《设计基础》课程教学资源（电子图书）Precedents in Architecture（Analytic Diagrams, Formative Ideas, and Partis）Fourth Edition

efforts deserve recognition.We are indebted to Wendy own interpretations and some are more interpretive than Lochner for persuading us to attempt a second edition.Her others.Obviously these diagrams are then abstractions that support and encouragement were critical.The editorial staff focus on an issue that we have identified.For a particular at Van Nostrand Reinhold provided us with willing and valu- architect or building a single diagram may be clearer or more able assistance.James L.Nagle,Victor Reigner,and Mark revealing,which might suggest the identification of an issue Simon supported our efforts through encouragement,sug- of interest to the architect involved.By examining the build- gestions,and recommendations.Peter Bohlin and Carole ings through the same issues it is possible to see relation- Rusche generously contributed valuable information on the ships and nuances of development between architects and works of some of the architects.Collectively,we thank the their buildings.We also understand that architecture has staff of the School of Design for their willing assistance. many manifestations-social,technical,economical,cultur- Special recognition goes to Mara Murdoch who single- al,legal,and political.Any or all of these areas can impact handedly,with great skill,dedication,and patience,drew all the final form of the building,as can an individual architect's of the new pages. or client's personal predilection or whim. Finally.we wish to acknowledge all of our students,who Of those architects.for instance,that have been added have shown us that the study of precedents is a valuable tool for this edition,we know of Sigurd Lewerentz's interest in for learning to design,and who continue to challenge us. not doing things the conventional way.He is perhaps not as well known as some of the other architects in this volume, probably because he did not write about his work and did PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION not teach.Fortunately,some publications have appeared in recent years that have chronicled his life and his work.We We commend to the reader the Prefaces to the first and sec- found it interesting that while he began with a refined,yet ond editions of this volume.Much of what is included in original,Classical language (at the Chapel of the those Prefaces remains pertinent to us and our feelings Resurrection,for instance).his later work,represented here about this work.The approach to understanding architec- by the St.John's Church in Klippan,rejected that language. ture presented herein continues to be useful and this edition Yet there are similarities between the earlier and later work, again gave us the opportunity to enrich the Analysis section as revealed by the analytical diagrams.His work demon- by adding factual and analytic information on two buildings strates a subdued and restrained imagination that resulted in by each of eight architects. uncompromising and mysterious buildings. As with the previous editions.we have chosen to contin- Steven Holl seems to borrow from concepts of biology ue to present the buildings as a series of analytical diagrams and geology in making sculpturally fluid spaces.While his that examine archetypal ideas.Our intention is to continue buildings gesture toward their context,he has an obvious to explore the commonality of design ideas for comparison. interest in the introduction and manipulation of natural light We,of course,are aware that the architects examined here- for the interior spaces of his buildings.Much has been written in may not have embraced the subjects of the diagrams nor. about the importance of his sketches and watercolors in cap- if they did consider the issues,approached them in the same turing the feelings he desires for a building,yet his early inter- way we have interpreted them.Thus,the diagrams are our est in geometries is still demonstrated in his recent buildings. vii

efforts deserve recognition. We are indebted to Wendy Lochner for persuading us to attempt a second edition. Her support and encouragement were critical. The editorial staff at Van Nostrand Reinhold provided us with willing and valu￾able assistance. James L. Nagle, Victor Reigner, and Mark Simon supported our efforts through encouragement, sug￾gestions, and recommendations. Peter Bohlin and Carole Rusche generously contributed valuable information on the works of some of the architects. Collectively, we thank the staff of the School of Design for their willing assistance. Special recognition goes to Mara Murdoch who single￾handedly, with great skill, dedication, and patience, drew all of the new pages. Finally, we wish to acknowledge all of our students, who have shown us that the study of precedents is a valuable tool for learning to design, and who continue to challenge us. PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION We commend to the reader the Prefaces to the first and sec￾ond editions of this volume. Much of what is included in those Prefaces remains pertinent to us and our feelings about this work. The approach to understanding architec￾ture presented herein continues to be useful and this edition again gave us the opportunity