The hallucinatory effect derives

From the extraordinary clarity

And not form mystery or mist. Nothing

Is more fantastic ultimately than precision

Robbe-Grillet on Kafka

The?Texas Houses?represent?ten years of a basic training that began to exorcise the reductive tendency. I wanted to learn not only how to put buildings together, but how to?detail conceptually. I have a tendency to reduce. My battle is to bring thing up to the edge and not to go over (and then be content with it). It is a form of auto criticism.

The first Texas House had to do with?program, it had to do with site, it had to do with structure, it had to do with construction, it had to do with detail. And the struggle of how the site and structure worked. The roof framing was an essential argument, and there were others. One was of the programmatic aspect, the program being asymmetrical, yet instituting a symmetrical plan scheme. There were a number of things that were unresolved in Texas House 1 ——?they brought up questions. The second Texas House was done in 1954. It was a system of hollow columns (as did House 1) and they held all the air, all the wire; the whole system was working in there, in service space —— not big service space but ones that were compressed. Electrical, mechanical, and structural systems were being argued constantly.

I do not deal with fantasies. Architects always have to deal with the problem of gravity. That there is a grade plane. The grade is always there, you always have a problem of grade relative to a cubic configuration. You may want to have a floating cube, but it is very hard to have a floating cube when you have to deal with the problem of gravity.

I started the second house to take up some of the unresolved problems of the first. The program became clearer. There was still the problem of a symmetrical condition. That was handled in the major planning, verandahs were introduced and again I used the idea of the hollow column-frame sections. The columns gave me enormous problems, the sizes went from a foot, to six inches, to three inches, which then raised the problem of the plinth. In this case (House 2) the plinth was a very important condition because it related to a site that was beginning to turn, to rotate. The first Texas House site plan was perfectly symmetrical about the long axial condition. In House 2 there’s a wall condition. A car approaches, stops and enters through a wall-porch which acts as a reception area, letting the people off before going into the garage. You’re left on the level of the house plinth and you go down into the site across a sunken area and then up steps. The garden is on the other side, with trees, a pool, and then all of a sudden something else occurs: it’s a guest house which begins to move away from the whole symmetrical condition. House 2 is better from the structural aspect, because I started dealing with the question of the I-beams. In House 1 I was dealing with a structural sub-system; the sections had to do with directions and counter directions. In the roof of House 2 I solved the problem of the structural sections by making a whole steel-grid fin condition (dropping the fins in).

The Fifth House confronts the problem of the nine squares in an asymmetrical condition. It introduces the Mies problem of floating shapes and floating conditions in a pure nine square structure. I wanted to start warping the architectural section by setting up right angle conditions, where the elements would warp as well as the void space, not just physically but by the tension of the pointal conditions. The interesting part is that I began with the Miesian condition. The elevations were the last, and the closest to a Miesian condition. They were dropped at that point. I realized that if I followed that path with the elevations, I would have to be dealing with them exquisitely.

I’m thinking about the relationship of the column surfaces to the volume. A particular column surface to a particular volume, a particular column surface to a particular plane – it’s always a heightened condition of tension. I remember working the relationships so that I could get four special conditions and bounce off each of them. In other words, there’s a phantom volume and caught it. I wanted to talk about antiquated conditions; House 5 is a contemporary plan. I was never satisfied. I dropped it because of the elevations, they started in a neo-classic manner. (I use the term neo-classic loosely). It was a free plan and a neo-classical elevation, a contemporaneous condition which I was able to translate into the elevations. Thus the frustration of it.

The Texas Houses are the result of a search into generating principles of form and space in architecture. There is an attempt to understand certain essences in regard to architectural commitment with the hope of expanding a vocabulary. The discovery of the workings and dictates of an organic development of specific ideas becomes a necessary function of the search. A liberation of mind and hand becomes possible which perhaps leads to certain transformations and visions of form regarding space.

The realization that works in the Arts are the embodiment of specific plastic points of view, that the mind and hand are as one, working on primary principles, and of filling these principle through juxtaposition of basic relationships within the vocabulary of point, line, plane, volume, opened up the possibility of argumentation.

