以下是作家兼建筑师伊曼·安萨里对彼得·艾森曼的采访节选。它最初发表于Hamshahri Archtiecture在伊朗。

伊曼·安萨里:在物体和物体的概念之间，你的方法倾向于后者。物理的房子只是一个媒介，通过它，虚拟或概念性的房子的概念成为可能。从这个意义上说，真正的建筑只存在于你的图纸中。

彼得的一项:“真正的建筑”只存在于图纸中。“真实的建筑”存在于图纸之外。这里的区别在于“建筑”和“建筑”不是一回事。

你曾经希望你的房子没有建吗?

不。如果说今天的建筑有什么争论的话，那么持久的争论是建筑作为一种概念的、文化的和智力的事业，还是建筑作为一种现象学的事业——也就是说，建筑中主体的经验，对物质性、光、颜色、空间等的经验。我一直反对现象学。我对彼得·卒姆托的作品不感兴趣，也对那些花时间担心细节、一边的木纹或表面材料的颜色的人不感兴趣。我一点也不在乎。话虽如此，但仍有必要进行建设。但“纸板建筑”的整个概念意味着作品的物质性作为一种“反物质”的声明是重要的。也许我在概念主义领域做的最重要的作品是纸板建筑。例如，房子II的照片是在没有阳光的情况下拍摄的，所以没有阴影，没有暴露或类似的东西，事实上，我们在一家法国杂志上拍摄的房子II的一张照片，说它是“房子II的模型”。我已经实现了我想要实现的，那就是减少建筑形式和模型之间的差异。 I was always trying to say “built model” as the conceptual reality of architecture. When you see these houses and you visit them you realize that they are didactic and important exercises—each one has a different thematic—but they were concerned not with meaning in the social sense of the word or the cultural sense, but in the “architectural meaning.” I never thought I would want to build anything but houses because I thought they gave sufficient room to experiment with non-functionalities, since there is no one type of functional organization for a house, but there are architectural organizations. But that later proved to be problematic. The second thing was that I didn’t believe it was necessary to ever visit my houses. In other words, there were houses that for the first six months or year they were open I didn’t even go to see them because I thought it wasn’t that important; the important thing was laid in the drawing. The Canadian Centre for Architecture has 2,000 drawings for House II. I would draw and draw because I never knew what I was looking for. I knew the general parameters, but I had no formula for setting up how to achieve it. Each house has an idea behind it.

你是否认为，因为这些房子在认知上存在，它们在物理上实现的那一刻就失去了真正的意义——在“真正的建筑”变成“真正的建筑”的那一刻?

曼弗雷多·塔夫里(Manfredo Tafuri)曾经对我说:“彼得，如果你不去建造，没有人会认真考虑你的想法。你必须建立，因为没有建立起来的想法只是没有建立起来的想法。”建筑包括看这些想法是否能经受住建筑、人、时间和功能的冲击。塔夫里说，如果你没有建造任何东西，历史就不会对你的工作感兴趣。我认为这是绝对正确的。如果我什么都没造，你和我现在就不会说话了。

在这种情况下，这座建筑意味着什么?你认为建造的房子或“真实的建筑”代表的是“真实建筑”的“建造模型”，而“真实建筑”只在概念上存在吗?

有时是这样，有时是超越，有时是更少。当你看到辛辛那提的阿罗诺夫中心时，你会发现它的空间体验是非凡的。说教式的绘画本身是另一回事。但这是两码事。我必须建造辛辛那提，我必须建造韦克斯纳，我必须建造圣地亚哥，这是我的最新项目。你必须看到它，因为你画不出来。你无法从认知上理解发生了什么。人们必须以一种与我所追求的概念完全不同的方式去观看和体验它。这项工作分为三个阶段。一个是纯概念性的人工制品，就像你说的，可能不一定非要建造出来。 The second is the ground projects, which are at a different scale and many of them had to be built. And finally you have Santiago, which is a hybrid project because it is neither a ground nor a figure.

在你的卡纳雷乔项目中，我们见证了一种新的秩序，它开启了“人工挖掘的城市”，并在那之后描绘了你的作品:从结构到场地或文本的移动，或者更好的是，从物体的结构化，到场地的文本化。或者从语言操作到文本操作——因为文本是非常正确的，但它们不再是句法和语法的，它们是其他的。如果你说早期的房屋是类比的语法练习和语言练习，它们不再是类比的语言。

