The significance of Drawing in Architecture from Andreea Palladio to Michael Hansmeyer Today

History and Theory Studies First Year, Term 1

1

The Significance of Drawing in Architecture from Andrea Palladio to Michael Hansmeyer Today History and Theory Studies - First Year Term 1 Submission 12/1/2012

Architectural Association Iris Gramegna

Word Count: 3298

Tutor: Mollie Claypool


2

Drawings, sketches and representation of ideas have had their place in the history of architecture for

centuries. The essence of putting a pen to paper and experiencing firsthand the action of creating is

vital to designing and innovation in architecture. Or is it? This essay will consider the significance of

drawing and the different approaches to using drawings from Palladio’s Villa Capra to Michael

Hansmayer’s columns today. One will come to understand how different points of view, such as those

of Robin Evans as a historian and Peter Eisenman as a designer, on architecture shape how one

interprets and uses drawing. Initially the term drawing will be approached and considered.

Subsequently the three buildings/projects concerned will be addressed. Their different means of using

drawing as a tool for creating will be compared and contrasted. Finally the argument will develop into

questioning and understanding the transition we are seeing today from drawing to computers - a much

debated topic today.

Architecture is not a static structure. From the process of creation, to construction, to

preservation, to disintegration, to rediscovery, one continually finds a certain life within each process

in spite of these stages in themselves already giving it a certain being. In the case of creation, life is

brought to the structure through the act of drawing. Effectively before creating, the space is formless

and undefined; hence one must begin by filling up a blank sheet. This is where drawing plays the

greatest role in architecture; a means to communicate ideas. More accurately drawing is the initial

thread of translating thoughts to representation and then to building. Robin Evans equally argues:

“architecture… is brought into existence through drawing. The subject matter (the building or space)

will exist after the drawing not before it.”1 However, the act of drawing does not stop there. It

continues as a means to develop and reconsider ideas that have been uncovered. Today, architectural

drawings could be denounced as being unacknowledged, yet their vitality lies within the value of the

medium; that of enabling architects to communicate their imagination. Drawings must provide

sufficient information for someone else to take it, understand it and transition from the process of

creating to constructing.2 At this point, one can dare classify and refer to drawing in three stages:

“referential sketches”− a means to formulate, almost aridly and rapidly an idea, “foundation studies

and drawings”− developing initial sketches into a more constructed and studied attribute and lastly the

“final output” – the most developed of the stages used to transmit with clarity and appeal the initial

idea to an outsider. This somewhat definitive drawing3 is today where computer-based drawings are

most commonly used as the medium provides visually appealing outcomes. However, what about the

two other categories of drawing? Do their values come from being hand-drawn or would a computer-

based approach be equally as effective? Finally, in the past drawing was a means to solely show

construction and technicality whilst today drawing is used as a means to create the intangible. This is

where one bears to question whether drawing for the intangible is the same as drawing for construction

since today it is through the use of software and computational composition that we translate

exhaustless ideas. Do we possibly lose something essential from ‘drawing’ through technology rather

than basic pen and paper? Or are these technological developments driving imagination further whilst

perhaps at the same time causing the translation from drawing to building to be lost.

1Evans, Robin. Translations from Drawing to Building. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1997. p.165 2Evans, Robin. Translations from Drawing to Building. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1997. p.155

3 Graves, Michael. "OPINION; Architecture and the Lost Art of Drawing." The New York Times. The New York Times, 02

Sept. 2012. Web. 21 Apr. 2013.


3

Andrea Palladio – Villa Rotonda

The first building this essay is entitled to consider is Villa

Rotonda in Vicenza, northern Italy designed by Andrea Palladio.

The villa is also known as “Villa Capra” and “Villa Almerico”.

This inarguably renaissance style villa is a good example to

consider with regards to drawings being significant to Palladio’s

designs and creations. Effectively the final villa is an all-rounded

symmetry. It bases itself on a square plan encompassing four

identical facades, each with a portico and steps leading up to it.