The first moves are arbitrary but once the arbitrary beginning is committed, once the initial intuitions are experienced, it then becomes necessary that the organism proceeds through its natural evolution; and whether the evolution of form continues or stops depends upon the use of the intellect not as an academic tool but as a passionate living element.

The problems of point-line-plane-volume, the facts of square-circle-triangle, the mysteries of central-peripheral-frontal-oblique-concavity-convexity, of right angle, of perpendicular, of perspective, the comprehension of sphere-cyclinder-pyramid, the question of structure-construction-organization, the question of scale, of position, the interest in post-lintel, wall-slab, the extent of a limited field, of an unlimited field, the meaning of plan, of section, the meaning of spatial expansion-spatial compression-spatial tension, the direction of regulating lines, of grids, the force of implied extension, the relationships of figure to ground, of number to proportion, of measurement to scale, of symmetry to asymmetry, of diamond to diagonal, the hidden forces, the ideas of configuration, the static with the dynamic, all begin to take on the form of a vocabulary.

The projects were begun not knowing all the above beforehand, but knowing that the basic orders needed to searched for, becoming known as the work progressed, as the work was analyzed, as the work was criticized, as the work was formed. In order to make principles meaningful and to have them put forth organic revelations, there had to be a given form. The arguments and points of view are within the work, within the drawings. It was hopped that the conflicts of form would lead to a clarity which could be useful and even perhaps transferable.

Texas House 1

The site was imagined to be located somewhere in the hill country of Texas on a slope with a gully in it.

A member of arguments within the house were not resolved. One was that of an asymmetrical program placed in a symmetrical form-structure; the same problem occurred relative to the site, although this could perhaps offset the house asymmetry. The structural columns (the small ones) as far as their penetration to the ground, as still an open question. Someday I will return to these questions, among others.

Column-beam-panel system.

Major bay: Sixteen feet, o.c.

Structure: Steel frame.

Steel frame painted white. Panel frame painted grey. Panel infill painted off-white toward grey. Panel infills also glass, translucent and transparent. Wood also used.

Texas House 2

The asymmetrical program of House 2 moved toward a clearer solution of the symmetrical structure form, but not entirely clear. The obsession with having the steel columns join the granite base occupied me for a considerable time. The argument of a symmetrical building placed in an asymmetrical site emerged. In both House 1 and House 2 I considered the element of verandas; it is said that today there are few verandas proposed. Column reduction-compression in plan acted as a counterpoint to each other. A ceiling grid of steel fins was placed into the bay system between beams.

Column-beam-panel system.

Major bay: Sixteen feet, o.c.

Structure: Steel frame.

Steel frame painted white. Panel frame painted grey. Panel infill painted off-white toward grey. Panel infills also glass, translucent and transparent. Wood also used.

Base: Granite.

Texas House 3

The introduction of masonry bearing walls with peripheral columns and a central court informed the development of this house, as did metal-capped, glass-slotted wall ends and the slippage of steel elements out from void slots. There was a bedroom side, a utility side, and a center for living, including court, library and music. A diagonal relationship of program was attempted . . . tentatively. As in House 1 and House 2 clerestory lighting was a major element. House 3 was started in 1954 and was worked on and off until 1960; it was never fully completed, although the garden opened up particular possibilities.

Column-wall bearing beam-slab system.

Bay system: one foot, twelve feet, nine feet, twelve feet, etc.

Structure: Concrete, masonry, concrete beam-slab.

Walls of stucco, cement finish. Steel trims painted grey, other surfaces off-white. Glass: translucent and transparent. Wood also used.

Texas House 4

Of all the Texas House, House 4 is perhaps the most complete and most resolved. The idea of the reductive element expression of the internal organism upon the peripheral glass facades by mullion notation revealed quiet syncopations. In addition, the glass slots which penetrate through the whole house tend to separate the single volume into three separate parts relative to the vertical plane. Here the relationship of asymmetrical program coincides with asymmetrical structure-form. The slotted, separated structures provoked the possibility of special natural and artificial lighting, along with a roof drainage system. There were two propositions about the site; one being a reflection of the internal plan, the other not. I worked hard on the slab cutouts.

Masonry bearing walls, steel-capped.

Bay system: Sixteen feet, o.c.

Structure: concrete beam-slab system.

