Showing posts with label Architecture is a metaphor. Show all posts

Monday, July 9, 2012

Learning architecture:the making of metaphors(c)

Learning architecture:the making of metaphors Learning architecture:the making of metaphors(c)

By Barie Fez-Barringten

bariefezbarringten@gmail.com

Abstract

“Architecture:the making of metaphors” quotes from my monograph of paradigms and axioms about architectural education based on (Ortony,A)Metaphor and Thought. In each of the below cases I have fist paraphrased the scientist's conclusions based on a notable commonality to architecture where space allowed described an architectural process or product in the terms of each finding. Out these comparisons there came topoi (Zaretsky,D (2005) (A traditional theme or motif; a literary convention.) which we can use to describe architecture and aesthetics, all below sections and paragraphs reference Metaphor and Thought by A. Ortony. (Ortony,A)

Background

Early monographs justifying architecture:the making of metaphors were steeped in deductive reasoning since we could not find new information pertaining to metaphors. Many of my monographs included analyzing and explaining the syllogism:

Art [1] is the making of metaphors
Architecture is an art[1]
Therefore architecture: the making of metaphors.

Till now we did nothing to reason why art [1] is neither the making of metaphors nor why architecture is an art. Since 1967 I proceeded to analyze the presumptions and find its many applications. This new information in Metaphor and Thought by Andrew Ortony first published in 1979, provides evidence to support inductive reasoning and to this end each axiom is its own warrant to the inferences of the above syllogism and the answer to questions of why metaphor is the stasis to any of the syllogism’s claims and implications.

In argumentation (Zarefsky,D (2005) notes that in induction there is no new information added. In both methods the metaphor is at their root and as such the basis of aesthetics and as such essential to understand the stasis to what makes all arts the making of metaphors and how that Wilson’s statement is true for everything as most are metaphorical s as well. The matter then is one of standards, social rightness and the ability any one or another work has an explanation of its form.

Architecture: the making of metaphors not only is the stasis to why architecture is art but also explains the formation of architectural aesthetic vocabulary.

The below is predominantly developed from a study of “Metaphors and Thought” by Andrew Ortony, and, is in addition to over forty years of my work about “architecture as the making of metaphors. It is my hope that this monograph will introduce to aesthetics an architectural vocabulary to further the appreciation of works of architecture.

Some contemporary aesthetic theory differs with how best to define the term

“art”, What should we judge when we judge art?, What should art be like?, The value of art, things of value which define humanity itself; contrasted to Raymond Williams who argues that there is no unique aesthetic object but a continuum of cultural forms from ordinary speech to experiences that are signaled as art by a frame, institution or special event. Conversations about aesthetics, metaphors and architecture reassess current and traditional issues by providing a scientific analysis for the way metaphors work in architecture.

As stasis, “architecture:the making of metaphors” enables the center of the dispute to be argued with common purpose. So this is a stasis in definition which concedes conjecture. With all the controversy around "knowing"; how do we know we know and the inaccuracy of language and dubious nature of scientific conclusions I have written over fifteen monographs about “architecture:the making of metaphors” This is the first with the sciences of linguistic, psychology and cognition definitions of the metaphor and there fore a set of third party facts by which to base our comparison. It was my hope that these commonalities provided substantive reasons to allow the metaphor linking architecture to metaphors as my theorem (stasis): "architecture is the making of metaphors”. “If art is the making of metaphors and architecture is an art then it too must make metaphors. But until now aside form this formal logic we have not shown the informal logic, argument and evidence of this proposition.

The generative metaphor is the name for a process of symptoms of a particular kind of seeing-as, the “meta-pherein” or “carrying –over” of frames or perspectives from one domain of experience to another. This process he calls generative which many years earlier Gordon called the Metaphoric Way of Knowing (Gordon, W.J.J.) and Weiss (Weiss,P) called “associations”.

In this sense both in enterprise architecture, interior design and traditional architecture after assimilating the program the very first step in the design process is to develop a “parte’ (An ex parte presentation is a communication directed to the merits or outcome of a proceeding …it’s the resolution of the argument consisting of claims, inferences, evidence and warrants to the inference). It is a “top-down” ( Plyshen, Z.) approach later followed by designs which meet the parte. The parte may follow the design process and be presented to sell the product.

The landscape is replete with an infinite number of inane replicas which render readers dull, passive and disinterested (How many times will you read the same book?) Mass housing, commercial office buildings and highways are the main offenders leaving the owner designed and built residence, office, factory, fire station, pump house, as unique and delightful relief’s in an otherwise homogenized context. The reader stops reading because it is the same as before. Not reading the copy yet seeing the copy and the collective of copies focuses rather on the collective as the metaphor as the overall project which also may be “dead”. In its time, Levittown’s uniqueness and the sub-structures sameness were its’ metaphor. It was alive and today still lives as new residents remodel upgrade and exhume their “dead” to become a “living” metaphor.

Revitalization teams of revivalist have discovered there is more than turf and proprietorship, peculiarization, personalization and authentication are required for a metaphor to live. In this is the art of making metaphors for the architect of public works. In this is the aesthetic of public works and culturally pervasive urban design.

An example of novel images and image metaphors is Andre Breton’s “My wife……whose waist is an hourglass” explains…..”By mapping the structure of one domain onto the structure of another”, (Lakoff,G) . “This is a superimposition of the image of an hour glass onto the image of a woman’s waist by virtue of their common shape. As before the metaphor is conceptual; it is not the works themselves, but the metal images. Here, we have the mental image of an hour glass and of a woman and we map the middle of the hourglass into the waist of the woman. The words are prompts for us to map from one conventional image to another”. Lakoff concludes that “ all metaphors are invariant with respect to their cognitive topology, that is, each metaphorical mapping preserves image-schema structure:” Likewise when we look at the geometrical formal parts of an architectural metaphor we note those common elements where fit, coupling and joints occur. We remember that which exemplified the analogous match. (Lakoff,G)

This observation of the metaphor finds that the commonality, commonplace and similarity are the chief focus of the metaphor. As Frank Lloyd Wright designed his Prairie architecture with dominant horizontal axis thrust to his structure as common to the horizontal axis of the land upon which the building sits. Thus the two horizontal axes, the land and then the building were wed by their commonality of horizontality.

According to Lakoff plausible accounts rather than scientific results is why we have conventional metaphors and why conceptual systems contain one set of metaphorical mappings than another.

An architectural work establishes its own vocabulary which once comprehended become the way in which we experience the work, finding its discrepancies and fits and seeking the first and all the other similar elements. We do judge the work as to have Consistency, integrity and aesthetics. Buildings which do not have these characteristics do not work as metaphors. ((Lakoff,G))

The relevance of studying architecture:the making of metaphors is to provide practitioners, owners, and mainly those that shape the built environment that they have a somber and serious responsibility to fill our world with meaning and significance, That what they do matters as in this first of Layoff’s results (Please note the application of Layoff’s vocabulary, definitions and descriptions related to linguistics metaphorically applied to architecture).

Metaphor is the main mechanism through which we comprehend abstract concepts and perform abstract reasoning. For example, as this is so for linguistics (spoken or written), then I infer that it must be true for non-linguistics, and I give as evidence the built habitats and their architectural antecedents, being as how what is built is first thought and conceived separately from building as thinking and conceiving is separate from the outward expression, whether it is one or thousands, public cultures is influenced, bound and authenticated by its’ metaphors. Not withstanding “idolatry”, the metaphors are the contexts of life’s dramas. As our physical bodies are read by our neighbors, finding evidence for inferences about social, political and philosophical claims about our culture and its place in the universe is a metaphorical act.

Subject matter, from the most mundane to the most abstruse scientific theories, can only be comprehended via metaphor. ((Lakoff,G)) Much subject matter, from the most mundane to the most abstruse scientific theories, can only be comprehended via metaphor where metaphor is fundamentally conceptual, not linguistic, in nature ((Lakoff,G) Metaphorical language is a surface manifestation of conceptual metaphor. ((Lakoff,G)) As language is to speech so are buildings to architecture where each has a content and inner meaning of the hole as well as each of its parts. As each word, each attachment, plain, material, structure had first been conceived to achieve some purpose and fill some need. Hidden from the reader is the inner psychology, social background, etc of the man when speaking and the programming deign and contacting process from the reader of a building metaphor. As in completing an argument the reader perceives the inferences with its warrants and connects the evidence of the seen to the claims to make the resolution of the whole, all of which are surmised from the surface.

Through much of our conceptual system is metaphorical; a significant part of it is non-metaphorical. Metaphorical understanding is grounded in non-metaphorical understanding. ((Lakoff,G)) The science of the strength of materials, mathematics, structures, indeterminate beams, truss design, mechanical systems, electricity, lighting, etc. are each understood metaphorically and there precepts applied metaphorically but often random selections, trails and feasibility are random and rather in search of the metaphor with out knowing it is or not a metaphor and fit to be part of the metaphor at hand. On the other hand we may select on or another based on non-metaphorical, empirical test and descriptions of properties. We then try to understand the metaphor in the selection, its commonality, how it contributes to the new application, how its has properties within itself which are alone strange and unrelated yet when couple with the whole or part of the created metaphor contribute to metaphor. Aesthetic judgments are affected by sense we have of both the technical and conceptual aspects of the metaphor.

Metaphor allows us to understand a relatively abstract or inherently unstructured subject matter in terms of a more concrete or at least more highly structured subject matter [((Lakoff,G)) . The whole of the metaphor is designed in such a way as to clarify, orient and provide “concrete” reification of all the design parameters into a “highly structured’ work, a work which homogenizes all these diverse and disjointed systems and operations into a well working machine. Building types such as pharmaceutical, petrochemical laboratories, data research centers, hospitals, space science centers, prisons, etc are such relatively abstract unstructured uses which only careful assembly can order. Faced with both housing and creating identity the Greeks and the Romans derived an Order of Architecture which we now call the Classical Order of Architecture. Long before the use of computers after faced with a complex way of teams of service clerks communicating on the phone, accessing and sharing files and instantly recording all transactions I invented a huge a round table where all clerks would be facing the center where would be sitting a kind of “Lazy Susan” . I choose the Lazy Suzan because of my experience in Chinese restaurants and selling Lazy Suzan’s as a young sales assistant in a gift store in the Bronx. The aesthetics of this design were driven by an elegant accommodation to a complex function.

Their mappings are based on the warrants which are their licensed to perform. Each warrant will support a different mapping (inference) and result in its own metaphor. In effect each will see a kind of reality of the proposed in the perspective of their peculiar warrant, where license is permission from authority to do something.

It is assumed if one gets permission it has met the conditions, operations, ideal and goals of the proposed metaphor.

Like a landscape artist who gathers for the chaos of the nature into select5ed items to organize into the canvas so that the viewers will find what he saw and reconstruct so the architect and the user map their reality into a metaphor. In this way the conception of the map is the metaphor and what is made by the cartographer is a "graphic" to simplify the chaos to find the commonality. Sifting through the program the architect seeks the “commonality” between the reality and experience to make the metaphor. Mapping is only possible when we know the “commonplace”, the commonality, the characteristic common to both, the terms that both the source and the target have in common that the mapping takes place.

As the architect structures his program, design and specifications he simultaneously structures the metaphor of his work of architecture. Architecture consists of program specifics where the conditions, operations, goals and ideals are from heretofore unrelated and distant contexts but are themselves metaphors “mapped across conceptual domains”.

As the architectural program the mappings are asymmetric and partial. The only regular pattern is their irregularity, and, like a person can be read and understood, once one is familiar with the personality and character, vocabulary and references, and of course the context and situation of the work the work can also be read and understood. .

Schemas [((Lakoff,G)) are the realms in which the mappings takes place much the same as the inferences in arguments have warrants and link evidence to claims so do these schemas, architects carry-over their experiences with materials, physics, art, culture, building codes, structures, plasticity, etc. to form metaphor..

Aesthetically, humans also interact with their environments based on their sensory capabilities. ((Lakoff,G)) The importance of the senses is discussed by Arnold Berlant in the fields of human perception systems, but like perceptual psychology and cognitive psychology, are not exact sciences, because human information processing is not a purely physical act, and because perception is affected by cultural factors, personal preferences, experiences, and expectations, so human scale in architecture can also describe buildings with sightlines, acoustic properties, task lighting, ambient lighting, and spatial grammar that fit well with human senses. However, one important caveat is that human perceptions are always going to be less predictable and less measurable than physical dimensions.

However, the scale of habitable metaphors is the intrinsic relation between the human figure and his surroundings as measured, proportioned and sensed. ((Lakoff,G))

It is dramatically represented by Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man (see below illustration) is based on the correlations of ideal human proportions with geometry described by the ancient Roman architect Vitruvius, representation of the human figure encircled by both a circumference encapsulating its’ feet to its outstretched fingertips where part is then encased in a square.

