http://elseplace.blogspot.ro/2009/06/katarxis-moment-peter-eisenman-and-leon.

html
Peter Eisenmann: " There are only perfect ideas in the classical ideology. However today, where
the elements of cosmology are no longer the same, we cannot return to a classical system. "
Leon Krier: " Our goal as artists and architects consists in understanding that universal system
and that universal order which allow us to produce artistical artefacts, in the same way in which
nature is creating individual beings. This is what makes classicism: It represents the fundamental
system which allows us to create objects of timeless beauty. "
Peter Eisenman: " Classicism encompasses the idea of perfection as it can be encountered in
Nature. As I said already, it is not possible anymore today to represent this classical concept of
perfection -of harmony between Man and Nature, because this ideal state has been destroyed by
forces generated by mankind. One cannot continue to use classical means of representation,
because, what they represent, does not exist anymore.
Leon Krier: " It is absurd to prohibit good architecture because we live in terrible times. "
Peter Eisenmann: " Leon, come on, you cannot build this way anymore today! "
Leon Krier: " You can't, but I can! "
http://doyouwantcoffee.blogspot.ro/2006/03/materiality-and-architecture-leon.html
Materiality and Architecture - Leon Krier
In this forum, a reoccurring theme in some posts has been the relationship between the
materiality of Architecture and the ephemeral and transcendent nature of Architecture. Its
materiality has been painted as a medium for larger concepts, and sometimes hindrance to the
delivery of these ideas, by infatuation, fetishization, or disinterest. The Jacque Herzog quote two
months ago, from his Pritzker Prize acceptance speech, may have most succinctly and poetically
captured this duality how the conceptual and the material in Architecture are forever
interdependent, yet necessarily autonomous at operational levels.
Mapping an unexpected corner of this relationship is Leon Krier. The Belgian architect and
designer for Prince Charles has built a career from a frontal assault on Modernism, earning
professional celebrity in the 80s from an ongoing debate with Peter Eisenman about the
direction of design exploration. The two are dear friends now, and recently Mr. Eisenman sat on
a final jury for Mr. Kriers studio. The following discussion is a polite exchange between the two
as Mr. Krier introduced the studio problem. It is valuable as it suggests a way to approach
Western Architectures cultural heritage and even catches a participant in one of those
Architecture is moments, where in order to explain why we intervene in a certain way with
our work, we end up offering a definition of Architecture as a common starting point
Leon Krier: We looked at this. The students everyonehad to draw. We had to research here.
They had to draw for the first time in their life one of the buildings. Not only in [] but also in
grade elevation, understand the construction, understand the materials. An all of this material had
to be put on the computer so it becomes a bank of knowledge, not only of style but also of
technique. Which then became a common index which can be reused by everyone in the next

phase, which was the problem phase. Once these records were made, we could do some brief
exercises -- to take a detail and to distort it. Distort it from the grotesque to the sublime, [in
order] to be able to understand what is classical. To understand what is the nature of the classical,
what is the best proportion of the column in a given situation.
[Three minutes later, at the end of the studio problem introduction.]
Peter Eisenman: Leon, before we get started, I have two questions. What is the difference to you
between the grotesque and the sublime? You said before you were going to take a classical
column and move it towards the grotesque or the sublime
Krier: There are many, many ahh...
Peter Eisenman: I need a quick mission statement.
Krier: Bulimia or anorexia would be a good, ahh...
Peter Eisenman: Oh. And the other would be, what's the difference between classical and
vernacular?
Leon Krier: Yes. Ahh. [...] I think that architecture is ninety percent vernacular. Any of it...
Other: But what does it look like?
Leon Krier: It is technology. It is technique of building. It has no "style." It is joining natural
materials in a tectonic way. Concrete and steel displaced this, because everything becomes style.
When you use concrete there is no more "vernacular."
Peter Eisenman: Why not use concrete instead of vernacular materials?
Leon Krier: No. Its not a natural material. Its nature. And we are not nature, we are cultural. We
are artificial. Whereas concrete is a form of blubber, which has no shape. It sticks together in
forms which are completely untectonic and holds up for a while. But not for very long. Its a very
fragile material. And very well nasty...
Peter Eisenman: What's the difference between bricks... bricks and mortar, mortar and concrete
materially?
Leon Krier: Bricks? Oh, the cost. The energy cost. We should have Glenn Murcutt up. The
energy cost to produce or create one brick is about... "x", and to produce reinforced concrete cost
would be a factor of about seven -- at a minimum.
Peter Eisenman: But P.S. -- just in terms of cost [Demitri Porphyrios?]'s brick-and-mortar
building at Princeton is the most expensive buildings ever built, at Princeton. And I don't know
what...

Leon Krier: We are conducted to an architecture, to brick buildings, any style -- all our buildings
are fake. Even our industrial building. But that's the industrial condition. Nevertheless, we have
the model of joining natural materials in a tectonic way, that is the overriding intellectual
discipline. Materials, which informs architecture. Now Architecture is when you join these
materials in an artful way. But I don't think you need 150% of []'s to be happy. Maybe 10% of the
[] is enough. It is correctly those...
Peter Eisenman: That's the artfulness of the vernacular? When vernacular becomes artful it's
classical?
Krier: Yes.