Re: rossi as paper architect

Rossi may have spent 10 years as a paper architect, but it would be hard to
argue that his projects did not carry the intention of being built.  It is
hard to reserve any kind of special classification for 'paper' architects
when they all follow the same 10-15 year curve of academic writing and
publishing but not building, then embarking on small scale commissions and
competition victories, and then move on to large scale jobs for corporate
clients (witness Rossi's speculative office complex for Disney at
Celebration, their new town development).  The 'paper architects that strike
me at present are: Ric Scofido and Elizabeth Diller, Michael Sorkin, Daniel
Libeskind and our own Lebbeus Woods.  There are others, but not so well
known.  Of the above Libeskind has attempted to build on a large scale
(Jewish Extension to German Museum, though I hear it is going forward as
designed after some haggling).  Oh, and Lars Lerup, though I haven't seen
anything from him lately (_Planned Assualts_ definitely constitutes paper
architecture), and he has built at least one house.

The best example for this discussion is House X (and the nine preceding it).
 Given that some of them were built, are they 'paper architecture.'  House X
seems unbuildable, but that never stopped Eisenman.  I'm a little busy this
weekend, so I haven't the time to flesh this out as I should, so I'll run off
having not offered much, though I might like to hear Mr. Woods comments on
being a 'paper' architect.  Is he? and what does this entail in regards
building (desirable? inevitably a compromise, etc), 'theoretical' projects,
and the like.

nic musolino
subject907@xxxxxxx
Daniel E. Snyder, Architect P.C.

I can't help sharing: we were published for the first time in Dec 94 P/A, pg
23.  I had a role in the design process, and did all the production work of
the pictured project.