At the center, a dome ties together all four sectors of the plan and

as many have said was reminiscent of the Pantheon in Rome.4

(fig.1) Over time, Palladio’s sketches and drawings have been

archived as valuable elements to understanding his drawing

process. Therefore, we will consider his initial sketches, field notes, detailed and final drawings. From

this, we will regard the role drawing played for Palladio’s works and recognize how his works

encompass all three stages previously stated.

Initially, Palladio would do quick free-hand drawings. These served as a means to understand

and consider different building layouts. These incorporated neither walls nor detail. This is

representative of the fact that proportion and distribution of rooms/space in his works was vital to

consider before propelling his ideas any further.5 This is quickly read and understood when looking at

the Villa Rotonda in which the organization of the space, the balance and the geometrical choices

made are succinct and clear to any audience. Effectively, the significance he carried to the plans of his

structures became a fundamental element to his architecture.

To further understand Palladio’s

pure and proportional buildings, one must

consider his studies and countless drawings

prior to designing. One quickly notes that

through the large collection of drawings

Palladio produced, drawing equally played

an important role for him to research other

architects and different architectural

components. Over the period in which he

traveled, his studies considered classical

elements from ancient roman

constructions.6 The latter then informed his

4Gardner, Helen, and Fred S. Kleiner.Gardner's Art through the Ages: The Western Perspective. [Boston, Mass]: Wadsworth

Cengage Learning, 2010. p.481

5Palladio's Drawing Process.“Field Notes.”Royal Institution of British Architects, 2011.Web. 20 Nov. 2012.

6Hicks, Peter, and Vaughan Hart.Palladio's Rome: A Translation of Andrea Palladio's Two Guidebooks to Rome. Yale

University Press, 2006.p.iii (Introduction)

Figure 2 – Left is the survey drawing of the Temple of Fortune, Palestrina (1560) and to the right is the idealized reconstruction. (1560)

Figure 1 - Villa Rotonda


4

works. As an example his “survey plan made of the temple of Fortune at Palestrina formed the basis of

his idealized reconstruction of the temple (fig. 2)”7. Features from this drawing served as stepping

stones to the designs of the Villa Rotonda.8As

one can therefore notice, for Palladio, drawing

was a means of rediscovering and understanding

past structures. It was a means to understand

ancient architecture, to draw from construction

rather than draw for construction. Nevertheless,

these drawings engaged Palladio to think and

appreciate certain elements and from that to

organize his thoughts for future projects.

Therefore, for Palladio, drawing was a means to

capture and understand arrangements of space

and from that to develop his own arrangements,

whilst keeping a sort of synesthesia of his

preconceived notions of ancient roman

architecture.

Initially, Palladio’s sketches and drawings were a series of technical references and plans of a multi-

facet way of arranging space. Next, his notational drawings/field notes that considered the works of

other architects served in their turn as inspirations and developments for his ideas. Finally, from this

he produced formal, final drawings: plans, elevations and sections alongside details he wished to

outline. (fig.3) Essentially, adding detail was the very last stage in Palladio’s works.

Peter Eisenman - Houses

Secondly, we will be considering the works of Peter Eisenman, an

influential architect of the late twentieth century. As one of the

founding theorist of postmodernism, his works are often regarded

to be de-constructivist9. The works that are of greatest interest to

the subject-matter of this essay are his series of house designs:

Houses I to X and more specifically their making. Interestingly

enough, the fact that these houses, regarded as conceptual and

abstract houses, are numbered rather than given a name is

reminiscent of Eisenman’s rigorous process and way of seeing his

work as a record of his process rather than of the completed works. Hence, for Eisenman, “The house

is not an object in the traditional sense – that is the end result of a process- but more accurately a

record of a process”10

. Essentially he does not want his houses to represent direct likeness nor

symbolic likeness to an object. For Eisenman, it is about separating form from function or rather

7Palladio's Drawing Process."Field Notes.”Royal Institution of British Architects, 2011.Web. 20 Nov. 2012.

8Palladio's Drawing Process."Field Notes.”Royal Institution of British Architects, 2011.Web. 20 Nov. 2012.