to enrich the Analysis section by adding factual and analytic information on two buildings by each of eight architects. As with the previous editions, we have chosen to contin￾ue to present the buildings as a series of analytical diagrams that examine archetypal ideas. Our intention is to continue to explore the commonality of design ideas for comparison. We, of course, are aware that the architects examined here￾in may not have embraced the subjects of the diagrams nor, if they did consider the issues, approached them in the same way we have interpreted them. Thus, the diagrams are our own interpretations and some are more interpretive than others. Obviously these diagrams are then abstractions that focus on an issue that we have identified. For a particular architect or building a single diagram may be clearer or more revealing, which might suggest the identification of an issue of interest to the architect involved. By examining the build￾ings through the same issues it is possible to see relation￾ships and nuances of development between architects and their buildings. We also understand that architecture has many manifestations—social, technical, economical, cultur￾al, legal, and political. Any or all of these areas can impact the final form of the building, as can an individual architect’s or client’s personal predilection or whim. Of those architects, for instance, that have been added for this edition, we know of Sigurd Lewerentz’s interest in not doing things the conventional way. He is perhaps not as well known as some of the other architects in this volume, probably because he did not write about his work and did not teach. Fortunately, some publications have appeared in recent years that have chronicled his life and his work. We found it interesting that while he began with a refined, yet original, Classical language (at the Chapel of the Resurrection, for instance), his later work, represented here by the St. John’s Church in Klippan, rejected that language. Yet there are similarities between the earlier and later work, as revealed by the analytical diagrams. His work demon￾strates a subdued and restrained imagination that resulted in uncompromising and mysterious buildings. Steven Holl seems to borrow from concepts of biology and geology in making sculpturally fluid spaces. While his buildings gesture toward their context, he has an obvious interest in the introduction and manipulation of natural light for the interior spaces of his buildings. Much has been written about the importance of his sketches and watercolors in cap￾turing the feelings he desires for a building, yet his early inter￾est in geometries is still demonstrated in his recent buildings. vii

Rafael Moneo's work included in this edition shows his lished the original edition of Precedents in Architecture in intense use of the site,resulting in a building that is compact 1985 and the second edition followed in 1996.Both editions and basically fills the site.Through this compactness.Moneo have been through several printings,and each has been reacts to the urban context while providing an autonomous translated into Spanish and Japanese.We are also aware that and animated inner world.Herzog and de Meuron,on the these editions have been translated on an ad-hoc basis into other hand,give obvious priority in their work to the skin, Korean and Chinese.The second edition received an the surface,of their buildings.Perhaps their desire is to cre- International Architecture Book Award from the American ate a visual and tactile surface that will create the percep- Institute of Architects.The jury for this awards program, tion that the built form has disappeared. which included books from publishers worldwide,com- The common thread is that each of these architects has, mented that "Precedents in Architecture provides a vocabu- regardless of their interest or considerations,produced built lary for architectural analysis that helps architects under- forms that include the physical and spatial realms of archi- stand the works of others and aids in creating original ideas. tecture.Architecture is not formless.In the end the built Whether a novice or professional,this work enriches the form may outlast the current fascinations and considera- reader's design vocabulary." tions.The issues we examine here may not be part of those The success and longevity of this work suggests there is considerations.Our analytical diagrams afford a way to a need for this information about architecture.As we started understand buildings.In some cases they may help build a to produce the material for this third edition,we were keen- formal vocabulary.The issues examined could be the means ly aware of the initial premise for the study-the commonal- for ordering or organizing an idea,or they may possibly be a ity and significance of design ideas that transcend time and way to generate a design.In any case,we can diagram what place.As the work progressed,these assumptions have been has been done,but not necessarily why it has been done. reinforced.Architectural ideas are the underpinnings of The work that has been used for this third edition is in architecture upon which other concerns-social,technical, the same format as the previous editions.The new pages economical,cultural,legal,and