Steel painted grey. Other surfaces off-white. Glass: translucent and transparent. Wood also used.

Texas House 5

Of all the nine square investigations that were begun at Texas, House 5 is the purest expression of the nine-bay, sixteen column system. It is a homage to Mies van der Rohe. I wanted to take a deep look at the free-floating elements within the structure grid. In a way it is at once the most simple yet also the most complex investigation. I remember playing off singular columnar surfaces against the floating elements. A rather compact house, forty nine feet by forty nine feet, because of the specific placement of the elements, I believe that if built it would reveal a spatial warp. My friend Robert Slutzky had been working for many years on the problem of obtaining warps from right-angle systems, which in his case worked beautifully.

The cube guest house, the three-sided walled-in garden, the rectangular pool, the car entry between walls, and the garage element set off quite a discussion of size among participants.

Column-beam-fin-grid-system.

Bay system: Sixteen feet, o.c.

Structure: Steel frame.

Steel frame painted white. Glass and wood used.

Texas House 6

Similar to House 4, House 6 has increased its size to three floors and a separated stair tower. A subtraction process: the garage-utility-guest-apartment is a volume that has been removed from the prime house, thereby creating a two-level volume outside and inside the house.

Now both plan and elevation become a nine square grid. It was extremely exciting to discover in elevation the beam of greater depth which appeared in conjunction with the normal beam size as a result of the increased span created by the removal of the void volume.

I don’t know why, but when I look at the basement plan I always think of Poe’s story,?The Cask of Amontillado.

The site plan for some reason seems too austere, too vertical, maybe . . . If it . . .?

Masonry bearing walls, steel-capped.

Bay system: One foot, twelve foot, one foot, twelve foot, one foot, twelve foot, one foot.

Structure: Concrete-beam-slab system.

Steel painted grey. Other surfaces off white. Glass translucent and transparent. Wood, stucco, cement, plaster, also used.

Highly polished metal could be used for capping.

Texas House 7

The final house of the Texas series. The Diamond Houses followed. This house is still being worked upon. The idea was to investigate a column-pier-wall construction system. Another search was to increase the visual scale; the external facades pose this problem.

The program is for a very complex interweaving of space. It appears that three floors from the exterior but in reality there are six. The program interlocks with the system of space enclosures. Isolated and separated inversions and ambiguities were sought.

From the upper floors, which are primarily open to the exterior, down to the basement, there is developed a whirlpool effect: columns to piers to walls to contained volume.

Although they have been thought about intensely, I prefer at this moment not yet to determine the final designation of program, construction, structure, materials or finish.

以下為嘗試翻譯稿，請謹慎閱讀。如有誤導(dǎo)，概不負責(zé)。

幻覺的效應(yīng)

源于超乎尋常的清晰

而非來自神秘或者模糊不清

本質(zhì)上沒有什么是比精確更奇妙的

羅布·格里耶談卡夫卡

這十座德克薩斯住宅代表了一項持續(xù)十年的開始遏止簡化傾向的基本訓(xùn)練。我想研究的不僅僅在于如何將建筑“組裝起來”，還在于如何在概念上細化。我有簡化的傾向。我的“戰(zhàn)斗”是將事物推至極端，而非輕輕掠過（并自滿于此，沾沾自喜）。這算是一種自我批判。

第一座德克薩斯住宅與實際項目有關(guān)，它與場地、結(jié)構(gòu)、建造、細部相關(guān)聯(lián)，并需要考慮場地和結(jié)構(gòu)是否有效。屋頂結(jié)構(gòu)是一個重要的討論，還有一些其他的。其中一個是項目層面的，項目本身是非對稱的，但卻提出了對稱的平面方案。在德克薩斯住宅1中有很多問題沒有被解決--只提出問題。第二座德克薩斯住宅是1954年完成的。它是空心柱體系（和住宅1一樣），里邊藏有全部的新風(fēng)和電線。整個系統(tǒng)在那個服侍空間中工作--一個不大但是被壓縮的服侍空間。電氣、機械和結(jié)構(gòu)體系不斷被討論。

