i lke it. i haven't done much of it in studio lately, but like you said, it's a good way to inform design. i'm not a big fan of peter eisenman's work, but i do like his process, ie diagram diaries and there's another book (i forget the title) i think called excavating cities of the future or future excavations of cities or something like that.

Cities of Artificial Excavation

that's right, thanks agfa8x

wake up people!
petey e is not a mapper; he is a superimposition contortionist.

mapping and diagramming are different things; mapping is about gathering information and processing it. pde invents information and processes it.

i think the landscapists do the best mappings: roger sherman, balmori, field operations, etc.

how exactly does he invent information?

ask him.

pde's work always begins with a grid (see house ii, house iv, church of 2000, bfl labs, cincinnati daap, etc.). the grid is naked information. then he "disturbs" the grid through some cryptic rationale which borders more on metpahor and symbol than data. in other words, there aint no nose-to-paper mapping being done. he doesnt read the site, other than its actual footprint which becomes very soft-core data.

dont get me wrong - love the guy - but he certainly isnt no mapper.

have a glorious evening.

wow,....um this is not about eisenman in particular, i understand he has a world full of groupies but please, can we move on people.

nope. he's cool and makes pretty diagrams

Eisenman might not be/have been mapping; but neither was it inventing info. After the inported logics of his 'autonomous architecture' of the 70's, the following period of his work was about uncovering hidden underlying structures (not literal, tho Wexner came close) of a site's past, with which to build on, like the Long Beach Museum project. kind of a palimpsest idea, hence the Artififcial Excavations title of the book/exhibition...