political-are layered. have been seamlessly inserted into the Analysis section in In addition to the acknowledgments cited in the prefaces alphabetical order.This section now includes the work of to the first and second editions,we wish to recognize some thirty-one architects.Collectively they represent architects people directly related to this edition.It is always difficult to of historic importance and those who have produced mean- thank adequately all of the individuals who have had an ingful work recently.All were selected not only because of influence on this work or have contributed to its develop- the quality and strength of their work,but also because they ment.We are indebted to each of them whether they knew afford the opportunity to explore buildings,their organiza- they had an influence or not.Certain people,however. tions,and ordering ideas,through comparison. deserve to be mentioned specifically.This edition would not We began exploring the analysis of architectural prece- have existed at all without the efforts of Margaret Cummins dents in the 1970s and first published such work in a student of John Wiley and Sons.She approached us about consider- publication of the School (now College)of Design at North ing a third edition,and she made it all possible by securing Carolina State University.That volume,titled Analysis of for us a grant from John Wiley to support our work.Her pow- Precedent,appeared in 1978.Van Nostrand Reinhold pub- ers of persuasion,suggestions,and encouragement were vi曲

Rafael Moneo’s work included in this edition shows his intense use of the site, resulting in a building that is compact and basically fills the site. Through this compactness, Moneo reacts to the urban context while providing an autonomous and animated inner world. Herzog and de Meuron, on the other hand, give obvious priority in their work to the skin, the surface, of their buildings. Perhaps their desire is to cre￾ate a visual and tactile surface that will create the percep￾tion that the built form has disappeared. The common thread is that each of these architects has, regardless of their interest or considerations, produced built forms that include the physical and spatial realms of archi￾tecture. Architecture is not formless. In the end the built form may outlast the current fascinations and considera￾tions. The issues we examine here may not be part of those considerations. Our analytical diagrams afford a way to understand buildings. In some cases they may help build a formal vocabulary. The issues examined could be the means for ordering or organizing an idea, or they may possibly be a way to generate a design. In any case, we can diagram what has been done, but not necessarily why it has been done. The work that has been used for this third edition is in the same format as the previous editions. The new pages have been seamlessly inserted into the Analysis section in alphabetical order. This section now includes the work of thirty-one architects. Collectively they represent architects of historic importance and those who have produced mean￾ingful work recently. All were selected not only because of the quality and strength of their work, but also because they afford the opportunity to explore buildings, their organiza￾tions, and ordering ideas, through comparison. We began exploring the analysis of architectural prece￾dents in the 1970s and first published such work in a student publication of the School (now College) of Design at North Carolina State University. That volume, titled Analysis of Precedent, appeared in 1978. Van Nostrand Reinhold pub￾lished the original edition of Precedents in Architecture in 1985 and the second edition followed in 1996. Both editions have been through several printings, and each has been translated into Spanish and Japanese. We are also aware that these editions have been translated on an ad-hoc basis into Korean and Chinese. The second edition received an International Architecture Book Award from the American Institute of Architects. The jury for this awards program, which included books from publishers worldwide, com￾mented that “Precedents in Architecture provides a vocabu￾lary for architectural analysis that helps architects under￾stand the works of others and aids in creating original ideas. Whether a novice or professional, this work enriches the reader’s design vocabulary.” The success and longevity of this work suggests there is a need for this information about architecture. As we started to produce the material for this third edition, we were keen￾ly aware of the initial premise for the study—the commonal￾ity and significance of design ideas that transcend time and place. As the work progressed, these assumptions have been reinforced. Architectural ideas are the underpinnings of architecture upon which other concerns—social, technical, economical, cultural, legal, and political—are layered. In addition to the acknowledgments cited in the prefaces to the first and second editions, we wish to recognize some people directly related to this edition. It is always difficult to thank adequately all of the individuals who have had an influence on this work or have contributed to its develop￾ment. We are indebted to each of them whether they knew they had an influence or not. Certain people, however, deserve to be mentioned specifically. This edition would not have existed at all without the efforts of Margaret Cummins of John Wiley and Sons. She approached us about consider￾ing a third edition, and she made it all possible by securing for us a grant from John Wiley to support our work. Her pow￾ers of persuasion, suggestions, and encouragement were viii

