FLATNESS TRANSFORMED AND OTHERNESS EMBODIED A STUDY OF JOHN HEJDUK’S DIAMOND MUSEUM AND WALL HOUSE 2 ACROSS THE MEDIA OF PAINTING, POETRY, ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING AND ARCHITECTURAL SPACE A Dissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty by Weiling He In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in Architecture Georgia Institute of Technology April 2005 Copyright © 2005 by Weiling He FLATNESS TRANSFORMED AND OTHERNESS EMBODIED A STUDY OF JOHN HEJDUK’S DIAMOND MUSEUM AND WALL HOUSE 2 ACROSS THE MEDIA OF PAINTING, POETRY, ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING AND ARCHITECTURAL SPACE Approved by: Dr. John Peponis, Chair School of Architecture Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Kenneth J. Knoespel School of Literature, Communication and Culture (LLC) Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Sonit Bafna School of Architecture Georgia Institute of Technology Date Approved: April 12, 2005 ACKNOWLEGEMENTS When I started writing this work, my housemate was pregnant. I witnessed changes in her body daily with the growing baby and her experiences of happiness, pain, and most of all, hope. Now, the baby is nearly one year old, and my work is complete. The metaphorical relationship between carrying a baby and working on a dissertation is not a novel one because truth does not need to be rendered in novelty. However, a pregnancy fails to encapsulate the entire process of my work, which was not only a labor of an individual but also a project of intense collaboration. Unlike the delivery of a baby, it was an extended process of delivery. Very fortunately, I delivered my “baby” at Georgia Tech with the help of many individuals. Regardless of my pushing, screaming, or exhaustion, they were always by my side. Therefore, I am very much in debt to these people: My advisor, mentor and friend, Dr. John Peponis, for his rigor and passion. It was he who strongly encouraged that I pursue the topic of Hejduk while I was instinctively compelled by the deep sadness felt in Hejduk’s work. I deeply appreciate his openness, insight, encouragement, and engagement in my work. Two images of John that stand out in my mind the most are the logical John, arguing a theory, and the passionate one, strumming the guitar strings, always influencing the mode of my work. Dr. Ken Knoespel, for his fascination in crossing the boundary between the eastern and western cultures, and for this encouragement and insight, which led me to think beyond the limit of my work. Dr. Sonit Bafna, for his accurate criticism and precise advice. He helped me in activities ranging from those as specific as tightening a computer projector connection to those as abstract as tightening an argument. Dr. David Shapiro, for his warmth and welcome to the area of studying Hejduk’s work. His stories always provided a vivid image of the person whose world I was trying to enter. His iii encouragement and inspiration guided me until the final step in the defense of this dissertation. Dr. Sohpia Psarra, for her constructive comments, her energy, and her sharp comments in pushing this dissertation forward. Dr. Aarati Karnekar, for her inspiration through her own work, which became the direct reason for my choosing the interdisciplinary study of architecture. Dr. Athanassios Economou for his humor, friendship and his enthusiasm in my work. Jane Chisholm, for the proofreading and editing of my dissertation and her support and encouragement as a friend. Lord Aeck Sargent Architect, Inc. for their financial support, which that I have depended on throughout my doctoral studies, and for the practicing opportunities in the real world of architecture, which have been valuable experience to me. I’d also like to thank several people who were not directly involved in my dissertation but whose help was indispensable. They are Professor Douglas C. Allen, Dr. Ronald Lewcock, my qualifying paper and comprehensive minor committee: Professor Charles Eastman and Dr. Athanassios Economou, who helped me build a foundation in computational design, which not only benefited my current study but also, more importantly, will benefit me in future research; Dr. Elizabeth Dowling for her engaging me in the world of teaching architecture; Dr. Jean Wineman, for her help, especially in the first few years after I arrived at Tech, and for the intern architect job that she helped me find at Lord Aeck Sargent Architects in Atlanta. I am also obliged to the following people who provided me with valuable information with which to complete my dissertation. They are David Shapiro (Hejduk’s friend and colleague for twenty years), Robert Shubert (Associate Curator, Prints and Drawings Collection, Centre Canadien d'Architecture), Kim Shkapich (editor of the majority of