This scale is read in elevations, sections, plans, and whole and based realized in the limited and bound architectural space. These spaces and their variations of scale are where the reader perceives the architectural metaphors of compression, smallness, grandeur, pomposity, equipoise, balance, rest, dynamics, direction, static ness, etc. In his Glass House, Phillip Johnson extended that space to the surrounding nature, making the walls the grass and surrounding trees, St. Peter’s interiors is a Piranesi space.

(The Prisons Carceri d'invenzione or 'Imaginary Prisons'), is a series of 16 prints produced in first and second states that show enormous subterranean vaults with stairs and mighty machines. Piranesi vision takes on a Kafkaesque and Escher-like distortion, seemingly erecting fantastic labyrinthian structures, epic in volume, but empty of purpose and human scale in this work and often human scale in architecture is deliberately violated ((Lakoff,G)) for monumental effect. Buildings, statues, and memorials are constructed in a scale larger than life as a social/cultural signal that the subject matter is also larger than life. An extreme example is the Statue of Liberty, the Washington Monument, etc.It is not hard to experience a built metaphor as it is an ordinary fixture on the landscape of our visual vocabulary. It has predictable, albeit peculiar and indigenous characteristics where the generic nature of the cues are anticipated.

A conceptual system contains thousands of conventional metaphorical mappings which form a highly structured subsystem of the conceptual system. ((Lakoff,G)) Over the year’s society, cultures, families and individuals experience and store a plethora of mapping routines which are part of our mapping vocabulary.

Our system of conventional metaphor is “alive” in the same sense that our system of grammatical and phonological (distribution and patterning of speech sounds in a language and of the tacit rules governing pronunciation.) rules is alive; namely it is constantly in use, automatically, and below the level of consciousness and Our metaphor system is central to our understanding of experience and to the way we act on that understanding. ((Lakoff,G)) Elegant architectural metaphors are those in which the big idea and the smallest of details echo and reinforce one another. (Sternberg, R. J).; Contemporary architects wrapping their parte in “green”, “myths” and eclectic images” are no less guilty than was their predecessors of the Bauhaus exuding asymmetry, tension and dissonance as were the classics and renaissance insisting on unity, symmetry and balance.

So while architecture is the making of metaphors and architects are making metaphors their works, though metaphoric, are not themselves the metaphors but the shadow of the metaphor which exists elsewhere in the minds of both the creator and the user (Sternberg, R. J). Architects would not be known as artist nor should their works be known as works of art. Both their works are the “deep” while the readers deal with the “surface”; the true architectural artisan has deep and underlying metaphors predicated two and three dimensional space analysis, history, culture, class, anthropology, geography etc. They all are often underlying the surface of the choices of lighting, material, claddings, etc. Vigorous aesthetic analysis would consider all of these axioms to realize the full enjoyment of the information contained in the work. Spatial representation in which local subspaces can be mapped into points of higher-order hyper-spaces and vice versa and that is possible because they have a common set of dimensions. (Sternberg, R. J).; In these hyper-spaces many architectural elements are fitted and combine to make a unity. It can be argued that the seen is not at al the metaphor but the transfers, bridges and connections being made apart from the building. In filling in the terms of the analogy lies the metaphor.

Metaphor is used, understood, misused and misunderstood due to the inconsistencies, lack of derivatives and many unexplained changes in linguistics (Sadock, J. M)

Likewise, the street talk that permeated my childhood was a string of “sayings, clichés, proverbs and European linguistic slang. This was contrasted by the poetry of songs and medieval literature. The architecture was the only source of my identity having consistency, reputation and allusions toward science, logic and consequence.

I just know there was something out side of this circus. Although I could not derive what I saw I could document and retain the types and details of each type.

However, Sadock’s examples and apologies only remind me that my work to derive the phenomenon of architecture as the making of metaphors is in its’ infancy, beginning to develop a vocabulary and understanding for the architectural profession and its’ allies.

Difference between the indirect uses of metaphor versed the direct use of language to explain the world. (Sadock, J. M) In some circles this is referred to tangential thinking, that approaching a subject from its edges without getting to the point. Users can accept works which are vague, inane, and non-descript, evasive, and disorienting. Public housing, “ticky-tack” subdivisions, anonymous canyons of plain vanilla towers with countless nameless windows, offices with a sea of desks, nameless workstations and the daunting boredom of straight highways on a desert plain. This too applies to works of architecture which assembles a minimum and constructs the minimum in a stoic fashion considering the least needed to produce a work that fills the minimum economy of its commission. As such many architectural works escape the many and various realities settling for a minimum of expression of and otherwise prolific potential. There is a distinction and relationships between micro and macro metaphors and the way they can inform one another as the form of design may refer to its program, or a connector may reflect the concept of articulation as a design concept. (Sadock, J. M).

“Whenever we talk about the metaphorical meaning of a word, expression, or sentence, we are talking about what a speaker might utter it to mean, in a way it that departs from what the word, expression or sentence actually means”. (Searle, John R).; A” problem of the metaphor concerns the relations between the word and sentence meaning, on the one hand, and speaker’s meaning or utterance meaning, on the other”

With the exception of major corporate brands, churches, specialty building in architecture the examples is in infinite as most works designed are with no intended message, meaning or referent. Many are in the class of others of its types and generally convey their class while others are replicas and based on a model. Furthermore most architects have a design vocabulary which is foreign to the user. Conversely, in public buildings, the user’s expectations, use and expectations are foreign to the architect. At its best the architect may connect the vocabulary of his design to some exotic design theory which, results I a very beatiful and appealing building to which the user finds beautiful but has no idea about the intended making of the whole or its parts. But some how it works!

After formulating a program of building requirements and getting agreement that the words and diagrams are approved by the client. If the architect built-work can meet this program and come to be the building the client intended is such an example of the work of architecture as a metaphor and metaphorical work. (They carry-over, bridge, and are each others advocate)

Limited to meeting the program and the fulfilling the design contract says nothing about the unintended consequences of the building on the context and the way the metaphor outcome impacts for users, community and the general public. In some ways this is the job of municipal Departments of Community Services, town fathers, zoning boards and building departments and their building codes.

All contribute to honing the metaphors and their outcomes which is this relationship of intended words to spoken words and the chasm between the two.

We are told to think before we speak, picture what you are going to say then speak, still whatever we speak, in tone, emphasis, timing(meter) and pitch can carry its own meanings; this was also one of the final fields of investigation for my late mentor, Dr. Paul Weiss. Without apparent rhyme of reason metaphors of all arts have a way of recalling other metaphors of other times and places. In my mind I recall Brooklyn brick warehouses on Atlantic Ave. with turn of the century Ford trucks and men adorned in vests, white shirts and bow ties loading packages from those loading docks under large green metal canopies. The streets are cobble stones.

In the case of building metaphors it is the familiarity with not only the building- type, materials, context and convention but the architects, contactor’s and owner’s personas which increase the understanding of the metaphor. In the case of Dubai and other such contexts it is the lack of such familiarity and tolerance for the strange that makes the metaphor acceptable on face value. The metaphor is accepted yet not understood. As many beautiful things they are awesome, forbidding, and indicative of some greater condition as being a stranger in one’s own context. Buildings are perceived as cars manufactured by some idioms indicative of their species with little conscious relevance to the user’s context. It is very strange. Building designed for people who before (and even current) this generation found tents to be their habitat metaphor.

Human cognition is fundamentally shaped by various processes of figuration”. “The ease with which many figurative utterances are comprehended are has often been attributed to the constraining influence of the context” ………..Including “the common ground of knowledge, beliefs, and attitudes recognized as being shared by speakers and listeners (architects and users(clients, public) ( Gibbs, Jr., R.W.) As it is with speakers architects, designers and makers “can’t help but employ tropes in every day conversation (design) because they conceptualize (design) much of their experience through the figurative schemes of metaphor (design). Explaining tropes (turn, twist, conceptual guises, and figurations). It explains the standard and traditional building types found in various contexts as the chalet in the Alps and the specific style of each found in each of the Alp’s counties and villages, etc. Psychological processes in metaphor comprehension and memory by Alan Paivio and Mary Walsh say that Susanne Langer writes that:” Metaphor is our most striking evidence of abstract seeing, of the power the human mind to use presentational symbols”. (Gibbs, Jr., R.W.)

Metaphor is an abbreviated simile to appreciate similarities and analogies which is called “appreciation” (Miller, G A).

In psychology “appreciation” (Herbert (1898)) was a general term for those mental process whereby an attached experience is brought into relation with an already acquired and familiar conceptual system. (Encoding, mapping, categorizing, inference, assimilation and accommodation, attribution, etc). (Miller, G A). Likewise aesthetics’ view of beauty is not based on innate qualities, but rather on cultural specifics and individual interpretations. Miller explains how reading metaphors build an image in the mind. That is to say we “appreciate” what we already know. I have always contended that we do not learn anything we already do not know. We learn in terms of already established knowledge and concepts. We converse reiterating what we presume the other knows, otherwise the other party would not understand. The other party understands only because he already knows.

The architect who assembles thousands of bits of information , resifts and converts form words to graphics and specification documents communicates the new proposed (the strange new thing) in terms of the known and familiar. The first recipients are the owner, building officials; contractors must read seeking confirmations of known and confirm its adherence to expectations. After its construction the users read familiar signs, apparatus, spaces, volumes, shapes and forms. The bridge carries over from one to another what is already known .Even the strange that becomes familiar are both known but not in the current relationship. For example when we apply a technology used on ships to a building or a room which is commonly associated with tombs as a bank, etc. Both are generally known but not in that specific context. We could not appreciate it if it were not known .It is what Weiss calls commonalities and is the selection between commonalities and differences that makes a metaphor. About understanding and discerning between what is” true in fact” and “true in the model” Miller says: Metaphors are, on a literal interpretation, incongruous, if not actually false-a robust sense of what is germane to the context and what is “true in fact” is necessary for the recognition of a metaphor, and hence general knowledge must be available to the reader (user, public).

“We try to make the world that the author is asking us to imagine resemble the real world (as we know it) in as many respects as possible. Offices, bedrooms, lobbies, toilets, kitchens are such models which are built to specific situations in images of yet some other context. We know one from the other from the perception of the smallest detail to the overall layout.

By analogy what Miller distinguishes between what the architect designed and what he thought are different. The architects of the Renaissance tried to resurrect the grandeur of the classic building they discovered and resurrected. The contemporary architect faces a vernacular of design principles which are reified in to conventional building types. The convention is the model whiles the specific application in the strange. Often new buildings are likened to the first model or the prototype. The reader knows the building type and is able to recognize the new version. (Miller, G A)

Architectural making of metaphors is a matter of mapping, diagramming and combining to conclude the validity of combining and matching unlike materials, shapes, & systems. In this way any one of the metaphors and the whole system of bridging and carrying over is metaphoric. (Gentner, D) If one maps a rectangle and circle to a third you get a part square part circular odd shape. Map cold and hot and you get warm; map hotel, office, residential and shops and you get mixed use. (Gentner, D) The alchemists describe a system of triangulation I taught and applied at Pratt Institute which is as: “Metals were often held to consist of two components: mercury, which was fiery, active and male, and sulphur, which was watery, passive and female. Thus the combination of the two metals could be viewed as a marriage. Metals and other minerals were often compared with heavenly bodies and their properties triangulated to produce a third. Not to let this arbitrary characterizations blemish the structure of this system it is valid to triangulate and in fact produce a metaphor where you find the property they both share.

Renaissance European cities beguile their metaphor with such combinations known by their scale, cladding, décor, and entrees. Particularly charming are the German “guest houses ("gast hofs"), English family pubs, etc. New Towns and contemporary town centers are mixed use, multi zoned urban cores. It isn’t the referent where one is the other but where there is a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump. The commonality is apparent. They both share a similar characteristic. The hotel, residence , office and shop are joined by their convenience to that provide service to clients and their use of rooms, and a core of service, mountainous and housekeeping and supply. A small staff can support these businesses and there customers are compatible (Gentner, D)They all have a front of the house and back-of-the -house function (garbage, deliveries, maintenance, etc) in many citers lacks zoning regulations have alo9owed such mixed uses zones to still exist to day. Seeing these metaphors is a part of the fabric and character of neighborhoods. (Gentner, D)

Metaphor is reasoning using abstract characters whereas reason by analogy is a straight forward extension of its use in commonplace reasoning. (Gentner, D)All this to say and as if there was a choice that architects have a choice where to make a new building by analogy or by metaphor. Analogies may be the ticky-tacks, office building, church, school building, fire station analogies to a first model verses an abstraction of a program into a new prototype. Is the analogy any less a work of architecture? Or do we only mean that works of architecture are works of art when they make abstractions? (Boyd, R). .Aesthetic judgments bridge some principle or prior experience to a secondary subject. Architects design by translating concepts into two dimensional graphics that which ultimately imply a multidimensional future reality. She tests the horizontal and vertical space finding accommodation and commonality of adjacency, connectivity and inclusiveness. (Boyd, R).