9Davidson, Cynthia C. Tracing Eisenman: Peter Eisenman Complete Works. London: Thames & Hudson, 2006. p.105


Figure 3 – Torre Sacello, Rome Andrea Palladio (c. 1540)

and Profile of a pedestal Andrea Palladio (c.1560)

Figure 4 – House VI Separated Beds


5

unlinking function from appearance. His theory is that architecture should not be determined by the

actions we do, rather to have architecture define our use of space: “The architecture would create

anxiety and distance, for it would no longer be under man’s control. Man and Object would be

independent and the relationship between them would have to be worked out anew.”11

As an example

of this, the design of house VI called upon the couple to sleep in separate beds. (fig.4) Moreover, to

emphasize and allow the separation he wishes to promote between the viewer and the experience

within the representation of his structures, he uses axonometric diagrams for the different stages of his

process12

. (fig. 5) This enables the viewer not to perceive the structure as an object. Here we see how

he uses drawing as a means to translate his theory visually. Effectively the drawings he makes use of

are what he calls diagrams. These diagrams are essential to understanding what drawing is to

Eisenman and how his approach to drawing and creating was different but in some ways similar to that

of Palladio’s work.

To begin with we will consider understanding what a diagram is and what elements suggest it

to be a form of creating and drawing. Eisenman allows the diagram to be the generator for the entire

process and design of his works. This can be regarded as the ‘new form’ of drawing of his time. The

diagram is a form of representation that is different from a sketch or a plan of a building, although

synonymous. “A diagram attempts to uncover latent structures of organization, like the nine-square

grid, even though it is not a conventional structure itself.”13“Essentially a diagram is neither a structure

nor an abstraction of a structure. While it explains relationships in an architectural object, it is not

isomorphic with it”.14

Moreover a diagram, in spite of the name itself giving it a mathematical and

scientific connation in comparison to a

sketch, it is a geometric consideration of

the space. Yet it is not mere geometry as

was used in Palladio’s sketches to organize

the space. A diagram is a tool to

understand geometry and to further analyze

and interpret different combinations of

space. This was seen when Rudolf

Wittkower’s nine-square grid in the late

1940s was adapted to understand Palladio’s

works. (fig. 6) Finally, the diagram is not

solely an explanation that follows the

construction as the example of adapting the nine-square grid to the Redentore.15

In fact it also “acts as

an intermediary in the process of generation of real space and time.”16

This is the way in which

Eisenman uses the diagram and this is crucial as we see that the diagram is a generator that does not

11Eisenman, Peter. Eisenman inside Out: Selected Writings, 1963-1988. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2004. p.218


13Eisenman, Peter. Written into the Void: Selected Writings, 1990-2004.New Haven: Yale UP, 2007. p.88

14Eisenman, Peter. Written into the Void: Selected Writings, 1990-2004. New Haven: Yale UP, 2007. p.88



Figure 6 – Peter Eisenman, Diagrams of Anteriority,

1982.Analytical diagrams of the Church of the Redeemer by

Andrea Palladio. Venice. Italy.


6

necessarily result in the final project built which is contrasting to the final drawings of Palladio which

were key to the final construction. Eisenman effectively uses diagrams more as a mathematical tool by

elaborating form based on structural matrices, stratification and dilatation of space. The objective is

not a final precise plan to be built but rather about recording and learning from the process of creating.

Therefore one can say that diagrams were a means to record process of creating and were a form of

drawing, serving to piece together conceptual spaces.

Spinning off on this, in Eisenman’s case, drawings were not about shapes and pure geometry

as one could see earlier in Palladio’s works but rather about the conceptual and abstract conception of

space and volume. In this sense Eisenman somewhat ties together with Adolf Loos’s modernist

approach of the 1920s where it was about: “setting free the ground plan in space”17

. Nonetheless

Eisenman’s work remains more objective through the additive and subtractive means of forming space

whilst Adolf Loos was more theatrical and subjective in making volume grow out of spaces. As an

example in House VI, the volumes in the house are formed by the intersecting columns and walls;

engendering different spaces.18

Although it was mentioned that shapes were not essential to Eisenman,

the Boolean cube was. He uses this as the base of all his diagrams (fig. 5) as it “encompasses a

complex structure that was at a time an infinite yet frozen form.”19

Furthermore, the space enclosed by

the cube can be intersected by multiple planes and lines to the extent that an unlimited set of spaces is

possible. Nevertheless to achieve the right form, there lies this crucial yet lengthy process of diagrams

being ‘cut-up’ and rearranged in a variety of ways.