我已经不再相信语言可以成为建筑的类似模型。我认为我必须在建筑中找到我在做什么，而不是在建筑之外。我正在做的阅读，我正在做的工作，更多地与建筑有关。这并不是偶然发生的。第一个建筑双年展是欧罗巴-美洲。尽管Paolo Portoghesi认为1980年的Strada Novissima是第一个双年展，但Vittorio Gregotti 1976年的欧罗巴-美洲双年展是第一个建筑双年展。几年前我见过维托里奥，他任命我为意大利首届建筑双年展美国部分的负责人。与此同时，我应该完成x住宅的工作图纸。客户挖了一个洞，等待开始项目。我在意大利度过了一个夏天，并没有注意到绘画。我回来的时候，工作图纸还没有完成，客户很生气; he fired me and refused to pay my bills. I was depressed, and I realized that my intellectual side, or cultural side, and my entrepreneurial side had gotten way out of whack. So I went into psychoanalysis and began to learn about the difference between living in your head and living in your body, with the reality of the earth, the ground. When Tafuri wrote “The Meditations of Icarus” in Houses of Cards, he meant that Peter Eisenman was Icarus, and to be Icarus meant that you wanted to fly and to look into the sun, as Icarus did. And to look into the sun meant that you were totally out of touch with the reality of the earth and the ground. Icarus, of course, gets too close to the sun, his wings of wax melt and he falls to earth. Icarus was the son of Daedalus, who made a labyrinth that was guarded by a Minotaur. It was an interesting mythology, which had to do with the ground, digging into the ground and making marks on the ground. I realized that what was wrong with my architecture was that it wasn’t from the ground, from inside the unconscious, beneath the surface. So the first evidence of this occurs in Cannaregio in 1978, where for the first time I did a project totally in the ground. And it’s not only in the ground, it’s also urban. But it’s also not real. It’s conceptual; and uses Corbusier’s unbuilt hospital project as an initial context. In 1980, I’m invited to Berlin to do the Checkpoint Charlie project, which includes the garden of walls. You can’t walk on the ground of Berlin even though it is a project inscribed in the ground. Then I did the Wexner Center. A number of these projects fall within the concept of artificial excavations. The ground afforded me a critical dialogue with the then-current (1978–1980) theory of Figure-Ground Architecture: the black and white drawings of Collin Rowe and the contextualists, work done for Roma Interotta using the Nolli map of Rome. What I was doing was the reverse. I was attacking the historicizing obviousness of “figure-ground” and trying to make what I call a “figure-figure urbanism.” And that of course had to do with my interest in Piranesi, and his Campo Marzio.

你认为绘画在当代建筑实践中的作用正在减弱吗?

我不能在Kindle上看书。我必须拥有一本书，我必须在书里写东西。我读书的时候会做笔记，复习。你可以看到我的书里满是用不同的笔、颜色和时间写的笔记，因为当我今天读一本书时，我可能十年前读过，我读的方式不同了，因为我不一样了。我必须在书上做笔记，所以我有书。这是第一点。对我来说，画画和读书是一回事。我不能在电脑上阅读。每当有人在电脑上画东西时，我都想把它打印出来，这样我就可以用描图纸在上面画，也可以不用描图纸。你不能在电脑里通过连接点来制定计划。 You have to think about a diagram or what it is you are doing. You have to think in drawing. So to me, all of my work, even the last competition that we won in Turkey, is drawn by hand first, then we give it to the computer guys and then they model it and then we get it back. To me, drawing is not making pretty things or making representations. It’s not representing anything. It is the incarnation of the thing. I’m not trying to represent something. I’m trying to make it real. And the only way it can be real is through my drawings. Architects and architecture students today have lost the capacity to think through drawing. They can only think through a computer. I watch people in this office sitting and looking at these things on their screen as they roll them around in space, and I think to myself, what the hell are they doing? It’s nuts. It’s totally wacko. You know, what does a section look like? What does a plan look like? They don’t seem interested in that. Then drawing comes as an after thought. Once you model the object in 3D, then you can cut plans and sections off it. But I start with the cuts. I build from the cuts.

可以说你已经脱离了定义你早期作品的结构主义原则吗?什么时候建筑的个体主体和空间的主观体验会在你的项目中发挥作用?

卡纳雷乔之前的作品是结构主义的，然后变成后结构主义。卡纳雷乔是一个从过去到现在的枢纽。卡纳雷乔之后我做的第一个项目是柏林的查理检查站。这个项目挖掘了我自己的潜意识，产生了一个我们不知道是属于左派还是右派的作品。事实上，柏林市长说:“听着，我不能建这个，因为每个人都会讨厌这个项目。右翼会讨厌它;左翼会讨厌它的。”但这肯定与个人有关，他或她在这个空间里。毫无疑问，当你走在一堵3.3米高的墙上时，这是你唯一可以走路的空间，你现在走在柏林的一个新的基准上，这就是柏林墙的基准。所以这堵墙已经不存在了，它现在是这个项目的一部分。 And then when you go into the watchtowers and you walk up and you cannot see anything because there is no viewing out. And then you see the ruins below. All of this is about the experience of moving up and down and across of the human subject. So there is no question that the human subject enters the project, and you cannot understand the project unless you can conceptualize what it would be like to be the human subject. Even though it’s not built, you can conceptualize what it would be like. It would be quite an extraordinary experience. That’s why architecture, finally, has to involve the subject in an architectural manner.