Metaphors simply impart their commonplace not necessity to their similarity or analogous. (Boyd, R). This kind of metaphor simply adds information to the hearer which was not otherwise available which explains the built metaphor that is neither analogous not abstractly common but works, is unique and serves a purpose. (Boyd, R). We absorb new knowledge on the shoulders of old experiences. [(Pylyshyn, Z W). about Cognition to justify Socrates “learning as recollecting” Consider new concepts as being characterized in terms of old ones (plus logical conjunctives)” As William J. Gordon [7] points out we make the strange familiar by talking about one thing in terms of another. Pylyshyn: "On the other hand, if it were possible to observe and to acquire new “knowledge” without the benefit of these concepts (conceptual schemata (an underlying organizational pattern or structure; conceptual framework) which are the medium of thought), then such (Pylyshyn, Z W).

The art implicitly has gathered the information and organized it in way that given the right apriori vocabulary, codes definitions and signal and sign cognitions one can read the message in one way or another depending on the individual and the variety of individual perceptions. Buildings, artifacts, products with embedded (encrypted) workings can be read, learned, assimilated, connected and either by epiphany or Pavolivain stimulus –response known. Climbing the stairs of a pyramid in Mexico City or a fire stair in a high rise is essentially the same except for the impact of its context and what the stair connects (create and base) and the object on which the stair ascends and descends. The conditions, ideals and goals are very different while most of the operation is the same. In this way you can say that non-architecture can be identified as teaching nothing. (Pylyshyn, Z W).

Pulling from three dimensional and two dimensional means and methods, from asymmetrical and symmetrical, and from spatial and volumetric design principles the architect assembles metaphor metaphorically by associating and carrying-over these principles applying to the program at hand to lift and stretch the ideas into space and across the range of disassociated ideas and concepts making a new and very strange metaphor unlike anything ever created yet filled with thousands of familiar signs and elements that make it work . (Pylyshyn, Z W). Just as practice makes perfect for the concert pianist, opera singer, ballerina, etc so is it for the architect and in aesthetics for the critique and the reader. However, having said this reader is at imitate disadvantage except for the natives of a particular location. Little old ladies in the tiniest Italian village can tell in the minutest detail all about every building, street and area. She has learned and passed on the “knowledge” from her ancestors and is as trained as its creators but in a totally different way. Hers is the act of perception and reader who must recreate and challenge her memory and recollections. She does not have to work at design but at reliving and imagining the design process to find the details and the whole of the building and its social, political and chronological context. Her explanations will include great joy, violent emotions, dis-tastes and rejections of the owners and authors. Her experience of the metaphor will be different from that of the creators both about the same work. (Pylyshyn, Z W).

“The difference between literal and metaphorical description lies primarily in such pragmatic consideration as (1) the stability, referential specificity, and general acceptance of terms: and (2) the perception, shared by those who use the terms, that the resulting description characterizes the world as it really is, rather than being a convenient way of talking about it, or a way of capturing superficial resemblances”. (Pylyshyn, Z W). Pylyshyn asks:” What distinguishes a metaphor from its complete explication”? (In the case of architecture the entire set of contract documents, program, etc).” Pylyshyn answers: “In this ways of all the arts, architecture is the most profound in that it combines and confirms the secular (of this time), “how things really are” with the gestalt of personal, social, community and private importance. If art is the making of metaphors and it has no real use then how significant is architecture with both “reality” and fantasy/ imagination combined and confirmed by its very existence. The very real existence of a work of art that bespeaks of life and times, exists and is accessible and in our contexts is itself a metaphor of great significance and satisfaction; where I a building it would look like this metaphor. The metaphor expresses a value common to both; both are both real and ideas at the same time.

The metaphor is the bridge and confirmation of art in the world, life in the flesh and flesh become ideas. Architecture is an extreme reification from notion in both creator and reader of materials and idea. “Metaphor induces a (partial) equivalence between two known phenomenons; a literal account describes the phenomenon in authentic terms in which it is seen”. (Pylyshyn, Z W). Socially speaking, worldly people that work in offices, dress, and then behave the way they do, for example, if they reported to work in a manufacturing warehouse? Their scenario of the behavior and the metaphor would not correspond. (Pylyshyn, Z W).

“Radically new knowledge results from a change in modes of representation of knowledge, whereas a comparative metaphor occurs within the existing representations which serve to render the comparison sensible. The comparative level of metaphor might allow for extensions of already existing knowledge, but would not provide a new form of understanding. (Oshlag, Ra S)When visiting new cities in another country one is immediately confronted with metaphors which create similarities as interactive and comparative as we seek to find similarities and differences with what we already known in our home context. Visiting, sketching and writing about over seventy European cities I noted the character and ambiance of each and the differences between one and another. I drew so many vignettes of buildings and cityscapes noting the metaphor of each. The visitor (this is my word) may “well be acquiring one of the constitutive or residual metaphors of the place (this is my word) at the same time; same metaphor, different experiences. (Oshlag, Ra S)

Metaphors have a way of extending our capacities for communications. ( Sticht T.G.)

As most artists their language is beyond speech and to the peculiar craft of their art of which their practice and exercise develops new capacity and opportunity to teach and express thought outside of the linguistics but is nevertheless perhaps as valuable and worthy. “The mnemonic (intended to assist the memory) function of metaphor as expressed by Ortony’s vividness thesis also points to the value of metaphor as a tool for producing durable learning from unenduiring speech” ( Sticht T.G.)

Architects both compose the program and reify its contents from words to diagrams and diagrams to two dimensional graphics and three dimensional models to reify and bring- out (educate) the user’s mind and fulfillment of unspoken and hidden needs. Needs which may or may not have been programmed and intended; the metaphor is the final resolution until it is built and used.

Then it is subject to further tests of time, audience, markets, trends, fashions, social politics, demographic shifts, economics, and cultural changes. The aesthetics of the process and the product are both metaphoric and a metaphor.

Works Cited

Boyd, Richard; Metaphor and theory change: What is” metaphor” a metaphor for?
Conrad, Ulrich; In Programs and Manifestos on 20th-Century Architecture about Glasarchitektur Ulrich Conrad'
Fraser, Bruce; Interpretation of novel metaphors
Gentner, Dedre The shift from metaphor to analogy in Western science
Gibbs, Jr., Raymond W.; Process and products in making sense of tropes
Glucksberg, Sam;. How metaphors work by Sam Glucksberg and Boaz Keysar
Gordon, W.J.J. Metaphorical way of knowing: Gordon began formulating the Synectics method in 1944 with a series ... The Metaphorical Way of Learning and Knowing, Synectics asks participants to solve problems by thinking in analogies--to identify ways in which one pattern or situation is like or similar to another totally unrelated pattern or situation. Synectics uses comparisons such as analogies and metaphors to stimulate associations, developed by George M. Prince; Gordon was one of the original speakers at the Yale lecture series on architecture:the making of metaphors..
Jeziorski, Michael; The shift from metaphor to analogy in Western science
Kuhn, Thomas S.; Metaphor in science by Thomas S. Kuhn
Keysar, Boaz;
Lakoff, George; The contemporary theory of metaphor by George Lakoff
Mayer, Richard E.; The instructive metaphor: Metaphoric aids to students’ understanding of science by Richard E. Mayer
Miller, George A.; Images and models, similes and metaphors by George A. Miller
Nigro, Georgia; Metaphor, induction, and social policy: The convergence of macroscopic and microscopic views by Robert J. Sternberg, Roger Tourangeau, and Georgia Nigro
Ortony,Andrew;Metaphor and Thought: Second Edition
Edited by Andrew Ortony: School of Education and social Sciences and
Institute for the learning Sciences: North Western University
Published by Cambridge University Press
First pub: 1979
Second pub: 1993
Oshlag, Rebecca S.; Metaphor and learning
Petrie, Hugh G; Metaphor and learning
Pylyshyn, Zeon W.; Metaphorical imprecision and the “top down” research strategy Is Board of Governors Professor of Cognitive Science at Rutgers Center for Cognitive Science. He is the author of Seeing and Visualizing: It's Not what You Think (2003) and Computation and Cognition: toward a Foundation for Cognitive Science (1984), both published by The MIT Press, as well as over a hundred scientific papers on perception, attention, and the computational theory of mind.
Reddy. Michael JThe conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language: by Michael J. Reddy.
Rumelhart, David E.;. Some problems with the emotion of literal meanings
Sadock, Jerrold M.;. Figurative speech and linguistics by Jerrold M. Sadock
Schon, Donald A. ; Generative metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy: by Donald A. Schon
Searle, John R.; Metaphor by John R. Searle
Sternberg, Robert J.;. Metaphor, induction, and social policy: The convergence of macroscopic and microscopic views by Robert J. Sternberg, Roger Tourangeau, and Georgia Nigro
Thomas G. Sticht; Educational uses of metaphor
Tourangeau, Roger; Metaphor, induction, and social policy: The convergence of macroscopic and microscopic views by Robert J. Sternberg, Roger Tourangeau, and Georgia Nigro
Weiss,Paul; Paul Weiss: Born in 1901, Being and Other Realities (1995) ; Emphatics, (2000); Surrogates," published by Indiana University Press.
Zarefsky,David 5. Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning, 2nd Edition; by Professor Dr. David Zarefsky of Northwestern University and published by The Teaching Company, 2005 of Chantilly, Virginia

Endnotes:

1. Art is the intentional and skillful act and/or product applying a technique and differs from natural but pleasing behaviors and useful or decorative products in their intent and application of a developed technique and skill with that technique. Art is not limited to fields, persons or institutions as science, government, security, architecture, engineering, administration, construction, design, decorating, sports, etc. On the other hand in each there are both natural and artistic where metaphors (conceptual and/technical) make the difference, art is something perfected and well done in that field. For example, the difference between an artistic copy and the original is the art of originality and authorship in that it documents a creative process lacking in the copy.

2. The first lectures "Architecture as the Making of Metaphors" were organized and conducted by Barie Fez-Barringten near the Art and Architecture building at the Museum of Fine Arts Yale University 11/02/67 until 12/04/67. The guest speakers were: Paul Weiss, William J. Gordon, Christopher Tunnard, Vincent Scully, Turan Onat, Kent Bloomer, Peter Millard, Robert Venturi, Charles Moore, Forrest Wilson, and John Cage.

3. American painter Irving Kriesberg was born in 1919. He studied painting in America at The Art Institute of Chicago and the University of Chicago from 1938-1941 and later in Mexico from 1942-1946. Kriesberg began his interest in art as a cartoonist in high school in Chicago. In the 1930's he spent many days sketching the work of the great masters Titian & Rembrandt when visiting The Art Institute of Chicago. In the late 1930's he came under the influence of modern art via School of Paris exhibitions prominently exhibited in the museums in Chicago.

4. Main Currents in Modern Thought/Center for Integrative Education Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New Rochelle, New York

Researched Publications: Refereed and Peer-reviewed Journals: "monographs":

Barie Fez-Barringten; Associate professor Global University

1. "Architecture the making of metaphors"

Main Currents in Modern Thought/Center for Integrative Education; Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New Rochelle, New York.

2."Schools and metaphors"

Main Currents in Modern Thought/Center for Integrative Education Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New Rochelle, New York.

3."User's metametaphoric phenomena of architecture and Music":

“METU” (Middle East Technical University: Ankara, Turkey): May 1995"

Journal of the Faculty of Architecture

4."Metametaphors and Mondrian:

Neo-plasticism and its' influences in architecture" 1993 Available on Academia.edu since 2008

5. "The Metametaphor of architectural education",

North Cypress, Turkish University. December, 1997

6."Mosques and metaphors" Unpublished,1993

7."The basis of the metaphor of Arabia" Unpublished, 1994

8."The conditions of Arabia in metaphor" Unpublished, 1994

9. "The metametaphor theorem"

Architectural Scientific Journal, Vol. No. 8; 1994 Beirut Arab University.