At this point one can begin comparing Eisenman and Palladio. With regards to arranging

space, both Palladio and Eisenman meet as this was crucial in their drawings and diagrammatic works.

However their notions of utopian arrangements of space was very different as in the case of Palladio’s

works it was about creating a logical, functional, symmetrically balanced and purist form and space

whilst for Eisenman it is all about separating form from function. Whilst both architects use a type of

diagram, their use of it is distinguishable. Palladio uses the diagram as a drawing in order to create

orderly patterns and clear geometry whilst Eisenman uses the diagram to create an ‘orderly disorder’.

One can equally note that in Eisenman’s diagrams there is an absence of detail, contrastingly to

Palladio’s works in which the detail appeared at the end of the process of his drawings. This goes to

show how the diagrams of Eisenman are mere representations of conceptual space and volume,

serving a more ‘rational’ role in the act of creating. The diagrams are for Eisenman a way to document

his progressive compositions of space and to attain what he sees as an ideal arrangement of volume.

Eisenman says himself that “the diagram traces and writes, and can be traced and read in

architecture”.20

Therefore, the diagram is another means of drawing and translating space.

Interestingly enough the term ‘diagram’ is often used today in information technology. For

this reason we can find a good link from Peter Eisenman to drawing today which incorporates the use

17Oeschlin, Werner. "Raumplan Versus Plan Libre." p.76-83.

18Davidson, Cynthia C. Tracing Eisenman: Peter Eisenman Complete Works. London: Thames & Hudson, 2006. p.26,105

19Rocker, Ingeborg M. "Architectures of the Digital Realms: Experimentations by Peter Eisenman, Frank O. Gehry."

-Kolloquium Weimar 2007.By rg

H. leiter, Norbert orrek, and erd immermann. Weimar: Verlag Der Bauhaus- niversit t, 200 . p.250



7

of software. It would seem that Eisenman’s work falls well between the two very different worlds of

drawing from Palladio’s visual, traditional way to today’s computation and software–driven

representations. Peter Eisenman’s work is interesting to consider as his diagrams appear digital and

artificially composed. Nonetheless they remain drawings and geometrically simple enough to unfold

and understand. In contrast to this, the consequence today of a world emerged by digital technology

are complex forms and extreme geometries that are very difficult to piece apart. Effectively,

information technology “values appearance over existence, what can be seen over what is. Not the

seen as we formerly knew it, but rather a seeing that can no longer be interpreted”.21

Peter Eisenman

has long argued that computers as a design tool would suggest changing the role of an architect.

Henceforth, in the last part of this essay we will consider how the design and drawing processes today

has changed by looking at Michael Hansmayer’s recent “Subdivided columns” that are generated

using highly complex geometries and details, made possible through the use of software. This will

make us consider where drawing and creation lies in the making of such extravagant structures and

how this differs to the two previous architects we have analyzed.

Michael Hansmeyer – Subdivided Columns

Michael Hansmeyer is regarded as a post-modern computational architect. He uses CAD software, and

other means to create highly detailed and complex forms. His “Subdivided Columns – A New

Order”(fig.7) achieved in 2010 are as

Michael Hansmeyer says: “an attempt to

incorporate tools and technologies that can

expand the scope of what is possible and

what is imaginable and in the best case to

create something that is not yet

imaginable”22

. He rightly argues that no

person could draft these columns by hand,

yet they are buildable.23

In order to create

such extravagant forms, one must free

themselves from experience and build

without preconceptions. This is already a

different approach to the use of drawing by

architects like Palladio and Eisenman in which prior notions were vital to consider and understand in

order to create. Inspired by cell division and the processes of nature which he abstracts into something

utterly new, Michael Hansmeyer started off from a cube which he then folded through algorithmic

codes.24

Essentially the computer and software can make ‘folds’ we, humans, could not possibly make

by hand, due to the level of intricacy and minuteness. While the forms seem elaborate the process of

creating the virtual design is minimal: 35 seconds. Nonetheless it must be noted that similarly to

21Rocker, Ingeborg M. "Architectures of the Digital Realms: Experimentations by Peter Eisenman, Frank O. Gehry."