critical.The other members of the editorial,art,and produc- into the Analysis section using the techniques and format tion staff at Wiley were also helpful.Peter Q.Bohlin,James L. that were developed previously.The analytic diagrams are Nagle,and Victor Reignier encouraged us through sugges- our interpretations and are thus abstractions that purposely tions and recommendations.We also thank the College of eliminate some information found in the plans,elevations. Design,its administration and staff,for their willing assis- and sections of the buildings.The desire through these tance. abstractions is to highlight the particular issue being As with previous editions all of the pages in this edition examined.By presenting the factual information on a page are from original drawings.While we are responsible for the adjacent to the analytic diagrams our intention is to aid the content of the drawings,Jason Miller has with diligence, reader in connecting the factual information with our inter- patience,and great skill interpreted our sketches to create pretation.Placing all of the analytic diagrams on one page these thirty-two new pages.We owe him a special thank you. affords the reader the opportunity to accumulate informa- Finally,as we have done previously,we wish to thank tion about the building.One can also read from page to page our students,who reinforce,challenge,and question con- to compare any one analytic diagram to see how different stantly while demonstrating that analytical processes are architects addressed that particular issue.Alternatively.one valuable as a tool for design.They make each day an inter- can refer to the Formative Idea section of the book to see esting pleasure. collections of diagrams of buildings by various architects about one archetypal idea. We are aware that the built form from any architect is PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION the result of multiple considerations-social,technical,eco- nomic,cultural,legal,and political-not the least of which Our commentary in the original,second,and third editions are the programmatic peculiarities and the client's interests remains relevant and we commend the reader to them.The and concerns.Of the architects we have added to this methodology of analysis and the formative ideas presented edition we know,for instance.of the importance that the continue to be a useful means for providing a vocabulary for region has had on Brian Mackay-Lyons.His architecture understanding the architectural work of others and for cre- takes advantage of local building skills while responding to ating architecture.It provides a tool for connecting archi- the particular geography and climate of the site where he tectural works regardless of time or origin.Thus,it affords builds.Others have even referred to him as "the poet of the opportunity to transcend style,culture,and type.It place."However,the importance of place does not change reminds us that there is more to architecture than a picture his apparent interest and abilities in other issues of form like or a well composed photograph. geometry,proportion,spatial manipulation,and the relation- As with the previous editions we have added to the ship between the plan and section that consistently appear Analysis section of the book with the desire to present fac- in his buildings. tual drawings and information about the buildings,along Tom Kundig has indicated on many occasions that his with our analysis of these buildings.The new information source of inspiration has always been "the large landscape" presents the work of seven architects with two buildings by and clearly he makes gestures in his work to that landscape. each of them.This new work has been seamlessly inserted He has also written about the seminal influence of a sculptor

critical. The other members of the editorial, art, and produc￾tion staff at Wiley were also helpful. Peter Q. Bohlin, James L. Nagle, and Victor Reignier encouraged us through sugges￾tions and recommendations. We also thank the College of Design, its administration and staff, for their willing assis￾tance. As with previous editions all of the pages in this edition are from original drawings. While we are responsible for the content of the drawings, Jason Miller has with diligence, patience, and great skill interpreted our sketches to create these thirty-two new pages. We owe him a special thank you. Finally, as we have done previously, we wish to thank our students, who reinforce, challenge, and question con￾stantly while demonstrating that analytical processes are valuable as a tool for design. They make each day an inter￾esting pleasure. PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION Our commentary in the original, second, and third editions remains relevant and we commend the reader to them. The methodology of analysis and the formative ideas presented