我并不空想，建筑師總要解決重力的問題。建筑周邊有地平面，它是先在的，你總要面對與立方體結(jié)構(gòu)相關(guān)的地坪的問題。也許你想做一個漂浮的立方體，但當(dāng)你不得不處理重力問題時，漂浮的立方體是極難做到的。

我開始第二個房子以重拾第一個房子中很多未解決的問題。這個項目變得更加干凈。這個項目仍然有以對稱為條件的問題。這個問題在主平面中被解決，我引入了柱廊并再一次使用了空心框架柱截面的概念。這些柱子給我?guī)砹司薮蟮膯栴}，其截面尺寸從1英尺到6英寸、3英寸不等，進而引發(fā)了基座的問題。在這個方案（住宅2）中基座是一個非常重要的要素，因為它面臨一個扭轉(zhuǎn)的場地。而住宅1的總平是沿長軸完全對稱的。住宅2有一片先在墻體。當(dāng)車輛經(jīng)過、停車、進入時會通過一條墻-廊，這個廊子正好作為一個接待區(qū)，客人可以在進入車庫前先下車。下車后是在住宅的基座層，然后穿過一片凹地下到基地，然后上臺階?；▓@在另一側(cè)，有樹叢和泳池，然后突然一些其他的事情發(fā)生了：客房開始偏離整體的對稱軸。在結(jié)構(gòu)方面住宅2做的更好，因為我開始處理工字梁的問題。在住宅1中，我在處理結(jié)構(gòu)子系統(tǒng)，梁截面既要承受正向又要承受反向作用。在住宅2的屋頂我通過一套完整的鋼格構(gòu)翅片元素（置入翅片）解決了這個結(jié)構(gòu)截面問題。

第五座房子面臨非對稱條件下的九宮格問題。它在一個純凈的九宮格結(jié)構(gòu)中引入了密斯的流動形和流動空間。我試圖通過引入直角元素來引發(fā)建筑中要素和空余空間的扭轉(zhuǎn)，這個扭轉(zhuǎn)不只是物理上的扭轉(zhuǎn)而是由點狀要素的張力帶來。有趣的是當(dāng)我以密斯式作為前提。立面最后生成，但卻最為接近密斯式前提。它們在那里相遇。我意識到如果我沿著這個方向處理立面，那么我將必須更加巧妙地處理它們。

我有思考柱體表皮與其體量的關(guān)系。特定的柱體表皮對應(yīng)特定的體量，特定的柱表皮對應(yīng)特定的平面--這總是一種緊張的狀態(tài)。我持續(xù)操作這對關(guān)系，直到得到四種特定的條件，然后再逐個推敲它們。換句話說，有一個潛在的體量，要想辦法捕捉到它。我想要談?wù)摴爬系拿}；住宅5是一個現(xiàn)代的設(shè)計。我對它一直不太滿意。因為立面原因，我放棄了它，這些立面以新古典的方式開始。(我輕率地使用了新古典這個術(shù)語)。自由平面和新古典立面，這兩個共時的條件都可以轉(zhuǎn)譯到立面。這正是它令人沮喪的地方。

德克薩斯住宅是建筑形式和空間生成原則研究的結(jié)果。我嘗試理解與建筑職能有關(guān)的某些本質(zhì)，以期拓寬“詞匯量”。對工作方式的探索以及特定想法的有機發(fā)展是這項研究的一個主要作用。它使思想和雙手的解放成為可能，而這也許能指向某些形式及空間的看法和轉(zhuǎn)變。

藝術(shù)作品是特定塑形的體現(xiàn)，思想和雙手是同一的，都基于基本的原則。這些意識以及通過并置點、線、面、體等基本關(guān)系補充這些基本原則，打開了論證的可能性。

最初的動機是主觀的，但是一旦這個主觀的起點被確立，一旦感受到最初的直覺，那么有機體必將沿自然進程發(fā)展; 而形式的發(fā)展是繼續(xù)還是停止，取決于才智的運用——作為狂熱的生活元素的才智，而非學(xué)術(shù)工具。