-Kolloquium Weimar 2007.By rg

H. Gleiter, Norbert orrek, and erd immermann. Weimar: Verlag Der Bauhaus- niversit t, 200 . p.250

22Hansmeyer, Michael. "Ted Talks - Ideas worth Spreading." Michael Hansmeyer: Building Unimaginable Shapes. July

2012. Speech.


2012. Speech.


2012. Speech.

Figure 7 – SubdividedColumns


8

Eisenman, multiple trials must be made to explore all possibilities, to eventually pinpoint the desired

design or in the case of Palladio the ideal space. Designing becomes the architect’s exclusive role

through exploration of different possibilities. It also becomes a job of trial and error by choosing

which algorithmic command creates the best design. The architect ends up orchestrating the processes

of mutating.

Furthermore, crafting these columns only requires one process: digitally folding. This

procedure creates both the form and surface detail. This is contrasting to Palladio who first considered

the arrangement of space and only after did he consider adding detail. For Hansmeyer, the detail is

primary. In addition, one element that distinguishes from the past is the idea that in computational

architecture there is no finite predictability. In some ways it is based on ‘chance’ of trial and error. On

the other hand, in the past, architects had preconceived notions of structures and buildings which made

the end result of their creations imaginable and tangible. ltimately, today’s software enables an

infinite realm of possibilities. Does this therefore revolutionize the way we think or reduce our

imagination? One asks such critical questions when Michael Hansmeyer says: “I didn’t design the

form; I designed the process that designs the form”.

In conclusion, how have the uses of drawing and the significance we attribute to drawing

changed over centuries in architecture? As we have seen, Palladio used drawings as a necessity for

creating and designing. Peter Eisenman, on his part, used diagrams, a form of drawing, to record the

process of creating spaces. It is only when we consider today’s computational architecture with

Michael Hansmeyer that we realize the possibly dismissive attitude towards drawing today. However,

perhaps we do not realize that designing through using software and technology is no more than a new

form of drawing, only the architect is not as physically involved with the creation. Nonetheless,

accepting computational mutations as a form of drawing becomes difficult, as the ideas that come of

this technique are so intangible that the artist/architect appears to lose control over structuring ideas

and creating 'coherent' work. Would the digital world jeopardize translation from ‘drawing’ to

building that has, in the past, been ultimately crucial to express creations, processes and designs to an

audience? Essentially today’s technology aims to make any form of translation easier hence would

seem to offer new designs, new ways of looking at, of translating and building architecture.

Nevertheless, a full loss of the process of drawing is dangerous. In schools, a mix of both traditional

and computational drawings is essential because whilst computers seem to have brought a positive

new realm of possibilities, the architect/student loses a certain regard to essential elements and more

importantly to recording process which Peter Eisenman stresses as being crucial to any design or

creation.

Therefore it is undeniable that computers have become assets in the ways we organize and

present work. Nevertheless, this is where we inquire where the art of being a creator lies. Does it lie in

tedious calculations, sitting in front of a screen for hours clicking away or are the essences of

referential sketches that serve as visual diaries and as the records of an artist s discoveries the core of

the profession? We are moving away from the tangible as the noun “digit” (from the Latin “digitus”)

loses its meaning as “finger,” and becomes an adjective form as “digital”, which solely relates to data.

Are our hands becoming obsolete as machines and computers outshine us? In this regard, it leaves us

questioning where the creative process would lie if computers were the sole medium of designing and

constructing.25

Yet drawing is regarded very differently depending on who is analyzing its role:

whether a historian or a designer. Although ultimately both will argue that drawing is a critical

25

Graves, Michael. "OPINION; Architecture and the Lost Art of Drawing." The New York Times. The New York Times, 02

Sept. 2012. Web. 21 Apr. 2013.