10. "Arabia’s metaphoric images" Unpublished, 1995

11."The context of Arabia in metaphor" Unpublished, 1995

12. "A partial metaphoric vocabulary of Arabia"

“Architecture: University of Technology in Datutop; February 1995 Finland

13."The Aesthetics of the Arab architectural metaphor"

“International Journal for Housing Science and its applications” Coral Gables, Florida.1993

14."Multi-dimensional metaphoric thinking"

Open House, September 1997: Vol. 22; No. 3, United Kingdom: Newcastle uponTyne

15."Teaching the techniques of making architectural metaphors in the twenty-first century.” Journal of King Abdul Aziz University Engg...Sciences; Jeddah: Code: BAR/223/0615:OCT.2.1421 H. 12^TH EDITION; VOL. I and “Transactions” of

Cardiff University, UK. April 2010

16. “Word Gram #9” Permafrost: Vol.31 Summer 2009 University of Alaska Fairbanks; ISSN: 0740-7890; page 197

17. "Metaphors and Architecture." ArchNet.org. October, 2009.at MIT

18. “Metaphor as an inference from sign”; University of Syracuse

Journal of Enterprise Architecture; November 2009: and nomnated architect of the year in speical issue of Journal of Enterprise Architecture.Explainging the unique relationship between enterprise and classic building architecture.

19. “Framing the art vs. architecture argument”; Brunel University (West London); BST: Vol. 9 no. 1: Body, Space & Technology Journal: Perspectives Section

20. “Urban Passion”: October 2010; Reconstruction & “Creation”; June 2010; by C. Fez-Barringten; http://reconstruction.eserver.org/;

21. “An architectural history of metaphors”: AI & Society: (Journal of human-centered and machine intelligence) Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Communication: Pub: Springer; London; AI & Society located in University of Brighton, UK;

AI & Society. ISSN (Print) 1435-5655 - ISSN (Online) 0951-5666 : Published by Springer-Verlag;; 6 May 2010 http://www.springerlink.com/content/j2632623064r5ljk/

Paper copy: AIS Vol. 26.1. Feb. 2011; Online ISSN 1435-5655; Print ISSN 0951-5666;

DOI 10.1007/s00146-010-0280-8; : Volume 26, Issue 1 (2011), Page 103.

22. “Does Architecture Create Metaphors?; G.Malek; Cambridge; August 8,2009

Pgs 3-12 (4/24/2010)

23. “Imagery or Imagination”:the role of metaphor in architecture:Ami Ran (based on Architecture:the making of metaphors); :and Illustration:”A Metaphor of Passion”:Architecture oif Israel 82.AI;August2010pgs.83-87.

24. “The soverign built metaphor”: monograph converted to Power Point for presentation to Southwest Florida Chapter of the American Institute of Architects. 2011

25.“Architecture:the making of metaphors”:The Book;

Contract to publish: 2011

Cambridge Scholars Publishing
12 Back Chapman Street
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE6 2XX
United Kingdom

Edited by

Edward Richard Hart,

0/2 249 Bearsden Road

Glasgow

G13 1DH

Lecture:

http://globaluniversity.academia.edu/BarieFezBarringten/Books/1449761/Architecture_The_Making_Of_Metaphors

All photographs are taken in KFU in Dammam, Saudi Arabia

Barie Fez-Barringten,Andre Breton, Architectural Education, Architecture is a metaphor, comprehend abstract concepts and perform abstract reasoning, conventional

http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2433463466927232250#editor/target=post;postID=3704461414054587766

Interactive architecture makes metaphors(c)

Interactive architecture makes metaphors Interactive architecture makes metaphors(c)

Barie Fez-Barringten

E-mail address:bariefezbarringten@gmail.com

Global University

www.bariefez-barringten.com

All collages are created by Christina Fez-Barringten

Abstract:

The main scope of the research is to show how architecture: the making of metaphors is valid with interactive (kinetic and responsive) architecture. By its very definition interactive architecture is a metaphor conditioning “architecture” with “interactive”, and vice versa.; when something interacts it transfers; and, “transfer” is another word for metaphor; and, as all metaphors “interactive architecture” makes the strange familiar and expresses one thing in terms of another: that is its two referents, “interactive” and “architecture”. This research will show that architecture makes metaphors with all sorts of technological and conceptual variations whether static,responsive, interactive or kinetic. Each period in architectural history technology was the landmark of its period; perhaps ours will be marked by our moving parts.

Key Words:

Artificial intelligence, natural intelligence, kinetic, transfers, metaphor, interactive, architecture, automatic, passive, active, read, show, art, aesthetic, sustainable, function, space, scale, embedded, intelligent, craft.

All artwork are collages made by Christina Fez-Barringten.
Originals are for sale and have been published in a book called "Legend" which can be purchased at Amazon.com. You can see all of her art and read about her background at:www(dot)bariefez-barringten(dot)com.

Interactive architecture makes metaphors

For years (Olgay, V. (1963) Victor Olgay’s climatology, bio-climatic design, green architecture and smart buildings interacted with users, participants and occupants. Most buildings do this in a static way and its structures and forms are not actually nor apparently in motion, albeit there may be components which move and such as louvers, springs and valves, hinges and frames, etc. Otherwise, they are static by design controlling the climate passively (not actively) and at little expense. In this sense, all of architecture is interactive as all of architecture is a metaphor; but to so distinguish interactive architecture from all other traditional architecture is to imply a claim that all other architecture is not interactive. So what is it that the author’s of the new so-called “interactive architecture” really have in mind? This research will show whether they only mean to describe the way gadgets change the limits and bounds of exteriors and interiors with different light of times of day and the weather, etc. While the buildings don’t change, their form or shape may be modified because they interacted. It is a real challenge to architecture when its parts, shapes and forms can change and still retain its integrity as a serious work of architecture.

The renaissance sculptors designed their figures as in motion while these, so-called, interactive architecture walls, structures and appurtenances actually do move, change color, etc. Yet there is an additional and unique technology emerging which reads shows and modifies designed metaphors within the parameters of the building’s designed metaphor. It is a kind of self-programming maker of metaphors within the metaphor of the architectural metaphor. It is designed and like the carnival fun house (where lights go on and off, figures lurch and make noises) responds with predetermined changes in temperature, color, structure, etc. Unlike the fun house it reads participants and like a conversation by two willing conversant modifies according to behavior, vocabulary and subject.

Architectural program (the basis for a work of architecture) includes COIG (conditions, operations, ideals and goals) utilizing kinetic, mechanical, structural and digital systems.

While the prefix, period, and context changes architecture remains a metaphor and operates as the literary metaphor; making the strange familiar.

Programs are like a play’s script, a movie’s story board or a football team’s game plan; and, of an interactive work can be expanded to increase such interactive features.

In any case, architecture limits and bounds space. It is a work of art and ever-present extent in the context. It is a landmark to the times and place as well as a work of value and source of pride, identity, status and dominion. Architecture can be designed to the peculiar and specific or generalized to the society and/or engaged in the environment. There is the public and private, large and small and the many building types as institutional, industrial, residential, commercial and mixed-use.

Yesterday, today and tomorrow architecture is a metaphor and architects are its makers. As all arts interacts, so architecture interacts, responds, and adapts in both static and dynamic ways and for all sorts of programmed features depending on the context of the work. For some time buildings have been equipped with environmental controls and made smart by a variety of artificial intelligent systems controlling not only the heating ventilation and air-conditioning systems, opening and closing window coverings, garage doors, lights, security systems ,etc but also regulating the consumption and emission of energy and light into the environment. Recently building design has added yet other passive and automated systems which can alter the way building space is bound and limited.

The metaphor of building systems, boundaries, walls, structure that are animated, kinetic , static and engineered to adapt and modify itself communicates itself to human and natural participants while metaphorically interacting between components.

As the literary metaphor talks about one thing in terms of the other so the interactive work necessarily finds commonplace by communicating values. The metaphor is interaction between static and or changing parts and becomes renewed as when day becomes night or when seasons change and when occupants are exchanged.

Where static or kinetic the function of the metaphor finds stasis as one referent seeks the other and the aesthetic commonplace is resoled in change. As electro mechanical technology are brought into the building industry the value of expectation of buildings have such capabilities becomes a status and social requirement.

Not unlike the toaster, automatic hearting, ventilation and air-conditioning such innovations are yet a status of buildings and the metaphor of their context. They can even be play things, superficial and artificial.

For example, on the floor of a variety shop there lie a stuffed animal that when approached twirled and growled. When I left its vicinity it ceased. I recently had lasik surgery which my urologist confessed was mostly carried out by artificial intelligent sensors and laser heat under his guidance. In traditional architecture while most walls do not do is change their shape, vibrate, wiggle, etc. for many years there have been room dividers, retractable walls, beds coming out of the wall, automatic shades and curtains, etc. Whether it is labeled interactive, kinetic, responsive, etc., architecture is an art because it makes metaphors and as all art it too makes metaphors; is metaphoric and as all art it “transfers”, communicates and interacts. The key difference is that by embedding “readers” into the building’s components they are able to read and react in prescribed ways to heat, motion and with those to qualities of people and the speed with which they move. It means they automatically read; read without a human concern and are really a product of artificial intelligence.

Radiologist now makes magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using conventionalized settings while the machine clicks away and creates images. Neurologist openly confesses that their non-invasive lumbar hemilaminectomy could not be carried out with out the hospital’s artificial intelligence systems. They are also synthetic and not indigenous and usually without a referent to the context and its existing built environment.

Airline pilots are able to set course and the “automatic pilot” reads the weather, climate, airflows, ground speed and direction. Automobiles are now made by robots which begin and end there routines feeling their way as the chassis is moved by them on the conveyor belt. So it’s no big surprise that embedded computation (intelligence) with a physical, tangible counterpart (kinetics) is introduced into buildings. A uniquely twenty-first century toolbox and skill set-virtual and physical modeling, sensor technology, CNC fabrication, prototyping, and robotics-necessitates collaboration across many diverse scientific and art-based communities. (Fox, M. & Kemp, M (2009)

1. Interactive Architecture:

Borrowing form industry, numerical control (NC) refers to the automation of machine tools that are operated by abstractly programmed commands encoded on a storage medium, as opposed to manually controlled via hand wheels or levers, or mechanically automated via cams alone.

The first NC machines were built in the 1940s and '50s, based on existing tools that were modified with motors that moved the controls to follow points fed into the system on paper tape. These early servomechanisms were rapidly augmented with analog and digital computers, creating the modern computed numerically controlled (CNC) machine tools that have revolutionized the design process. (Pease, W. (1952),

The Computer Numerical Control (CNC) fabrication process offers flexible manufacturing runs without high capital expenditure dies and stamping presses. High volumes are not required to justify the use of this equipment. It is equally less surprising when full-scale built examples that program itself by observing the lifestyle of the inhabitants, and then learns to anticipate and accommodate their needs. Metaphoric interactive architecture is both a conceptual and technical metaphor including the sociological and psychological stasis in terms of metaphor’s two technical and conceptual dimensions. Both are valid separately and even more acceptable in combination. But how do they two operate and how does knowing this benefit design, use and evaluation of built works?

The technical is that all art, including architecture, expresses one thing in terms of another by its inherent and distinct craft. On the one hand there is the architect who acts as the master builder (head carpenter); and on the other the fountain of conceptual metaphors which expresses ideas as built conceptual metaphors other wise known as works of architecture. Techne is actually a system of practical knowledge as a craft or art informed by knowledge of forms.

For example, the craft of managing a firm of architects where even virtue is a kind of technê of management and design practice, one that is based on an understanding of the profession, business and market. In this case the technai are such activities as drafting, specifying, managing, negotiating, programming, planning, supervising, and inspection.

By association with these technai, we can include house-building, mathematics, plumbing, making money, writing, and painting. So much so that the study and practice of design is devoid from the humanities and downplays theories of architecture; developing rather the crafts, skill and understandings needed to engineer, plan, sketch, draw, delineate, specify, write, and design.

Contemporary architecture is replete with axioms, principles and theorems guiding the geometry, applications of science, use of engineering, and formal logic to produce technical metaphors and justly excluding a whole conversation about the conceptual part of the built metaphor.

Now there are city-wide projection systems reading and relating to the numbers , frequency and speed of pedestrian and vehicular ambulation changing street lights and now even projecting images on buildings changing the images, colors textures and with that the scale and apparent height . (Watson, T. (2008)

As the two referents in any metaphor interact talking about on thing in terms of the other and making the strange familiar so are the building and the participants in the conversation, such a conversation seeking a commonplace and stasis by the limits of the technology and the concept of the designer.

2. Artificial Intelligence and Interactive architecture

There is common metaphor (commonplace) between natural intelligence (NI) and artificial intelligence (AI). The inference warrants that for both architectures’ (AI and NI {building}), master builder is an interdisciplinary, multi-crafted and multi-venue team. They are also both arts since they wed intentional ideas to “craft”; and, with craft they both make metaphors, the commonality to all the arts.

