operational, and still under
Davidson’s direction and continues to publish the magazine
«LOG», and the series for MIT Press, Writing
Architecture.
[28] M. Hays, Alicia
Kennedy: About Assemblage in
Assemblage n.1 – October 1986, MIT Press, pg. 4-5.
[29] M. Hays: The
Oppositions of Autonomy and History
in «Oppositions Reader: Selected readings from A Journal
for Ideas and
Criticism
in Architecture 1973-1984, a cura di M. Hays –
1998,
Princeton Architectural
Press, pg. XIV.
[30] K. Frampton: On
Reyner Banham’s The
Architecture
of the Well-Temper Environment, in «Oppositions» n. 7
– Winter
1976, MIT Press,
pg. 86-89.