9

constituent to the process of creating and should not be discarded. Therefore, as Giorgio Vasari

claims: “ w … y b f v y [ ], and not having it, one has

” 26

26

Vasari, Giorgio, and Philip Joshua Jacks.The Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects. New York:

Modern Library, 2006.


10

Bibliography Davidson, Cynthia C. Tracing Eisenman: Peter Eisenman Complete Works. London: Thames & Hudson, 2006.

Eisenman, Peter. Eisenman inside Out: Selected Writings, 1963-1988. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press,

2004.

Eisenman, Peter. Written into the Void: Selected Writings, 1990-2004. New Haven: Yale UP, 2007.

Gardner, Helen, and Fred S. Kleiner.Gardner's Art through the Ages: The Western Perspective. [Boston, Mass]:

Wadsworth Cengage Learning, 2010.

Graves, Michael. "OPINION; Architecture and the Lost Art of Drawing." The New York Times. The New York

Times, 02 Sept. 2012. Web. 21 Apr. 2013

Hansmeyer, Michael. "Ted Talks - Ideas worth Spreading." Michael Hansmeyer: Building Unimaginable

Shapes. July 2012. Speech.

Hicks, Peter, and Vaughan Hart.Palladio's Rome: A Translation of Andrea Palladio's Two Guidebooks to Rome.

Yale University Press, 2006

Mendelowitz, Daniel Marcus. Drawing. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1980.

Oeschlin, Werner. "Raumplan Versus Plan Libre." p.76-83.

Palladio's Drawing Process."Field Notes”.Royal Institution of British Architects, 2011.Web. 20 Nov. 2012.

<http://www.architecture.com/LibraryDrawingsAndPhotographs/Palladio/ExhibitingPalladio/TheDrawingLabor

atory/PalladiosDrawingProcess/Fieldnotes.aspx>

Rocker, Ingeborg M. "Architectures of the Digital Realms: Experimentations by Peter Eisenman, Frank O.

Gehry." -

Kolloquium Weimar 2007.By rg H. leiter, Norbert orrek, and erd immermann. Weimar: Verlag Der

Bauhaus- niversit t, 200 . p.249-62.

Vasari, Giorgio, and Philip Joshua Jacks.The Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects.

New York: Modern Library, 2006.

Image Bibliography

Figure 1 - Palladio, Andrea, and Robert Tavernor.I Quattro LibriDell'architettura Venice, 1570. Oakland, CA:

Octavo, 2000.

Figure 2 - "Palladio's Drawing Process." Field Notes.Royal Institution of British Architects, 2011.Web. 20 Nov.

2012.<http://www.architecture.com/LibraryDrawingsAndPhotographs/Palladio/ExhibitingPalladio/TheDrawing

Laboratory/PalladiosDrawingProcess/Fieldnotes.aspx>

Figure 3 -"Palladio's Drawing Process."Field Notes.Royal Institution of British Architects, 2011.Web. 20 Nov.

2012.

<http://www.architecture.com/LibraryDrawingsAndPhotographs/Palladio/ExhibitingPalladio/TheDrawingLabor

atory/PalladiosDrawingProcess/Fieldnotes.aspx>

Figure 4 - "AD Classics: House VI / Peter Eisenman." ArchDaily.N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Dec. 2012.4

<http://www.archdaily.com/63267/ad-classics-house-vi-peter-eisenman/>

Figure 5 - Davidson, Cynthia C. Tracing Eisenman: Peter Eisenman Complete Works. London: Thames &

Hudson, 2006. p.33,68,69

Figure 6 – Eisenman, Peter. Written into the Void: Selected Writings, 1990-2004. New Haven: Yale UP, 2007.

p.88


11

Figure 7 -Hansmeyer, Michael. "Subdivided Columns."Michael Hansmeyer, Computational Architecture. 15

Nov. 2012. <http://www.michael-hansmeyer.com/projects/columns.html>.

The significance of Drawing in Architecture from Andreea Palladio to Michael Hansmeyer Today

Documents

Transcript of The significance of Drawing in Architecture from Andreea Palladio to Michael Hansmeyer Today