點、線、面、體問題，正方形、圓形、三角形的真相，中心-邊緣-正面-斜面-凹進-凸出、直角、正交、透視的奧秘，對球體-柱體-錐體的理解，結(jié)構(gòu)-建造-組織問題，尺度、基址問題，對柱-梁、墻-板的興趣，有限領(lǐng)域與無限領(lǐng)域的范圍，平面、剖面的意義，空間擴張-空間壓縮-空間張力的意義，參考線、網(wǎng)格的方向，隱含的延展力，圖形與實地、數(shù)值與比例、尺寸與尺度、對稱與非對稱、菱形與對角線的關(guān)系，隱藏的力量，配置的觀念，靜態(tài)與動態(tài)，這些全都開始以詞匯的形式出現(xiàn)。

這些項目起初并不了解上述這些，只知道要探索基本秩序。隨著作品的發(fā)展、作品的分析、作品的評論、作品的成形，而逐漸了解到。為使原則有意義并提出有機的啟示,就必須有一個特定的形式。這些論點和看法都蘊含于這些作品和圖紙之中。我們希望形式的沖突能指向一種清晰，這種清晰也許是有用的，甚至是可轉(zhuǎn)移的。

德克薩斯住宅1

基地設(shè)想位于德克薩斯州山區(qū)某個斜坡上，在斜坡上有一條溝壑。

在這個房子中的一些問題仍沒有被解決。一是非對稱的功能被布置到對稱的形式結(jié)構(gòu)里。與基地相關(guān)的考慮也有同樣的問題，盡管這也許可以抵消房子本身的不對稱性。至于那些結(jié)構(gòu)柱（小柱子）與地面的交接方式也依舊是一個懸而未決的問題。將來我還會回過頭討論這些問題。

柱-梁-板體系。

主要分隔：16英尺（中線距）。

結(jié)構(gòu)：鋼框架。

鋼框架漆成白色。結(jié)構(gòu)墻漆成灰色。填充墻噴涂灰白色。部分填充墻用半透明和透明玻璃。木材也有使用。

德克薩斯住宅2

住宅2非對稱功能做出了更干凈的對稱的結(jié)構(gòu)形式方案,但仍不夠徹底。我很長一段時間都癡迷于鋼柱與花崗巖基座的連接。出現(xiàn)了對稱的建筑被放置在一個不對稱的基地的爭論。在住宅1和住宅2，我都考慮了“柱廊”的元素；據(jù)說今天很少再有“柱廊”的提案。柱減少-壓縮、在平面相互對位。在梁之間的間隔系統(tǒng)中加入了由鋼翅片構(gòu)成的天花板格網(wǎng)。

柱-梁-板體系。

主要分隔：16英尺（中線距）。

結(jié)構(gòu)：鋼框架。

鋼框架漆成白色。結(jié)構(gòu)墻漆成灰色。填充墻噴涂灰白色。部分填充墻用半透明和透明玻璃。木材也有使用。

基礎(chǔ):花崗巖。

德克薩斯住宅3

帶外圍柱的磚石承重墻和中庭的引入，以及金屬屋蓋、玻璃開槽墻端和從空隙間滑動的鋼構(gòu)件，定義了這座房子的發(fā)展。功能包括臥室、公共部分以及生活中心，包括庭院、圖書館和音樂室。對角線關(guān)系曾經(jīng)短暫地被嘗試。如住宅1和住宅2一樣，天窗照明是一個主要因素。住宅3于1954年開始，斷斷續(xù)續(xù)地進行到1960年，盡管庭院開辟了一些特別的可能性，但它從未被徹底完成。

柱-墻承重梁-板體系。

分隔體系：1英尺、12英尺、9英尺、12英尺...

結(jié)構(gòu):混凝土、砌體、混凝土梁板。

墻面水泥粉刷，鋼飾板涂成灰色,其他表面涂成白色。玻璃:半透明和透明。木材也有使用。

德克薩斯住宅4

在所有德克薩斯住宅中，住宅4可能是完成度最高，問題解決最徹底的一座。通過窗欞切分將內(nèi)部有機體還原要素表達到外圍玻璃立面上的的概念揭示了安靜的切分音符。此外，貫穿整個住宅的玻璃槽幾乎將整個體量沿垂直方向分割成三個獨立的部分。在這里，非對稱項目與非對稱的結(jié)構(gòu)形式相匹配。開槽,分離的結(jié)構(gòu)引發(fā)了特殊的自然和人工照明以及某種屋面排水系統(tǒng)的可能性。關(guān)于這個場地有兩個提案，一個作為內(nèi)部平面的反映，另一個則不。我花了很大的精力在板的切分上。