continue to be a useful means for providing a vocabulary for understanding the architectural work of others and for cre￾ating architecture. It provides a tool for connecting archi￾tectural works regardless of time or origin. Thus, it affords the opportunity to transcend style, culture, and type. It reminds us that there is more to architecture than a picture or a well composed photograph. As with the previous editions we have added to the Analysis section of the book with the desire to present fac￾tual drawings and information about the buildings, along with our analysis of these buildings. The new information presents the work of seven architects with two buildings by each of them. This new work has been seamlessly inserted into the Analysis section using the techniques and format that were developed previously. The analytic diagrams are our interpretations and are thus abstractions that purposely eliminate some information found in the plans, elevations, and sections of the buildings. The desire through these abstractions is to highlight the particular issue being examined. By presenting the factual information on a page adjacent to the analytic diagrams our intention is to aid the reader in connecting the factual information with our inter￾pretation. Placing all of the analytic diagrams on one page affords the reader the opportunity to accumulate informa￾tion about the building. One can also read from page to page to compare any one analytic diagram to see how different architects addressed that particular issue. Alternatively, one can refer to the Formative Idea section of the book to see collections of diagrams of buildings by various architects about one archetypal idea. We are aware that the built form from any architect is the result of multiple considerations – social, technical, eco￾nomic, cultural, legal, and political – not the least of which are the programmatic peculiarities and the client’s interests and concerns. Of the architects we have added to this edition we know, for instance, of the importance that the region has had on Brian MacKay-Lyons. His architecture takes advantage of local building skills while responding to the particular geography and climate of the site where he builds. Others have even referred to him as “the poet of place.” However, the importance of place does not change his apparent interest and abilities in other issues of form like geometry, proportion, spatial manipulation, and the relation￾ship between the plan and section that consistently appear in his buildings. Tom Kundig has indicated on many occasions that his source of inspiration has always been “the large landscape” and clearly he makes gestures in his work to that landscape. He has also written about the seminal influence of a sculptor ix

through interactions early in his life that still impact his as one crosses the bridge.Beel refers to this court as a thinking and his work.It seems that this early influence is “floorless patio.” manifest in his sophisticated use of materials and the impor- From October 2009 until the end of January 2010,David tance of craftsmen in creating his custom-made mechanical Chipperfield had a comprehensive exhibit of his work at the devices or contraptions,most often referred to as "gizmos," Design Museum in London titled "Form Matters"that distin- that are found in his work.But it appears that between his guishes between shape and form.In his terms shape is interest in the language of details and the larger landscape organic,more the result of consequence;while form implies he is also interested in other archetypal ideas. discipline and is something that could be constructed. If Brian MacKay-Lyons is the poet of place,Thomas Therefore,whatever its provocation,it is form that we Phifer could be considered the poet of the pavilion.Using a design.Chipperfield himself is a conservative form maker. more universal language of twentieth-century modernism, He is not interested in creating buildings that constantly tell Phifer creates precise minimalist sculptures that are some- us how clever the architect is,nor is he interested in expres- times solid,but more often transparent.These pavilions are sion for the sake of expression.His quiet architecture geometrically derived and,when transparent,visually deli- nonetheless is special. cate with a series of layers of scrims and mesh panels that We have chosen each of the architects to add to this edi- alter the light quality while maintaining views.The ephemer- tion of the book because we believe their work is strong and al quality of these pavilions,often setting within a landscape that their buildings add depth to the issues we have ana- that is equally as controlled as the architecture,is constant- lyzed.However complex the architecture may be,or howev- ly altered both internally and externally by the changing cli- er many concerns the architect grappled with,or whatever matic conditions. their motives or interest may be,each of the architects has In the two houses by Stephane Beel it is obvious he produced built forms that can be analyzed.As stated previ- reveals much about the house and its site through the ously,these built forms may very well outlast the architect's process of entry.Villa Maesen is a linear building of close to interests