While “architect” actually means master builder and “architecture” the product of the master builder, this is historically identified with habitable buildings. The warrant to the inference of the resolution is that the computer industries (and virtual designers) have made a metaphor referring to the word “architecture” with its conceptual design and fundamental operational structures of computer systems. Already, IT and AI industry metaphorically compare their sciences and art of selecting and interconnecting hardware components to create computers that meet functional, performance and cost goals with the ways and means traditional architects design buildings.

There is an interconnectivity between the metaphor of computer’s instruction set architecture, or ISA, machine language (or assembly language), Microarchitecture and system design.

Making use of the metaphorical way of learning and inventing (Gordon, W. J. J. (1966) What can be done for the design of manufacturing plants, machine parts and assemblies may be applicable to creating communities, environments, developments and specific buildings. To do this the architects had to talk about one thing in terms of another and thus make the strange familiar. It was an interdisciplinary act necessitating the use of making metaphors. The resolution’s presumed context is that it is not just limited to information technology (IT) but a presumption of intelligence assuming man can make something which can think for itself as today’s computer games, medical procedures, aircraft and military devices

The below examples show that when programmed, systems can make judgments in a strange environment and metaphorically make the strange familiar (metaphorically) and systematically design buildings. (Where design is intentionally originating and developing a plan for a product, structure, system, or component).

The impact of artificial intelligence on the future of architecture: practice, process and products are that today there are “smart buildings” with internal mechanical and electrical systems that respond to the specific behavioral patterns of occupants.

“The availability of reliable, high-speed electronic connectivity enabled collaborative design team’s function irrespective of physical distance. (Eskil, MT (2004)This calls for new type of design and simulation environment—one that facilitates automated searching and locating of satisfying and optimizing parts, integration of selected parts in an assembly, and simulation of the overall design that is distributed over the Internet”.

An increasing quantity of building applications of AI work is based on (Eastman, CM (1978) “Building Information Modeling (BIM) generating and managing building data during its life cycle” [2]

3. Interactive architecture’s (IA) [1] predicates of AI (artificial intelligence) to building design.

3.1 The acronyms

Most acronyms are themselves metaphors and the acronyms spun off of the architecture technology metaphor of artificial intelligence and interactive architecture is no exception. ANTS, ARTS, ACTS, RBS, CAD, and ED are just some examples. The practical and the esoteric (select and rare) applications of AI to the built environment is often the result of metaphoric inventive processes, shocks and imaginative invention such as (Curtis, S. /Daniel J.2008) ANTS which is an innovative example of an AI application to design buildings. “The Autonomic Nanotechnology Swarm (ANTS) [1] is a generic mission architecture consisting of miniaturized, autonomous, self-similar, reconfigurable, addressable components forming structures. The components/structures have wide spatial distribution and multi-level organization. This ‘swarm’ (metaphor) behavior is inspired (metaphoric association) by the success of social insect colonies where within their specialties, individuals outperform generalists and with sufficiently efficient social interaction and coordination, groups of specialists outperform groups of generalists. (Curtis, S. /Daniel J.2008) (Multi-disciplinary)

Axiomatically, the type of information that is preserved in the traditional built environment is organized-complexity: precisely the type of information that defines living systems themselves. Thus, the traditional built environment consists of evolved and discovered solutions (schemata) that make our life easier and more meaningful.

That having been said as ACTS combines design and construction research in construction automation at the University of Reading led to the formulation of a computer-integrated, component-based construction system. (Bridgewater, C & Atkin, B. L.(1994) ANTS is a model for IA as it is automated only requiring a third party stimulant what interactive architecture refers to as participant, however the participant must be read as no metaphors can operate without transference from one to another referent.

The Reading Building System (RBS) was rationalized for automation following a systematic study of the construction processes involved in the design and erection of a variety of building types, especially high-tech offices.

Computer-aided design (CAD) packages were written that used Parts Set components as primitives and that offered flexibility in design that was so often lacking in earlier approaches to system building. At the same time, a family of automation aids was developed to manipulate the parts that were modeled in the CAD. [1]

4. Aesthetics of Interactive Architecture:

As any metaphor’s technique the aesthetics of interactive architecture will be affected by its system’s designer, the command of the craft, the technology and the system employed. To ever believe that the aesthetic outcome will be “objective” is a fallacy as there is even an aesthetic to a kaleidoscope which has infinite possibilities yet all within the aesthetic of the kaleidoscope’s design. The aesthetic outcome may be the result of interaction and the very change itself may meet the aesthetic of the participant; but, will it be the precise aesthetic of the participant? It is conceivable that the interactive mechanism can be as personalized and peculiar to specific contexts, persons and environments as to interact in relevant terms to construct a relevant aesthetic metaphor. Arnold Berlant’s website states that: “Sense perception lies at the etymological (history of words) core of aesthetics (Gr. aesthesis, perception by the senses), and is central to aesthetic theory, aesthetic experience, and their applications. Berlant finds in the aesthetic a source, a sign, and a standard of human value”.

It is this human value which is one leg of the art metaphor and the very basis for my view that metaphor is the foundation for both art, architecture and aesthetics, and why I have spent the past forty years researching the stasis to architecture being an art (because it too makes metaphors) it can also be shown that this same stasis is the commonplace to the works of aesthetic interactive architecture.

This coincidence confirms the intrinsic nature of my study of epistemology of architecture is a study in aesthetics. In fact metaphor is the driving parte for most creative art and orchestral works. Some contemporary aesthetic theory differs with how best to define the term “art”, What should we judge when we judge art?, What should art be like?, The value of art, things of value which define humanity itself; contrasted to Raymond Williams who argues that there is no unique aesthetic object but a continuum of cultural forms from ordinary speech to experiences that are signaled as art [4] by a frame, institution or special event.

Conversations about aesthetics, metaphors and architecture reassess current and traditional issues by providing a scientific method for the way metaphors work in traditional architecture and even more so in inter5active architecture which tries to find a generalized system that yield a relevant metaphor.

Even if it is one metaphor it could be responsive to changing numbers by altering actual and perceived scale; proportions, shades and shadows, etc. (Williams, R. (1958). The commonality of all arts [4] is that they express thought in terms of their peculiar craft and thus they (all arts) are technically metaphoric, metaphors because they transfer, carry-over and express one thing (some idea) in terms of another(the craft). {Parenthetically, there is no doubt that craft itself derives from ideas and concepts and within each is a sub-metaphor}. The sculptor who finds the figure as he malls the block is where the craft and the material inform the artist. The splashes of paint to canvas by Jackson Pollack even prevented any slow and deliberate cognition until the process was complete. Mies van der Rohe belittles his forms by simply ascribing his end result to being faithful to the materials and their properties. While all art [4] is not expressed as a linguistic metaphor all arts are metaphoric. Likewise, if architecture is the making of metaphors what are the linguistic, psychological, and cognition science’s commonalities between architecture and metaphors? This monograph is linguistic analogy transferring from linguistic, psychological and cognitive fields to art and architecture what has been scientifically studied.

This is the “stasis” (the state of equilibrium {equipoise} or inactivity caused by opposing equal forces) of the controversy of architecture being an art; that if architecture behaves, acts, looks and works like art than it too must be an art. [4].

Why? Because it, too, makes metaphors, and those metaphors are varied in depth, kind, scope and context. It is the stasis because it is where art and architecture meet.

The metaphor is the conceptual focal point. While many claim that the architect is the “techne” artist being a crafts man point has been conceptual and so useful as to bridge, carry-over and provide both artist and architect a common authority over the making of the built environment. As stasis, Architecture: the making of metaphors enables the center of the dispute to be argued with common purpose. So this is a stasis in definition which concedes conjecture.

While there may be other concepts justifying the relationship between art and architecture the metaphor is the stasis, common ground and commonality apparent to me. It not only is apparent but I have found has wide and broad applications to a variety of arts and architectural definitions, practices and contexts.

There may have been a time when the architect was the “master builder” and the lead craftsman but that is only true by his skill in drawing, design and specifying and not his skill as master carpenter.

The interactive architect adds other digital design disciplines. As such these in them selves have an aesthetic about their precision, craft and quality. Before solidifying our hypothesis about architecture and metaphors we both compared architecture to the art of sculpture reflecting Christina’s work as a sculptress and my work as an architect and designer. It soon became apparent that while we could easily agree that buildings were “sculptural”,” colorful”,” lyrical”, “graceful”, ”rhythmic” etc. these were illusive and neither a field, base, or a true commonality to all the arts, including sculpture and architecture; so what was it? Aside from the traditional role of the architect to gather and design the program of conditions, operations, ideals and goals the parameters of a dynamic aesthetic is introduced. Interactive architecture requires information technology, computer aided design and artificial intelligence

The commonality of all arts is that they technically express something in terms of their peculiar craft and thus they are metaphoric. However technically metaphoric, how does architecture conceptually make metaphors and is there an influence between the technical and the conceptual architectural metaphor?

When kingdoms created dynasty’s iconic buildings the architect and artisans took their ques from the reigning monarch. In our modern democratic pluralistic society the free reign of ideas and opinions as to contexts and their meanings are diverse.

Not only is my childhood quest relevant but the essence of the responsibility of today’s architect who not only reasons the technical but individually reasons the conceptual. It is to the architect that society turns to be informed about the shape and form of the context in which life will be played.

With this charge the need to know that we know and do by reasoning what science verifies by the scientific method to know that we know about the buildings, parks, and places we set into the environment. It is a public and private charge included in the contract for professional services but unspoken as professional life’s experience; to prove the relevant, meaningful and beneficial metaphors that edify encourage and equip society as well as provide for its’ health, safety and welfare. So it is critical to realize, control and accept as commonplace that the role of the architect is to do much more than build but build masterfully.

4.1 Examples of interactive projects:

· Interactive wall in Singapore

· Multi-touch wall is a touch screen; Clarify Near Life

· Lenovo (an IBM company offshoot) water wall projection

· Reverse water wall

· Liquid magnet sculptures: Japan: Fero magnetic liquid

· Protrude flow; Magnetic liquid Ferro fluids are composed of nanoscale ferromagnetic particles suspended in a carrier fluid, usually an organic solvent or water. The ferromagnetic nano-particles are coated with a surfactant to prevent their agglomeration (due to van der Waals and magnetic forces).

· Responds to sound

· Hairy paper

· Water sound water: Germany Mackensie.com Cornstarch water and sound Collin's Lab: DIY Cymatics. (Sturrock, J., (1981).

There is no so-called “interactive architecture “which tries to address the metaphor of landmark preservation, restoration or historic preservation and contextual design. Most of the woe and cry of the general public is about relevance and adaptation of their habitat to their life-style and traditions. So many buildings lack the amenities, layout, appurtenances, conveniences, scale, forms, shapes, texture and color needed by occupants. The least of their complaints is that the building doesn’t change form, pulsate or change color.

5. Structuralism as a Conceptual Framework [8]

Aside from a technical, aesthetic and sculptural derivative for Interactive Architecture there is also a conceptual framework which can be traced back to structuralism. Structuralism is an approach to the human sciences that attempts to analyze a specific field (for instance, architecture) as a complex system of interrelated parts.

It began in linguistics with the work of Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913), but many French intellectuals perceived it to have a wider application, and the model was soon modified and applied to other fields, such as sociology, anthropology, psychology, psychoanalysis, literary theory and architecture. This ushered in the dawn of structuralism as not just a method, but also an intellectual movement that came to take existentialism's pedestal in 1960s France. (Sturrock, J., (1981).

Structuralism as a movement in architecture and urban planning evolved around the middle of the 20th century. [8]

6. Responsive Architecture

The common definition of responsive architecture, as described by many authors, is a class of architecture or building that demonstrates an ability to alter its form, to continually reflect the environmental conditions that surround it. The term "responsive architecture" was given to us by Nicholas Negroponte, who first conceived of it during the late nineteen sixties when spatial design problems were being explored by applying cybernetics to architecture. Negroponte proposes that responsive architecture is the natural product of the integration of computing power into built spaces and structures, and that better performing, more rational buildings are the result. Negroponte also extends this mixture to include the concepts of recognition, intention, contextual variation, and meaning into computing and its successful (ubiquitous) integration into architecture. (Negroponte, N. (1970). the work of Nicholas Negroponte and the Architecture Machine Group at the MIT from the late 1960 ́s to the mid 1970 ́s. Negroponte proposed the application of computers in architectural design and endorsed their integration in built structures and spaces. (Grünkranz, D. (2010).

6.1 Responsive Architecture’s Phenomenology

"The concept of architectural responses arose from the initiation of the research program was a consequence of the crisis of architectural rationalism and the endless repetition of industrialized architectural forms.

The goals of the program were to make buildings context responsive and to create an intelligent environment that responses to the requirements and desires of users. (Grünkranz, D. (2010). Metaphorically these are two very separate issues: 1. Context responsive and 2. Respond to the desires of users.