砌體承重墻，鋼屋蓋。

分隔體系：16英尺（中線距）。

結(jié)構(gòu):鋼筋混凝土梁板體系。

鋼構(gòu)件漆成灰色。其他表面涂成白色。玻璃:半透明和透明。木頭也有使用。

德克薩斯住宅5

在所有開始于德克薩斯的九宮格研究中，5號宅是最純粹表達九格、十六柱體系的一座。這是向密斯·凡·德·羅致敬的一個作品。我想在結(jié)構(gòu)網(wǎng)格中深入觀察“流動空間”。在某種程度上,這是一次最簡單也最復(fù)雜的探索。我記得操作柱表皮對抗流動元素。這個住宅相當(dāng)緊湊，四十九英尺見方，我相信如果建造的話，由于元素的特別布置，它將揭示空間的扭曲。我的朋友羅伯特·斯拉斯基已經(jīng)研究從直角系統(tǒng)獲得扭曲的問題研究了很多年，在他看了（這個作品）效果很好。

立方體客房、三面圍合花園、矩形泳池池、墻之間的汽車入口，以及車庫元素在參與者中引發(fā)了相當(dāng)大的討論。

柱-梁-翅-格構(gòu)體系。

分隔體系：16英尺（中線距）。

結(jié)構(gòu):鋼框架。

鋼框架漆成白色。

玻璃和木材也有使用。

德克薩斯住宅6

與住宅4相似，但住宅6將尺度增加到三層高，且多了一個獨立的樓梯塔樓。減法的過程：車庫-公共設(shè)施-客房-公寓體量從主體建筑中排出在外，從而形成住宅內(nèi)和外的雙重體量。

于是平面和立面都成為了九宮格。立面設(shè)計中令人驚喜地發(fā)現(xiàn)由于移除空余體量造成跨度增大從而形成的深度更大的梁與普通尺寸的梁協(xié)同工作。

不知道為什么，每次看地下室的平面總讓我想起埃德加·艾倫·坡的小說《阿芒提拉多的酒桶》。

出于某種原因，總平面顯得過于簡單、太過豎向，或許...如果...

磚石承重墻，鋼屋蓋。

分隔體系：1英尺、12英尺、1英尺、12英尺、1英尺、12英尺、1英尺。

結(jié)構(gòu)：混凝土梁板體系。

鋼框架漆成灰色，其他表面涂成白色，玻璃半透明或透明。木材、灰泥、水泥、石膏等也有使用。

高度拋光金屬可用于屋蓋。

德克薩斯住宅7

德克薩斯住宅系列最后一座，接下來就是菱形住宅的研究。這個住宅的研究目前仍在繼續(xù)。其想法是探索一種柱-垛-墻結(jié)構(gòu)體系。另一個探討是關(guān)于增大視覺尺度，這個問題因外立面而起。

這個項目的空間復(fù)雜而相互交織，從外立面看只有三層但實際上卻是個六層建筑。方案與空間表皮相關(guān)聯(lián)，空間分割與圍合相倒置，尋求一種模棱兩可。

從主要與室外相連的地上樓層到地下室，形成了某種漩渦效應(yīng)：柱、垛，墻及圍合的體量之間。

盡管這些一直被深入地思考，但我至今仍選擇不去確定方案、建造、結(jié)構(gòu)、材料及完成的最終定稿。

1. 本篇英文原稿及插圖來自于Mask of Medusa，by John Hejduk；

2. o.c, on center, 建筑圖紙中的縮寫，這里可以譯為中線距；

3. 前文有提到，本來德克薩斯住宅系列研究計劃每年一座一共做十年，但當(dāng)做到第七座的時候情況突然發(fā)生變化，開始轉(zhuǎn)向了菱形住宅。

4. 我發(fā)現(xiàn)，覺得海杜克的房子特別難讀是因為我拿它當(dāng)文本在讀，而沒有真正當(dāng)房子在讀；

5. 更多相關(guān)翻譯：IDsCeLeee