Wollflin's

Principle of Art History

From linear to painterly

From plane to recession

From closed tectonic to open a-tectonic form

From multiplicity to unity

From absolute clarity to relative clarity of the subject

Architecture is not Art History.

Trouble with the Part

I am struggling with the parts as the object becomes a section. Currently there is no scale differentiation, but I had been understanding an important thing to occur with each intersection, i.e. as a point of 'squish' if these were 'noodles.'

Is it so different that it is not considered as a project under the same umbrella as the rest of the section. Parts to whole, figure figure. 

Where did Eisenman play out his figure figure, and has it not been so pronounced as perhaps should have been, i.e. there were other things (ideas) that got much more 'play.' 

Nolli Construction

Drawing with the machine and perspective. 

Parallel

After finding a form of appropriate density to operate on, I will execute a technique of projecting a reading of figure ground onto the object. I will then tackle to problem of what (part of the city) is being aggregated or agglomerated. "But if there is no such thing as a figurative object, as Tafuri claims, then the architectural figure can be understood as an agglomeration of inhabitable cells."

So, mass at 6 is good - or massing from my physical model is better density to experiment figure ground with? Both have conditions of collision, but what I think using mass 6 would yield would be the invention of non-figure within the massing diagram that comes out of reading the figure ground, a method which may be applied to a mass with 'better' intentionally arrayed parts.

Problematics of the Array

Learning

Clearly I need to learn how to script.