and their current fascinations and considerations. two hundred feet in length located in a former kitchen gar- We understand that the architect may not have considered den of a nearby chateau that features a series of prominent what we have diagrammed,but the diagrams can describe walls.In essence.the villa becomes a new inhabited wall the formal aspects of the building as we interpret them.So sited parallel to the longest existing wall and is located the we can diagram what has been done-the form-while we same distance from that existing wall as is the width of the also understand that may not be why it was done.Through house.With the villa approximately the same height as the the analysis we have created one story about the building wall,one then enters into the house through a space that is that can be related,not all of the stories that are possible. the negative of the house.Villa P is also a linear scheme,but As indicated in the Preface to the Third Edition in this instance the line is bent to form four sides of a court. Precedents in Architecture has been continuously published Entry is through a gap in the bent linear form,across a since 1985 first by Van Nostrand Reinhold and subsequently bridge,through the court,to the door on the opposite side of by John Wiley Sons.It has been translated into at least the court.While the form of the house might be expected on four languages and in 2006 the China Architecture and a flat site,in this case there is a sloped site that is revealed Building Press published the Third Edition in Chinese.The

x through interactions early in his life that still impact his thinking and his work. It seems that this early influence is manifest in his sophisticated use of materials and the impor￾tance of craftsmen in creating his custom-made mechanical devices or contraptions, most often referred to as “gizmos,” that are found in his work. But it appears that between his interest in the language of details and the larger landscape he is also interested in other archetypal ideas. If Brian MacKay-Lyons is the poet of place, Thomas Phifer could be considered the poet of the pavilion. Using a more universal language of twentieth-century modernism, Phifer creates precise minimalist sculptures that are some￾times solid, but more often transparent. These pavilions are geometrically derived and, when transparent, visually deli￾cate with a series of layers of scrims and mesh panels that alter the light quality while maintaining views. The ephemer￾al quality of these pavilions, often setting within a landscape that is equally as controlled as the architecture, is constant￾ly altered both internally and externally by the changing cli￾matic conditions. In the two houses by Stephane Beel it is obvious he reveals much about the house and its site through the process of entry. Villa Maesen is a linear building of close to two hundred feet in length located in a former kitchen gar￾den of a nearby chateau that features a series of prominent walls. In essence, the villa becomes a new inhabited wall sited parallel to the longest existing wall and is located the same distance from that existing wall as is the width of the house. With the villa approximately the same height as the wall, one then enters into the house through a space that is the negative of the house. Villa P is also a linear scheme, but in this instance the line is bent to form four sides of a court. Entry is through a gap in the bent linear form, across a bridge, through the court, to the door on the opposite side of the court. While the form of the house might be expected on a flat site, in this case there is a sloped site that is revealed as one crosses the bridge. Beel refers to this court as a “floorless patio.” From October 2009 until the end of January 2010, David Chipperfield had a comprehensive exhibit of his work at the Design Museum in London titled “Form Matters” that distin￾guishes between shape and form. In his terms shape is organic, more the result of consequence; while form implies discipline and is something that could be constructed. Therefore, whatever its provocation, it is form that we design. Chipperfield himself is a conservative form maker. He is not interested in creating buildings that constantly tell us how clever the architect is, nor is he interested in expres￾sion for the sake of expression. His quiet architecture nonetheless is special. We have chosen each of the architects to add to this edi￾tion of the book because we believe their work is strong and that their buildings add depth to the issues we have ana￾lyzed. However complex the architecture may be, or howev￾er many concerns the architect grappled with, or whatever their motives or interest may be, each of the architects has produced built forms that can be analyzed. As stated previ￾ously, these built forms may very well outlast the architect’s interests and their current fascinations and considerations. We understand that the architect may not have considered what we have diagrammed, but the diagrams can describe the formal aspects of the building as we interpret them. So we can diagram what has been done – the form – while we also understand that may not be why it was done. Through the analysis we have created one story about the building that can be related, not all of the stories that are possible. As indicated in the Preface to the Third Edition, Precedents in Architecture has been continuously published since 1985 first by Van Nostrand Reinhold and subsequently by John Wiley & Sons. It has been translated into at least four languages and in 2006 the China Architecture and Building Press published the Third Edition in Chinese. The