The common introduction to responsive architecture is usually made by using the example of the thermostat. It is a basic example of a cybernetic feedback loop placed in a building environment in which the actual output is affected in response to an input.

A sensor distributed in the environment is monitoring its change (as for example a decline of temperature). A controlling device, which may also enables a user to enter his/her preferences (a change in space temperature), is reading the sensory output and compares it to a predefined instruction (hold a certain space temperature). If there is a change in the input criteria (temperature dial) the controlling device is triggering actuators (the heating system) which are able to change the environment. The thermostat is an example for what Don Ihde calls in his classification background phenomena. That is, as the term reveals, when a “specifically functioning technology” occupies a “background or field position” or becomes “a kind of near-technological environment itself.” (Grünkranz, D. (2010)

Once set, these technologies, controlling for example lighting, heating, and cooling systems, are operating more or less automatically. They do not require our focal attention. These technologies in the background would be a source of conflict for a phenomenology as operated by Heidegger, because they disconnect us from activities that bring change to an environment we live in. In this view, which might be called romantic, the way to heat a home is that one has to go out to cut down a tree using an axe as a technology for this purpose. Furthermore, someone has to chop the wood, dry it, store it, and at last set it ablaze to generate heat energy. In contrast, to operate a thermostat is a “fire and forget” activity. But also a conventional wood fired oven becomes an example for background relations in the intervals between the maintenance of the fire.

The oven does not need our undivided attention to cause environmental change. This examination should demonstrate the sometimes tense relationship between phenomenology and technology. It is shown in a missing acceptance for the nature of technology and its development as a fact of human endeavor. Ever since technologies have been deployed and accepted, they, on one hand, intended to change our ways of doing and on the other hand they also have changed the production of environments and social fields where we place our doing.

In the philosophy of technology, these two points were often strictly divided by the discussion over the neutrality or non-neutrality of technology; divided by the instrumental theory of technological-determinist position on one side and by the substantive theory of social determinists on the other side for which Heidegger took position. (Grünkranz, D. (2010).

As architects make metaphors so do it users as they reconstruct the referents and creative process making the metaphor. Automated or not the maintenance of either the context or the habitat conditions the operation of the goals of the metaphor according to its ideals and those of its cultures and particular users.

Responsive, interactive, kinetic or static architecture engages participant user inhabitants perusing life’s business. It is very natural for a metaphor to change as it for metaphor to cause change. Certainly inhabitants impact the metaphor as the metaphor impacts the inhabitant. Not every inhabitant’s impulses are followed by the person’s own responses nor may it be desired. Architecture which responds and interacts makes the unknown known and the need manifest by some accommodation of that need.

Responsive Architectures Projects [10]

7. Shape control in responsive architectural structures

Responsive architectures are those that measure actual environmental conditions (via sensors) to enable buildings to adapt their form, shape, color or character responsively (via actuators) (Sterk, T., (2006). Responsive architecture is a form of interactive architecture where architects make a metaphor. The metaphor can be both interactive and responsive or both.

Shape control within responsive architectural structures is a natural extension to the practice of engineering and architectural design.

The knowledge needed for this builds upon two well understood foundations: 1) the long existing knowledge that building performance and function are intimately connected to the shape of built spaces; and 2) the relatively new idea that embedded computational systems may be employed to control devices in useful and beautiful ways; when combined each type of knowledge can be used to further architecture and engineering at both theoretical and methodological levels as architecture: the making of metaphors.(Sterk, T. (2006). Even non-structural walls that move must be supported and carried. However, the cost of air-conditioning, cleaning and heating may offset the additional cost for the controls to change the space, shape and form of a building. Usually the sizes and shape of a building are included in the program and their ability to be modified may enhance the metaphor. [9]

8. Intelligent Building Kinetic Architecture [11]

Although this is a critical part of the background to Interactive Architecture but is merely Johnson control integrated systems of all building mechanical and electrical systems. These read the environment and not the people. These are reactive and not interactive but when digitized and adapted by re-programming is similar. The concept of intelligent architecture started as an interest in the latest integrated building systems operating a single building or facility, so that systems can communicate and exchange information. In that sense they interact.

The communication among these systems allows the right responses and decisions to operate buildings in a productive, economical and convenient way. Communication and information sharing prevents decisions from interfering with other systems’ responses or operation. Systems’ decisions and responses form the Responsive architecture that is represented by systems outputs.

9. Kinetic Architecture [11]

Kinetic architecture is really sculptural pieces mechanically controlled and automated. Kinetic architecture is a design concept in modern architecture which explores the physical transformation of part or portion of structural elements of a building with the objective to redefine traditional applications on motion through technological innovation. The use of robotics, mechanics and electronics are being more known as new approaches into architectural possibilities. (Curl, J. S.; (2000)

Kinetic Architecture evolved in the belief that the static, permanent forms of traditional architecture were no longer suitable for use in times of major change. Kinetic architecture was supposed to be dynamic, adaptable, and capable of being added to or reduced, and even disposable. ARHGRAM, Futurism, Metabolism, and the work of Friedman and Fuller have been suggested as examples of Kinetic architecture.

About once every couple of months one of my students sends me a video of ART+COM’s mechatronic installation, made up of 714 metal balls for the BMW museum. ART+COM describe it as “a spatial translation of a design process. Seemingly weightless and guided solely by the power of the mind, the sculpture moves through a cycle of free abstractions and typical BMW vehicle forms.” ( Curl, J. S.; (2000).

9.1 Kinetic Projects:

In search of flexible buildings – Kengo Kuma uses the term “weak architecture”. Itsellf a metaphor, his teahouse does not rise up from the ground as a fixed wooden construction, but unfolds as an airborne ephemeral structure. This metaphor works when a ventilation system is activated, the teahouse swells into shape like a white textile blossom. In its interior, comprising a surface of approximately twenty square meters, are nine tatami mats, an electric stove for the water kettle, and a preparation room. The design of the moving structure takes advantage of the Teflon foils and Shape Memory Alloys (SMAs) NiTiCu. This structure is fixed to the ground or to another structure and is a part of the electrical circuit.

The reactions controlled by computer are caused by the various circuits which connect the members of spirals of SMAs. The members are covered by the layered Teflon foil which is welded to the shape which is determined by the critical shape of the whole structure.

Another, The structure changes the shape continuously between the two critical positions. The SMAs change the shape according to the transformation temperature caused by the current passage. The very changes aree the metaphor of this work of archiotecure. The deformation is about 5% but using spirals multiply the result. The transformation temperature is 30°C and that is why the spirals are covered with the heat protection covering.

Two conditions of the structure come out from the characteristics of NiTiCu – the cold shape and the hot shape. The structure could be packed and transported during the cold shape position. The spirals of SMAs are welded to the joints which are connected by the system of locks which provides the stiffness of the whole structure. The structure is multilevel, and allotted chains determine the critical shape. ( Curl, J. S.; (2000). Ideally, the metaphor formed is a collaborative commonplace whose stasis is the user where the aesthetic, function and the form interact successfully. Architecture makes metaphors with all sorts of technological and conceptual variations whether static,responsive, interactive or kinetic. Throughout history technology has created its own system which has become the landmark of its period; perhaps ours will be marked by our moving parts. (Fez-Barringten,B. (2010)

#####

Footnotes: [ ] as noted in the text

1. Artificial intelligence and interactive architecture

In the Netherlands (Sha, R. (1998) “Artificial Design focuses on the application in architecture and design of the algorithmic approach to art being developed at the Institute of Artificial Art Amsterdam. Once a style has been defined the tool can suggest any desired number of alternative designs for a given document. The Department of Artificial Architecture develops programs which generate random specifications of 3-dimensional objects.

Each of these programs employs a "visual grammar" to define an infinite set of structures, and then draws random samples from this space”.

“The science of design usually conceives of AI as a set of tools for structuring the process, or planning, or optimizing [3] This further warrants that: “Rarely does the computer explore a space of designs, and in doing so, it is generally following a set of precise rules, so the machine is doing little else than repeating a series of mechanical steps, faster than a human could. Creativity is usually considered to lie outside the realm of what computers can do”. Evolutionary Design (ED), the creation of designs by computers using evolutionary methods is a new research area with an enormous potential”. Interactive Architecture uses much this system to design the mechanisms and support for the components of an interactive building. Interactive architecture reads and shows its form, color and texture based on its engineered design program; its aesthetic is the commonplace of the metaphor

Plausible accounts rather than scientific results are why we have conventional metaphors and why conceptual systems contain a preference for one set of metaphorical mappings over another. An artificial intelligence (AI) establishes its own vocabulary which once comprehended become the way in which we experience its’ product’s finding. Its discrepancies and fits seek the first and all the other similar elements while humans judge consistency, integrity and aesthetics of AI. The two have their respective roles. The human monitors, manages and controls wile the AI system performs anticipated intelligent operations leaving the human to find variances and reprogram. In this way AI in general and the application in particular evolves and impacts both architectures. However much the building’s systems behave participants read and digests and transmits new, changing and evolving information. Metaphor is the main mechanism through which humans comprehend abstract concepts and perform abstract reasoning. Whether it is one or thousands public cultures is influenced, bound and authenticated by its’ metaphors.

Not withstanding “idolatry” the metaphors are the contexts of life’s dramas and as our physical bodies are read by our neighbors finding evidence for inferences about social, political and philosophical claims about our culture and its place in the universe.

For humans much subject matter, from the most mundane to the most abstruse scientific theories, can only be comprehended via metaphor However, AI capacity is limited only by its microprocessor chips and RAM. Metaphor is fundamentally conceptual, not linguistic, in nature.

Human’s free will, whim, natural functions and being the original indigenous native inhabitants characterize man over his artificial creations. Left to its own AI would create a world of possible machine parts, systems and structures well suited for artificial intelligent life. (Lakoff, G. (1993)

Metaphorical language is a surface manifestation of conceptual metaphor. Prerequisite to understanding interactive architecture is to first understand architecture: the making of metaphors because interactive architecture reacts, recreates, and interpolates based on what it reads from participants. They each are referents of one metaphor. This is a transfer from one to another; making the strange (building) familiar and expressing one thing in terms of another; the very essence of metaphor. As one referent reaches stasis with the commonplace it forms the metaphor. The stasis is the metaphor and the commonplaces the aesthetic of the particular inter-architectural work.

As language is to speech so is output to AI where each has a content and inner meaning of the whole as well as each of its parts. As each word, each attachment, plain, material, structure had first been conceived to achieve some purpose and fill some need. Hidden from the reader is the inner psychology, social background, etc of the man when speaking and the programming deign and contacting process from the reader of a building metaphor. As in completing an argument the reader perceives the inferences with its warrants and connects the evidence of the seen to the claims to make the resolution of the whole, all of which are surmised from the surface.

Though much of our conceptual system is metaphorical a significant part of it is non-metaphorical. Metaphorical understanding is grounded in non-metaphorical understanding. AI is well suited to the architectural science of the strength of materials, mathematics, structures, indeterminate beams, truss design, mechanical systems, plumbing systems, electricity, cladding, finishes, lighting, etc. as are each understood metaphorically and their precepts applied metaphorically. But often random selections, trials and feasibility are random and rather in search of the metaphor without knowing whether it is or is not a metaphor and fit to be part of the metaphor at hand.

AI will not know the relevant commonality. It may select some commonality but chances are it will be irrelevant and as incongruous as often are language translations selecting incongruous phrases and usages. It is for such a risk that human management and monitoring may be required.

On the other hand we may select one or another based on non-metaphorical, empirical test and descriptions of properties. We then try to understand the metaphor in the selection, its commonality, how it contributes to the new application, how it has properties within itself which are alone strange and unrelated yet when coupled with the whole or part of the created metaphor contributes to metaphor. Metaphor allows humans to understand a relatively abstract or inherently unstructured subject matter in terms of a more concrete or at least more highly structured subject matter. Like the onomatopeics (words such as buzz or murmur that imitate the sounds associated with the objects or actions to which they refer) metaphors mappings of conceptions override the overt spoken and descriptive, and rely much more on mnemonics (something intended to assist the memory, as a verse or formula). Peculiar to the human, assistance comes from something much more primordial (constituting a beginning; giving origin to something derived or developed; original; elementary: primordial forms of life) to the person’s or societies experiences. Again, it is for such a risk that human management and monitoring may be required, an architectural design may warrant human invasiveness into the process. Interactive architecture strives to find the form best suited to what it reads. The conceptual metaphor is in search of the technical half of its metaphor as architectural metaphors are composed of both technical and conceptual metaphors (Fez-Barringten, B. 2009)

However, once completed these become the matrix (encyclopedic) of schemas (in argument; the warrants {where a warrant is a license to make an inference and as such must have reader's agreement} supporting the inferences (mappings) where in the metaphor becomes real). In this way the reader maps, learns and personalizes the strange into the realm of the familiar. The reader does so by the myriad of synaptic connections he is able to apply to that source. Hence humans translate their conceptions from philosophy, psychology, sociology, etc into two dimensional scaled drawings and then to real life full scale multi dimensions convention consisting of conventional materials, building elements the task of upload axioms to AI would take a lifetime of dedicated specialist.

