House VI / Peter Eisenman | Classics On Architecture Lab

Architects: Peter Eisenman
Year: 1975
Photographs: Peter Eisenman, Eisenman Architects, NJIT, sketchygrid.com
Town: Cornwall
Country: United States

House VI, designed by Peter Eisenman between 1972-1975 for Mr. and Mrs. Richard Frank in Cornwall, Connecticut, defies traditional notions of domestic architecture. Unlike the Vanna Venturi House, it embraces disorientation without referencing the conventional home. Developed from a grid-based conceptual process, the design divided the house into four sections, with exposed structural elements acting as a “record of the design process.” Some columns and beams serve no structural purpose, such as a hovering column in the kitchen and beams that meet without intersecting, emphasizing Eisenman’s notational system. The interior, formed by interlocking planes, disregards function, creating unconventional and challenging spaces. Examples include a bedroom divided by a glass slot that forces separate beds, an upside-down red staircase marking the house’s axis, and a single bathroom accessible only through a bedroom. While difficult to inhabit, the house forces users to engage with its architecture as a living work of art. Prioritizing art over function, House VI became both a home and a sculptural masterpiece, with the clients appreciating its poetic and theoretical significance.

Unlike the Vanna Venturi House, Peter Eisenman’s House VI embraces disorientation without referencing the concept of a traditional home. It is, in fact, far from what one might consider a conventional house. Designed between 1972 and 1975 for Mr. and Mrs. Richard Frank, the project marked a significant opportunity for Eisenman, a member of the New York Five, to translate his theoretical work into practice. Known previously as a “paper architect” and theorist, Eisenman created one of the most renowned and challenging houses in the United States, earning the admiration of his clients.

House VI / Peter Eisenman | Classics on Architecture Lab

Located on a flat site in Cornwall, Connecticut, House VI stands as a sculptural work within its surroundings. The design originated from a conceptual process rooted in a grid, which Eisenman manipulated to divide the house into four sections. Once completed, the building served as a “record of the design process,” with structural elements intentionally exposed to make the construction process visible—though not always immediately comprehensible.

The house became an exploration of the relationship between physical structure and architectural theory. Constructed efficiently using a simple post-and-beam system, certain columns and beams were deliberately non-structural, incorporated to emphasize the conceptual design. For instance, a column in the kitchen hovers above the table without touching the ground, while in other areas, beams meet but do not intersect, forming clusters of supports. Architectural critic Robert Gutman remarked, “most of these columns have no role in supporting the building planes, but are there, like the planes and the slits in the walls and ceilings that represent planes, to mark the geometry and rhythm of Eisenman’s notational system.”

The structure was integrated into Eisenman’s grid to express the modular system that defined the interior spaces, with a series of planes intersecting and slipping through each other. Deliberately rejecting the principle of form following function, Eisenman designed spaces that were quirky, well-lit, yet unconventional and challenging to inhabit. He intentionally created difficulties for users, compelling them to adapt to the architecture and remain constantly aware of it. For example, the bedroom features a glass slot running through the center of the wall and floor, dividing the space in half and necessitating separate beds on either side, forcing the couple to sleep apart.

Another intriguing feature of the house is an upside-down staircase, painted red to emphasize its role as the axis of the design and to draw attention. Furthermore, the house includes several other unconventional elements that challenge traditional living arrangements. These include a column suspended above the dining table, disrupting interactions between diners, and a single bathroom accessible only through a bedroom, further complicating usability.

Despite the challenges of inhabiting the house, Eisenman succeeded in continuously reminding its users of the presence of architecture and its impact on their lives. He created a structure that functioned both as a house and a work of art, deliberately prioritizing art over functionality. In doing so, he crafted a home where the occupants were compelled to live within a sculpture. According to the clients, who appreciated the poetic and artistic qualities of Eisenman’s design, the house was a resounding success.