Hejduk’s iv publications), Reneta Hejduk (Hejduk’s daughter, who teaches architecture at Arizona State University), Ulrich Franzen (the former president of the Architectural League and the organizer of Hejduk’s Diamond Exhibition in 1956), and Steven Hillyer (Director of the Architecture Archives Center at the Cooper Union). Many friends have also helped in different stages of the dissertation, but their friendship has always been extremely valuable to me. In particularly, I’d like to thank Peng Jiang and Ghang Lee for their patience and help, Hazem Ziada and Saleem Mokbel for their humor and dependability, Yi Lo and Tristan Al-Haddad for their guidance on 3D animation and movie editing, and Dr. Frances Hsu, Ranah Hammash and Hans Verheij for their support. Yinwu Huang for supporting me from a tremendous geographic distance. Yan Yang, Beisi Jia, Lan Wang, and Wei Tang, for their inspiration, tenacity, and assistance despite their busy schedules. I shall also thank Gerardo Odivilas for standing by me in the past months, taking on some of the burdens that I have been carrying and making my life happier and easier. Most of all, my deepest thanks go to my parents for their continuous love, support, and sacrifices by allowing and encouraging me pursue my dreams. I strongly feel their trust and faith although they and I are on opposite sides of the globe. v CONTENTS Acknowledgements iii List of Figures xi Summary xvi Chapter 1. Introduction 1 1.1 Question 2 1.2 Thesis 4 1.2.1 Partial Re-stating across Media 4 1.2.2 How Architecture Means 6 1.2.3 Re-statement in the Medium of Architecture 9 1.2.4 Meaning and Its Related Notions: Concept, Feeling and Structure 10 1.2.5 Spatial Meaning in the Medium of Architecture: Body and Metaphor 13 1.3 Literature Review 17 1.3.1 In Search for a Framework of Interpretation 17 1.3.2 Discussion on the Ideological Level 23 1.3.3 Discussion on the Actual Work 28 1.3.4 The Need for a Medium-specific Framework 31 1.4 Defining the Current Study 33 1.4.1 Subject 33 1.4.2 Methodology and Research Sources 36 1.4.3 Structure 38 1.4.4 Implications 39 Chapter 2. Time Line 41 2.1 Painting 43 2.1.1 Painters and Paintings 44 2.1.2 On Cubist Paintings 50 vi 2.2 Poetry 58 2.2.1 An Architect and a Poet 60 2.2.2 Hejduk’s Poetry 62 2.3 Architecture 64 2.3.1 1954-1963: The Formulation Period 67 2.3.2 1963--1974: Between the Diamond Series and the Wall House Series 74 2.3.3 After 1974: The Recurrence of the Wall House Theme 87 2.4 Architectural Drawing 99 2.5 Hejduk versus Corbusier 104 2.6 Chapter Conclusion 108 Chapter 3. Painting Design Means and Design Ends 110 3.1 The Diamonds 114 3.1.1 Forces around the Lines: the Diamond Composition by Mondrain 114 3.1.2 Tension in Space: the Diamond Series by Hejduk 136 3.2 The Vertical Surface 144 3.2.1 The Flattened Space around the Bird: Studios by Braque 145 3.2.2 The Flying Bird in the Wall Houses 158 3.3 Chapter Conclusion 165 3.3.1 Intentional Reading of Painting 165 3.3.2 Design Means versus Design Ends 166 3.3.3 The Agony with Formalism 168 3.4 The Following Chapters 168 Chapter 4. The Drawing of Flatness 170 4.1 Observation: The Absence of Perspectives 172 4.2 Flatness in Axonometric Drawing 173 4.3 Depth in Picture-plane 175 4.3.1 Depth in Projection Systems 177 4.3.2 Depth in Drawing Elements 179 4.4 The Construction of Flatness 182 vii 4.4.1 The Two-face Axonometric Projection 182 4.4.2 Compression in Hejduk’s Axonometric Projectiosn 188 4.5 Chapter Conclusion 190 Chapter 5. Space: Flatness Transformed 192 5.1 Hejduk’s Reading of Flatness in Other Works of Art 194 5.1.1 The Visual Effect of Flatness in Painting 194 5.1.2 Visual Compression across Media 195 5.1.3 “The Failing Distance” 196 5.1.4 The Two Levels of Flatness 5.2 Flatness/Depth Captured: Plan, Photography and Movie 199 5.2.1 Plan: Depth as a Spatial Structure 200 5.2.2 Computer Generated Perspective and Movie: A Static Point of View versus a Moving Point of View 201 5.3 Flatness in Space 203 5.3.1 The Flattened Diamond Configuration 203 5.3.2 The Temporal Dimension of Flatness 207 5.4 Chapter Conclusion 211 Chapter 6. The Poetry of Otherness 214 6.1 Tracing the Paintings in the Poems 216 6.2 The Accentuated Body 232 6.2.1 The Body and the Narrative in Paintings 232 6.2.2 Hejduk’s Choice: Body in the Attenuated Narrative 236 6.2.3 Geometrical Position and Bodily Sensation 240 6.3 Poetry: The Sentient Body 242 6.3.1 The Physicality of the Body 242 6.3.2 The Spatial Body 249 6.4 Bodily Expression of Otherness 253 6.4.1 Otherness 254 6.4.2 Within a Strange Body 256 6.4.3 The Unusual Condition 257 viii 6.4.4 Fragmentation and Detachment 260 6.5 Chapter Conclusion 264 6.5.1 Intention Embedded in the Construction of Poems 264 6.5.2 Poetry as a Notation of the Sentient Body 266 6.5.3 The Construction of Otherness in Poems 267 Chapter 7.