Well suited to AI as maps are the result of cartographers rendering existing into a graphics for reading so is mapping to the reading of metaphors where the reader renders understanding from one source to another.

Doing so mentally and producing a rendition of understanding (as a pen and ink of a figure) not as a graphic but a conceptual understanding. The best risk management is when reader sees in a critical way the existing culling through and encyclopedia of referents to make the true relationship; the mapping which best renders the reality; the relationship which informs and clarifies as the map the location, configuration and characteristic of the reality. As the cartographer seeks lines, symbols and shadings to articulate the reality so the reader choices of heretofore unrelated and seemingly unrelated are found to have and essence common to both the reality and the rendition so that the metaphor can be repeated becoming the readers new vocabulary . In fact architects do the opposite as graphic renditions are made of synapses between amorphic and seemingly desperate information. This relationship between axiom and performance assure for program conformity and reliability.

Yet the process of mapping is no less intense as architect review the matrix of conditions, operation , ideal and goals of the thesis to find similarities and differences , commonalities, and potential for one to resonate with another to make a “resolution” on the experience of a cognitive mapping which becomes the metaphor, parte and overwhelming new reality. The new reality is the target of the source and finally can be read. In the case of the birth of an infant metaphor readers may find a wide variety of source information which is germane to their own experience.

Before the public ever sees the constructed metaphor Building Officials, manufactures, city planners, owners, estimators, general contractors, specialty contractors, environmentalist, neighbors and community organization first read the drawings and map their observations to their issues to form a slanted version of the reality. Human manager can easily monitor this variance and modify the performance. Their mappings are based on the warrants which are their licensed to perform. Each warrant will support a different mapping (inference) and result in its own metaphor. In effect each will see a kind of reality of the proposed in the perspective of their peculiar warrant, where license is permission from authority to do something. It is assumed if one gets permission it has met the conditions, operations, ideal and goals of the proposed metaphor. As risk is managed by other professions, operations and systems mapping is critical at this read to assure that the architect’s rendering of the program is faithful to the cognitive, lawful, physical and legal realities.

It s like a map which gets tested by scientist, navigators , pilots and engineers before they build a craft to use the map, or set out on a journey using the map. Before the contracts start committing men and material the metaphor must map and be the metaphor meeting all expectations. As there is metaphor between natural (NI) and artificial intelligence (AI) in cognitive linguistics, conceptual metaphor, or cognitive metaphor, refers to the understanding of one idea, or conceptual domain, in terms of another, for example, understanding quantity in terms of directionality (e.g. "prices are rising"). A conceptual domain can be any coherent organization of human experience.

The regularity with which different languages employ the same metaphors, which often appear to be perceptually based, has led to the hypothesis that the mapping between conceptual domains corresponds to neural mappings in the brain. Earlier much of this was merely cybernetics (human control functions and of mechanical and electronic systems designed to replace them, involving the application of statistical mechanics to communication engineering) Cybernetics was defined by Norbert Wiener, in his book of that title, as the study of control and communication in the animal and the machine. (Bailey, K. (1994) Wiener popularized the social implications of cybernetics, drawing analogies between automatic systems (such as a regulated steam engine) and human institutions in his best-selling The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society (Houghton-Mifflin, 1950). Another characteristic of the new cybernetics is its contribution towards bridging the "micro-macro gap". (Weiner, N. (1950) That is, it links the individual with the society" Another characteristic noted was the "transition from classical cybernetics to the new cybernetics [that] involves a transition from classical problems to new problems. These shifts in thinking involve, among others, (a) a change from emphasis on the system being steered to the system doing the steering, and the factor which guides the steering decisions and (b) new emphasis on communication between several systems which are trying to steer each other" (Bailey, K. (1994) The work of Gregory Bateson was also strongly influenced by cybernetics. Pure cybernetics studies systems of control as a concept, attempting to discover the basic principles underlying such things as: Artificial intelligence, Robotics, Computer Vision, Control systems, Emergence, Learning organization, New Cybernetics, Second-order cybernetics Interactions of Actors Theory, and Conversation Theory ( the operational premise of interactive architecture)

NASA; Goddard Space Flight Center;

Human exploration of planetary surfaces. The Vision requires innovative multi-function structures, minimal resource use, and development of stand-alone and human-interfaced robotic capabilities which interacts by reading the environment, designing and building a habitat.

The NASA team has responded by developing ART (Addressable Reconfigurable Technology), as near-term Tetrahedral Walkers and Manipulators for lunar reconnaissance (ALMA/ALI) and as a more advanced mobile infrastructure for lunar exploration and exploitation (LARA) with applicability wherever extreme mobility is required on Earth.

Future ART structures will be capable of true autonomy using bi-level intelligence combining autonomic and heuristic aspects, acting as part of an Autonomous Nanotechnology Swarm (ANTS).

The Autonomous Nanotechnology Swarm (ANTS) Architecture is well suited to remote space or ground operations. It is being implemented on a near term basis, using Addressable Reconfigurable Technology (ART). In the future, Super Miniaturized ART (SMART) will form highly reconfigurable networks of struts, acting as 3D mesh or 2D fabric to perform a range of functions on demand.

The ANTS approach harnesses the effective skeletal/ muscular system of the frame itself to enable amoeboid movement, effectively ‘flowing’ between morphological forms”. ANTS’ structures would thus be capable of forming an en tire mobile modular infrastructure adapted to its environment.

The ANTS architecture is metaphorically inspired by the success of social insect colonies, a success based on the {axiom} division of labor within the colony in two key ways: [principle of axiom [T]} First, within their specialties, individual specialists generally outperform generalists. [Principle of axiom [T]} Second, with sufficiently efficient social interaction and coordination, the group of specialists generally outperforms the group of generalists. Thus systems designed as ANTS are built from potentially very large numbers of highly autonomous, yet socially interactive elements. The architecture is self-similar in those elements and sub-elements of the system may also be recursively structured as ANTS on scales ranging from microscopic to interplanetary distances” These are both metaphoric and multidisciplinary applications of axioms and AI methodology. AI Architecture is not the making of metaphors but self translating the design into a finally built product.

(http://ants.gsfc.nasa.gov/ArchandAI.html Official): Steven Curtis; Website Curator: James Daniel; Last Updated: April 2008.

2. BIM

One theory claims that Professor Charles M. Eastman at Georgia Institute of Technology coined the term. This theory is based on a view that the term Building Information Model is basically the same as Building Product Model, which Professor Eastman has used extensively in his book and papers since the late 1970s. ('Product model' means 'data model' or 'information model' in engineering.)

Nevertheless, it is agreed upon that the term was popularized by Jerry Laiserin as a common name for a digital representation of the building process to facilitate exchange and interoperability of information in digital format. According to him and others the first implementation of BIM was under the Virtual Building concept by Graphisoft's ArchiCAD, in its debut in 1987. Typically BIM uses three-dimensional, real-time, dynamic building modeling software to increase productivity in building design and construction. The process produces the Building Information Model (also abbreviated BIM), which encompasses building geometry, spatial relationships, geographic information, and quantities and properties of building components.

3. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO),

Building, Construction and Engineering, PO Box 56, Highett, Victoria, 3190, Australia. “The development of standardized product and process models for the building and construction industry has now reached a stage where collaborative design is feasible. The challenge comes from the appropriate adoption of emerging technologies to support advanced data interoperability at different levels of granularity. Interoperability is the enabling mechanism that allows information to be exchanged between collaborative systems. The process covers the information flow from a CAD system to the code checking system.

It contains the events and activities taking place within each separate CAD and compliance checking system and through the communication channels between the two systems”.

4. Art is the intentional and skillful act and/or product applying a technique and differs from natural but pleasing behaviors and useful or decorative products in their intent and application of a developed technique and skill with that technique. Art is not limited to fields, persons or institutions as science, government, security, architecture, engineering, administration, construction, design, decorating, sports, etc. On the other hand in each there are both natural and artistic where metaphors (conceptual and/technical) make the difference, art is something perfected and well done in that field. For example, the difference between an artistic copy and the original is the art of originality and authorship in that it documents a creative process lacking in the copy.

5. Interactive architecture’s key words

Read: in order to be read buildings must be authored (designed) and readers made literate; with interactive architecture the components and not the participants read and interact.

Art: Involving craft and technique architecture is an art; whether read or not is ever-present in our environment and constitutes our context

Aesthetic: whether read, authored or artful building’s aesthetic must be appreciated by beholder. The interactive itself is an aesthetic as opposed to the aesthetic of the traditional passive

Function: Aesthetic, artful, unread or un-authored if it doesn’t shelter to its peculiar demand the work is irrelevant and abandoned.

Interactive: buildings that program itself by observing the lifestyle of the inhabitants, and then learn to anticipate and accommodate their needs.

Sustainability; Green; environmentally friendly.

6. Aldo van Eyck: He taught at the Amsterdam Academy of Architecture from 1954 to 1959, and he was a professor at the Delft University of Technology from 1966 to 1984. He also was editor of the architecture magazine Forum from 1959 to 1963 and in 1967. Aldo van Eyck was one of the most influential protagonists of the movement Structuralism. A member of CIAM and then in 1954 a co-founder of "Team 10", Van Eyck lectured throughout Europe and northern America propounding the need to reject Functionalism and attacking the lack of originality in most post-war Modernism. Van Eyck's position as co-editor of the Dutch magazine Forum helped publicize the "Team 10" call for a return to humanism within architectural design.

7. Flyotel: (2004)

The 5 star hotel with 600 rooms is conceived as a new spectacular and architectural highlight for Dubai. The streamlined form of the building reminds of the body of a bird, spreading out its wings and lifting up its head just before starting to fly. The fascination of the Flyotel is based upon the theme of flying · People on the move are weaving threads around the world by traveling from airport to airport · The Flyotel celebrates the fascination of flying. The design captures the images of a bird spreading out its wing and lifting its head just before taking off. The Flyotel seems to float on water, just connected to the beach like a body which is both pier and building. Extraordinary is the construction of the diagrid steel framework: the 3d computer model of the architect is directly translated through a unique file to factory process of mass-customization to the production machines of the steel manufacturer. The non standard design technique and the file to factory production process technique makes the structurally and architectural audacious expression of the volume possible and cost-effective to realize. Design: ONL [Oosterhuis_ Lénárd] Rotterdam the Netherlands

8. Structuralism:

Structuralism was a reaction to CIAM (International Congress of Modern Architecture) -Functionalism (Rationalism) which had led to a lifeless expression of urban planning that ignored the identity of the inhabitants and urban forms. (Sturrock, J., (1981). Two different manifestations of Structuralist architecture exist. Sometimes these occur in combination with each other. On the one hand, there is the Aesthetics of Number, formulated by Aldo van Eyck [6] in 1959. This concept can be compared to cellular tissue. The "Aesthetics of Number" can also be described as "Spatial Configurations in Architecture".

(Sturrock, J., (1981). On the other hand, there is the Architecture of Lively Variety (Structure and Coincidence), formulated by John Habraken in 1961. This second concept is related to user participation in housing. The "Architecture of Lively Variety" can also be called "Architecture of Diversity" or "Pluralistic Architecture". Structuralism in a general sense is a mode of thought of the 20th century, which came about in different places, at different times and in different fields. It can also be found in linguistics, anthropology, philosophy, art and architecture, as architecture: the making of metaphors. (Sturrock, J., (1981).

Built structures corresponding in form to social structures, according to Team 10 (a group of architects and other invited participants who assembled starting in July 1953 at the 9th Congress of C.I.A.M. for the investigation of interrelationships between social and built structures: amongst those attending was Shadrach Woods (June 30, 1923 – July 31, 1973). The archetypical behavior of man as the origin of architecture (cf. Anthropology, Claude Lévi-Strauss). Different Rationalist architects had contacts with groups of the Russian Avant-Garde after World War I. They believed in the idea that man and society could be manipulated. Coherence, growth and change on all levels of the urban structure. The concept of a Sense of place. Tokens of identification (identifying devices). Articulation of the built volume. Polyvalent form and individual interpretations (compare the concept of langue et parole by Ferdinand de Saussure). User participation in housing. Integration of "high" and "low" culture in architecture (fine architecture and everyday forms of building). Pluralistic architecture.