success and longevity of this work suggests the desire for the individuals who had an influence on this work,con- this information and reinforces the initial premise of the tributed to its development,or encouraged us to continue need for exposing the design ideas that transcend time and pursuing the analysis of precedent and this book in particu- place and that underpin the making of architectural form. lar.Look what you started,George E.Hartman,Jr.,FAIA In addition to the acknowledgments cited in the previous Emeritus,those many years ago. prefaces,we wish to recognize some individuals directly As with previous editions all of the pages in this edition related to this edition.We are indebted to Brian MacKay- are from original drawings.We have produced the analytic Lyons and to Thomas Phifer for each generously agreeing to diagrams in freehand on tracing paper,thus we are responsi- provide us with information about two of their houses that ble for their content.As was the case with the third edition, had previously not been published so that we could include Jason Miller has interpreted our sketches and diagrams to their work in this edition.At Brian Mackay-Lyons'office, precisely draw the twenty-eight new pages in this edition. Lisa Morrison and Sawa Rostkowska were especially help- We owe him a special thank you for his precision,dedica- ful.At Phifer's office,Stephen Varady was similarly helpful. tion,diligence,patience,and great skill in producing the This edition would not have existed at all without the drawings;and for his sense of humor in dealing with us. efforts of Margaret Cummins of John Wiley Sons.As with Finally,over many years now our students,as well as the third edition,she approached us about considering a those from other schools,have demonstrated that the study fourth edition.As previously stated,her powers of persua- of precedents as presented herein is a valuable tool for sions,her suggestions,and her encouragement were each design.They have challenged us and made each day we critical to the development of this edition.We are profound- teach interesting through their questioning and discovery. ly grateful that she cares about this book and is willing to act on its,and thus our,behalf.The other members of the edito- Roger H.Clark rial,art,and production staffs at Wiley were also helpful and Michael Pause deserve our thanks.It is impossible to adequately thank all June 2011 xi

success and longevity of this work suggests the desire for this information and reinforces the initial premise of the need for exposing the design ideas that transcend time and place and that underpin the making of architectural form. In addition to the acknowledgments cited in the previous prefaces, we wish to recognize some individuals directly related to this edition. We are indebted to Brian MacKay￾Lyons and to Thomas Phifer for each generously agreeing to provide us with information about two of their houses that had previously not been published so that we could include their work in this edition. At Brian Mackay-Lyons’ office, Lisa Morrison and Sawa Rostkowska were especially help￾ful. At Phifer’s office, Stephen Varady was similarly helpful. This edition would not have existed at all without the efforts of Margaret Cummins of John Wiley & Sons. As with the third edition, she approached us about considering a fourth edition. As previously stated, her powers of persua￾sions, her suggestions, and her encouragement were each critical to the development of this edition. We are profound￾ly grateful that she cares about this book and is willing to act on its, and thus our, behalf. The other members of the edito￾rial, art, and production staffs at Wiley were also helpful and deserve our thanks. It is impossible to adequately thank all the individuals who had an influence on this work, con￾tributed to its development, or encouraged us to continue pursuing the analysis of precedent and this book in particu￾lar. Look what you started, George E. Hartman, Jr., FAIA Emeritus, those many years ago. As with previous editions all of the pages in this edition are from original drawings. We have produced the analytic diagrams in freehand on tracing paper, thus we are responsi￾ble for their content. As was the case with the third edition, Jason Miller has interpreted our sketches and diagrams to precisely draw the twenty-eight new pages in this edition. We owe him a special thank you for his precision, dedica￾tion, diligence, patience, and great skill in producing the drawings; and for his sense of humor in dealing with us. Finally, over many years now our students, as well as those from other schools, have demonstrated that the study of precedents as presented herein is a valuable tool for design. They have challenged us and made each day we teach interesting through their questioning and discovery. Roger H. Clark Michael Pause June 2011 xi