I'm back

After a few weeks holed up in a bedroom in Howick, I have read three pivotal texts that I believe will define my master's thesis and hopefully sow the seeds to my perspective in architecture. The three texts will be posted in a few.

Umbrella thoughts:
Peter Eisenman has defined an approach to architecture that I feel I have been circling around these past four years. In school we are taught representational architecture, experiential architecture (phenomenology) but we were never exposed to a self-referential architecture. Architecture should exist in and of itself, despite its functional and aesthetic endowments. According to Eisenman, the architecture is a digram of becoming, in that its transformation (and later deconstruction) is inherent. Objects are defined by their relationship to each other only irrespective of all other relationships such as culture and function after all they are fleeting.

Directions:
What Eisenman has not addressed is how the digital age of information can wind it way into his diagrammatic/rational approach to architecture. I propose to clue into this theory, approaches such as that of MVRDV (Metacity/Datatown), and Asymptote (3DTF). Both attempt to use information and virtuality to create space. Both approaches, Eisenman and the digital are seemingly at odds with another, but can a bridge be built between the two? That is my investigation.

Eisenman talks about texts and overlaying them to create a conceptual blur. The first text is the practical considerations such as site, program. The second text is the interiority and anteriority of architecture. The third is arbitrary. In my thesis, it would be digital information.
The question lies in how this third text is applied to blur.

(Source: Benjamin, A. E. (2003). Blurred zones : investigations of the interstitial : Eisenman Architects, 1988-1998. New York: Monacelli Press.)