Beautiful work! I think living in the space and the differences between the different levels gives a sense of adventure and delivers us away from the bland and ho-hum that clients usually have us design. As an interior decorator I personally feel that that the interiors are a little sterile, but appreciate for photography etc that sometimes interiors are styled for the moment.

The master bedroom with that wonderful view would be the place to be, watching whales migrate up the coast or an angry stormy sea! If ever they need somone to house sit….

Simon C.

I feel that there is a good argument for house as microcosm of city. Is this because of a failure of the modern city? Perhaps, but this would not be the main reason for allowing a range of experiences, including the unexpected, within a house. To my mind a house like a city should also allow us to wander a little, to ramble about, almost situationist style (dérive) through its domain – and should allow the inhabitants to occasionally have some distance rather than being all together all of the time. I also feel that a design (any design) should really respond in a nuanced way to its surroundings including what is above and below the site, where possible.

Sometimes in a crowded city, and on a tight budget the site may offer little – this might only be a view of sky and clouds above, or across a ramshackle urban roofscape, or perhaps the shadow of leaves on a wall in a bleak and narrow laneway. Nevertheless these things may be unique and very rewarding in their own way. The response to a place could be a sensual one or perhaps an intellectual one. In a more natural setting, or in an interesting urban setting, and where the constraints allow it why not make a little more of the peculiarities of the site?

There are many precedents – think of the roof of the Beistegui penthouse where Corb played a surrealist game (an intellectual exercise which also brought the Arc de Triomphe into the game), or the little platform below Falling Water where one could jump into the river (a sensual experience allowing a physical connection with the site). If the site doesn't offer many attractions then maybe an internal landscape (or landscape metaphor) can be invented. The site and the budget don't have to be large – look at what Barragan did in the Gilardi house with fairly modest means!

If we jump back to the scale of the city and look at those who have tried to force a big defining idea (and resultant regimentation) on us then they are legion – Hilberseimer and Corb were the most extreme examples in the modern era. You can see from one shot (or rendering) what the entire city would be like. If Hilberseimer had his way we would all be forced to take cyanide or else die a slow death of boredom. Their ideas are potent but they need to clash with other ideas. Personally, I prefer the Collage city or the city imagined by the situationists to those other more dramatic modern paradigms.

In my view an architect is not trying hard enough if he or she merely comes up with a central idea (often chosen very randomly) and then makes every space squeeze into the formula. There are many examples based on geometrical, topological, folded, blended, smooth, de-constructed etc space – you name it – they've all been tried in recent years. All too often rooms and spaces are squeeezed into the big concept leading to awkward, tight, and unpleasant spaces; and the end only rarely justifies the means. To me the acid test is: "what are the spaces like? would I want to spend some time in there? or just move through quickly?"

So often with these projects there is an excessive focus on the thing itself – as though the thing in itself is more significant to those other things that are external to it. Fallingwater does a neat trick – being an extraordinary thing in itself but also extending and projecting itself out into the landscape, and below as well – it allows rock in also, so that in a sense it becomes intertwinned or enmeshed with the landscape, making the most of the extraordinary site and fulfilling it's latent promise. Another example – the roof of the Casa Malaparte where, with the use of a simple device – a curved wall sitting on a platform – it brings in, (and extends out to), the whole world….

Not often do architects have an opportunity like those and usually the surroundings are much less inspiring. In such a case an internal landscape can sometimes be invented – as in the Gilardi house or in many of Corb's interiors. A fascinating internal landscape can also result from unusual situations – the lower level of Scarpa's Querini Stampalia (renewal), a case in point.

Finally, why can't a house be a place for the mind and the spirit as well as satisfying the requirements of the body. The city can provide much, but the house is the ultimate place of refuge and relaxation – a place where the spirit can re-juvenate and the soul can retire, if only temporarily from the turmoil of the outside world.

However, ultimately, a city home (a house, apartment or other) is really not separate from a city – it is merely a part of a continuum of spaces ranging from public, to semi-private, to private, which as a whole, houses, or accommodates a society. At the final stage; the dwelling place or home is the inner scanctum of a small group called a family, their relatives and their friends.

We should never abstain from the effort to add wonder and beauty to a house, a home, a city, or to a landscape.

To Martini-girl: Have more martinis, the world will be more colorful then! If you feel sepulchral, you find your solitude there… For expansive mood, there is also a place. This is a personal house of the architect, tailor-made for his family.

Style is boring! Vive la difference!