House at 56 Cornelia Street. It is necessary to create a project and an elaborate design strategy of each component before starting a construction of any building. Every design should begin with a well thought-out plan that would maximize the quality of construction. House at 56 Cornelia Street is an example of high-end, modern design, based on the ideas of deconstruction. This design has a complex system of relations between individual parts, characterized by destructive forms. This building has a direct indication of the designers' work on the project. It combines the functionality and concepts that allow the observers and its residents constantly find new meanings and convenience. House at 56 Cornelia Street can be recognized as an object of consumption, but the main purpose of its construction was to create a work of art. The present project is an example of architectural tropes; moreover, the analysis of its structure aims at explaining the main ideas of the Interstitial.
"House 56". The present house design clearly shows the use of architectural paths that separate the individual styles from each other. The house plan is well thought out in terms of the prevailing landscape and the environment. The house at 56 Cornelia Street has a very harmonious and balanced form, thus it differs from other buildings on the same street. If one uses a metaphor of the architectural character for the description of the house, it can be stated that it is a "revolutionary base" or an "uprising monument". Considering the other buildings near this "brick giant", it should be noted that they are inferior to it in terms of architectural aesthetics. The lack of architectural tropes in the design of most homes of this district makes them only the functional parts of the overall architecture of the street. From this, it follows that the "House 56" is the center of the street architecture that protests against monotony and linearity. The building construction is represented by a rectangle. Monolith with metal inserts were the main components for creation of the main framework. The outer part of the building is covered with bricks. The house has 20 windows and 3 entrances, making it very light and airy. Also, the house has 2 floors connected by a staircase of the irregular shape. The second floor is a separate room with a ceiling of the cathedral type. The house has a basement, which is designed as a workshop. Analyzing the overall composition of the building design (Fig. 1.), one can estimate the architect's skills and comprehend the logic of his creativity. Therefore, the house is built taking into account the transmission of visual messages along with the architectural tropes that separate the ordinary design elements from the extraordinary ones. As the photo shows (Fig. 1.), the house has the details from the usual functional architecture, which gradually transforms into a total deconstruction. "House 56" has a defined and clearly visible in the surrounding lines and sharp angles. A well-built rectangle of the building can be perceived in its three dimensions simultaneously, since the adjacent superstructure of the central facade makes it possible to embrace with the eye the entire central part immediately.
The method of the house design changes the conventional architectural codes, well-emphasizing the uniqueness of the architect's tropes. Some details of the structure cause a dissonance in the observer, because they do not fit into the present. Looking at the "House 56" from the outside, everything seems quite ordinary, but soon a retrospective vision reflected in the inversion location of windows and outer bricklayer begins to appear. The relation between the walls that form the "hard" part of the building and the interior that represents the "void" are significantly exacerbated with the aim to point out the revolutionary changes in modern architecture. The concept of emptiness has a tragic connotation or sense of conflict and some absurdities in the traditional aesthetics. However, emptiness no longer seems so absurd in the light of the latest artistic concepts of architecture. The present concept can be seen in the layout of the "House 56", which does not have any unnecessary details, being restrained in aesthetic and functional viewpoints. It is necessary to admit that the very location the project can be called the main part of the architecture. "The concept of figure/ground" is expressed in the construction and the deconstruction, and the archetypal part of the building forces to go against the established architectural tropes, creating new ways to contract implementation (Eisenman et al. 31). The "House 56" does not have any decoration or other additional designs. However, its external features have the abstract references and some elements of cubism.
Most modifications of the material condition of the overall house design can be defined as "interstitial", which "is achieved through a rhetorical trope rather than through the modification of a structural organization" (Eisenman et al. 32). The tropes used in the project deny the classical forms of stability. This approach to building gives an opportunity to see the architecture otherwise, expanding beyond the usual ideas about design. The relation between the form and space is also crucial within the design analysis. In this case, the outer shape of the object may be subjected to rational analysis, but in rhetorical terms, it violates a basic understanding of traditional architecture. It is possible to explain the idea of zones of undecidability, or the processes of the interstitial, by the example of the device of the "House 56". The design of the house implies a specific connection between its cavities and solid portions. If the traditional architecture of the house is usually built with the purpose of consumption, that is, relying primarily on the container function, in this embodiment, the house includes all together. In other words, this building is not an ordinary unit of architecture designed for living, as it violates some linearity in visual perception. First of all, this project is "a condition between form and space, between figure and ground, between an affective and a conceptual experience of space" (Eisenman et al. 32). The "House 56" has been developed outside the architectural field, reinforcing its rejection of the classical theories and general ideas about architecture. This means that the entire plan in the form of drawings and diagrams was developed separately from an overall picture of the project. That is, no one could imagine how the project should look like at the end. This method makes it possible to separate the object from the outside world, or detach the house from the land on which it is located. This effect makes the construction self-sufficient, as it has the meaningful only in itself. The rectangle underlying the House at 56 Cornelia Street is supplemented with a triangular roof, which indicates an extreme geometric unbalance. Looking at the overall picture of "House 56", the observer can notice that it is one indivisible symbol, i.e. the very idea of its creator.
The analysis of the project "House 56" can fully explain the principles of the concept of figure/ground, as well as find out the architectural tropes and the way they are realized. In addition, the interpretation of the home device is able to provide an understanding of the idea of zones of undecidability, or the processes of the interstitial, which are expressed in the relation of form and space. The details of the "House 56" indicate its special significance for the architecture of deconstruction and postmodernism.
Mwanner. House at 56 Cornelia Street. 2012. Plattsburgh, New York.
Works Cited
Eisenman, Peter, et al. Anyhow. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1998. Print.
Mwanner. House at 56 Cornelia Street. 2012. Plattsburgh, New York. Wikipedia. 16 Mar. 2016.