Structuralism is inherently a metaphor and metaphoric is so far as its referents are apparently unrelated and primarily it has a commonplace to it s context. (Sturrock, J., (1981).

9. Responsive architecture and Shape Control

Today, environmental concerns play a more important role within design so this focus has shifted slightly. The role of architecture at present can be more accurately described as to support human endeavors while using the minimum number of resources throughout the life of a building. This includes minimizing the resources used within construction and lifecycle processes. Responsive architectures help achieve this goal by finding best-fit formal solutions to both user activities and environmental changes. Today this is determined by comparative analysis for optimum design. They also may help reduce building mass and embedded energy costs. Though similar, the methodologies that architects need to produce these types of buildings are not the same as those used by engineers. Architects require cladding methodologies as well as response methodologies that can adapt to subjective spatial desires as well as to rigid structural criteria. Subjective desires include aesthetic, psychological and environmental factors such as comfortable ranges of temperature, lighting and acoustic performance. To construct systems that respond to these desires, control mechanisms that are capable of building partial user models may be required. (Sterk, T. 2006)

These are contextual models that capture three types of input, environmental data, user’s activity data, and data about when users correct the system. Above and beyond structural and architectural abilities they demand knowledge of distributed computing processes, network structures and synchronization, control theory, intelligent systems and learning within AI. Methods for networking responsive structures are especially significant because through coordinating different shape control systems larger environmental gains should become feasible.

Three prototypes shape changes include leaning, extension, collapse, and flattening correlated to scope. Scope becomes a tool for enabling different regions of a structural system to become more or less rigid and affect the shape of the structure. For example, by limiting the scope of actuation to one half of a structure, leaning can be induced, while by enabling a global scope, expansion or contraction results. Limiting factors of rigidity, still apply to this system. Rigidity limits impact by restricting the degree of freedom that a structure has to move. (Sterk, T. (Jul 2006). Without affecting the basic architectural program building shapes may be altered and still retain the building’s metaphor.

10. Responsive Architectures Projects

Tristan d' Estree Sterk of The Bureau for Responsive Architecture and The School of the Art Institute of Chicago and Robert Skelton of UCSD in San Diego worked together on actuated tensegrity, experimenting with pneumatically controlled rods and wires which change the shape of a building in response to sensors both outside and inside the structure. Their goal was to limit and reduce the impact of buildings on natural environments.

A full scale actuated tensegrity prototype built from cast aluminum, stainless steel components and pneumatic muscles (pneumatic muscles provided by shadow robotics UK) by Tristan d' Estree Sterk and The Office for Robotic Architectural Media (2003). These types of structural systems use variable and controllable rigidity to provide architects and engineers with systems that have a controllable shape. As a form of ultra-lightweight structure these systems offer a primary method for reducing the embodied energy used in construction processes.

MIT's Kinetic Design Group has been developing the concept of intelligent kinetic systems which are defined as "architectural spaces and objects that can physically re-configure themselves to meet changing needs." They draw on structural engineering, embedded computation and adaptable architecture. The objective is to demonstrate that energy use and the environmental quality of buildings could be rendered more efficient and affordable by making use of a combination of these technologies.

The E-motive House is a programmable and demountable structure that would change shape in real time; the Flyotel [7] , a hotel in Dubai that celebrates the pleasure of flying, The Acoustic Barrier and the Hessing Cockpit in Utrecht that combine a 1.5km long acoustic barrier with an industrial building of 5000m2.

The concept is to design with the speed of passing traffic since the building is seen from the perspective of the driver. Using a process he calls "mass customization", each piece of glass, steel, each node in the structure is slightly different that the others.The Hyperbody research group developed two years ago MUSCLE Tower II , a tower that reacts to its environment, and pro-actively determines the space around itself. It is inherently metaphoric where the structure likens itself to the environment and the environment likens its properties to the building. The HRG have also worked on the design of an interactive hotel room. The Muscle Room would allow the user to alter his surroundings to suit his every need. In this case the user makes the metaphor with the metaphor created by the architect. When the room is entered it is completely empty. By interacting with the room the user can get a different layout or appearance. The user and the room are the referents with the metaphor they make the commonplace to be discovered. Using a system of moving panels, the walls could be shaped into furniture, doors, and spaces. Like any metaphor it is shaped by its author to include two referents reaching toward each other to form a stasis. Also the appearance, light, sound and climate can be influenced to create the perfect room. "Muscles" is a 35-foot-high skyscraper designed to change posture thanks to a jointed spine and pneumatic muscles, designed by the WhoWhatWhenAir skyscraper team: Philippe Block, Axel Kilian, Peter Schmitt, and John Snavely.

The goal was To design a "smart" structure that responds to the people interacting with it. The architect of such a system provided the tools for the user to make a metaphor whose only understanding is limit the makers own perceptions. The project was inspired by structural engineer Guy Nordenson's idea of responsive structures for buildings. He said, "If architects designed a building like a body, it would have a system of bones and muscles and tendons and a brain that knows how to respond. If a building could change its posture, tighten its muscles and brace itself against the wind, its structural mass could literally be cut in half."

The Muscles tower is an articulated jointed spine controlled by a series of pneumatic muscles. Activating the pumps allows the structure to bend in different directions by introducing a twist in the jointed core. By stacking and activating several "muscle" units, the mini skyscraper can gently curve in space away from its upright equilibrium position. If no muscles are active, the core keeps the structure upright.

The team imagines that, in a full-scale tower, such active structural components would be used to cancel out movement and stabilize the tall structure against changing forces from wind or earthquakes.

Living Glass involves a reactive, transparent surface with an infrared sensor and gills that open and shut as they detect the presence of humans and control air quality in a room. With minor changes, the system could be tuned for environmental control, detecting carbon dioxide in a room and in multiple grapefruit-sized zones, and "breathing" when levels are high. Here, movement promotes health by allowing air flow when needed, and it provides information by signaling a high carbon dioxide level, which is normally invisible. David Benjamin and Soo-in Yang are both architects, but to call their company, "Living".

Responsive Interior Architecture (Interior Design). Parsons students transformed their lobby with walls that change configuration depending on activity in the room. In the lobby of the school's Design and Technology department, Witzgall's students mounted two deceptively simple polycarbonate panels, donated by Polygal, into a garage-door track in the ceiling. They sit side by side, partially blocking passage between the lobby's elevator and the hallway beyond. When someone approaches, embedded sensors trigger the panels to move toward the perimeter walls. These temporary walls remain parted during periods of high traffic, and return to the center of the lobby when there is none. The very nice panels also react to cues other than lobby gridlock. Each includes 128 LEDs linked to microphones in the department's two computer labs. The LEDs light up within a grid to graph the volume inside: the X-axis represents time; the Y-axis marks the activity level. Brightline lighting systems donated fluorescent fixtures, which create an ambient color wash that is programmed to change throughout the day with the class schedule.

[11] Intelligent Building Kinetic Architecture

If intelligent buildings need to receive, analyze, and react according to

such processes, responsive ones are required only to receive and react

to only one input parameter. Technology and communication systems

make it possible to combine several parameters by using system

integration and computerization. Technology and computerized

systems have enhanced and changed the manner of responses and provided a variety of decisions according to different sources of information. Receiving, analyzing, and reacting are the key criteria of intelligent building the input (reception) category covers information detection devices such as temperature sensors.

The second category will be the category of analyzing devices. The third category, decisions and outputs, will cover both output of sensory devices and forms of reaction and response that emanate from these systems. As a result of the third category, this paper will survey the forms of responses to determine whether or not the kinetic response is a viable choice.

The concept of intelligent building presents the strongest level of communication among a building’s systems. The term “building systems” refers to all systems that operate a building like HVAC, mechanical,

structural, access control, safety and security, building management, lighting, maintenance, local networking, and energy management.

The intelligent building concept presents control and management by a

building’s systems and users using computer abilities to achieve users’ needs, which may include productivity, efficiency, energy savings, entertainment, delight, and comfort, return investment, and low life cost. (Sherbini, K. & Krawczyk, R. (2004)

Citations/References

Anonymous (various): Designing Interactive Systems; (2008) Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Designing interactive systems

Cape Town, South Africa

Pages: 21-30

Year of Publication: 2008

Bridgewater, C &Atkin, B. L. (October 1994) Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering: Vol. 8, No. 4; pp. 469-488, Whiteknights, Reading RG6 2AZ, England:

Bailey, Kenneth D. (1994), “Sociology and the New Systems Theory: Toward a Theoretical Synthesis”, p.163).

Curl, James Stevens; (2000) “Kinetic architecture:” A Dictionary of Architecture and Landscape Architecture

Encyclopedia.com (Highbeam research, Inc.

Curtis, Stephen; Daniel, James; (2008):NASA; Goddard Space flight Center; (http://ants.gsfc.nasa.gov/ArchandAI.html Official): Autonomous Nanotechnology Swarm (ANTS). ART (Addressable Reconfigurable Technology),

Eskil, Mustafa Taner (advised by Jon Sticklen) (2004):”Distributed routine design over the internet with cooperating mdm agents”; Michigan State University. East Lansing

Eastman, Charles, M. (1978) “Product model’ means data model of ‘information model’ in engineering”; Georgia Institute of Technology (not quoted)

Eric Vreedenburgh and Remko Scha (1998) pp. 154-155. "The Artificial City." (Not quoted)

Fez-Barringten, Barie; (2009-10) Architecture is a technical and conceptual metaphor; and The History of the periods of metaphors; AI Journal (2010)

Fox, Michael Fox & Kemp, Miles; (2009) “Interactive Architecture; Princeton Architectural Press: http://www.interactive-architecture.com/).

Graffiti Research Lab; Interactive architecture business website: (Graffiti Research Lab: http://graffitiresearchlab.com/?page_id=32)

Grünkranz, Daniel ;( 2010) Towards a Phenomenology of Responsive Architecture, the University of Applied Arts in Vienna.

Gordon, William .J.J. (1966) The metaphorical way of learning and knowing; applying Synectics to sensitivity and learning situations; Porpoise Books, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Khalid Sherbini and Robert Krawczyk ;( 2004) “Intelligent Building Kinetic Architecture”: 1st ASCAAD International Conference, e-Design in Architecture: King Fahd University of Petroleum Minerals.

Lakoff, George; (1993) The contemporary theory of metaphor in Metaphor and Thought: Second Edition Edited by Andrew Ortony: School of Education and social Sciences and Institute for the learning Sciences: North Western University Published by Cambridge University Press First pub: 1979 Second pub: 1993

Negroponte, Nicholas. (1970). The Architecture Machine: Towards a More Human Environment. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Olgay, Victor; (1963) Design with Climate: Bioclimatic Approach to Architectural Regionalism: Princeton University Press

Pease, William (September 1952), "An Automatic Machine Tool", Scientific American: 101-115.

Remko Scha: "Towards Architecture of Chance." In: Hans Konstapel, Gerard Rijntjes and Eric Vreedenburgh (eds.): De Onvermijdelijke Culturele Revolutie. (Den Haag: Stichting Maatschappij en Onderneming, 1998), pp. 105-114. [In Dutch.] (Not quoted)

Sturrock, John, (1981) Structuralism and Since, Introduction. Opus Books; UK

Sterk, Tristan d’ Estre., (2006) Responsive Architecture: User-centered Interactions within the Hybridized Model of Control, in Proceedings Of

The Game Set and Match II, On Computer Games, Advanced Geometries, and Digital Technologies, Netherlands: Episode Publishers, pp. 494-501.

Sterk, Tristan d’ Estre; (Jul 2006) Shape control in responsive architectural structures – current Reasons & challenges; university California, San Diego; 4th World Conference on Structural Control and Monitoring;

Watson, Theodore; Generative Graffiti; (2009) Proceedings of the 7th ACM conference on Designing interactive systems;

Wiener, Norbert; (1950) Cybernetics and the Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society; Houghton-Mifflin: USA

Williams, Raymond; (1958) Moving from High Culture to Ordinary Culture; Originally published in N. McKenzie (ed.), Convictions; London

Researched Publications: Refereed and Peer-reviewed Journals: "monographs":

Barie Fez-Barringten; Associate professor Global University

1. "Architecture the making of metaphors"

Main Currents in Modern Thought/Center for Integrative Education; Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New Rochelle, New York.

2."Schools and metaphors"

Main Currents in Modern Thought/Center for Integrative Education Sep.-Oct. 1971, Vol. 28 No.1, New Rochelle, New York.

3."User's metametaphoric phenomena of architecture and Music":

“METU” (Middle East Technical University: Ankara, Turkey): May 1995"

Journal of the Faculty of Architecture

4."Metametaphors and Mondrian:

Neo-plasticism and its' influences in architecture" 1993 Available on Academia.edu since 2008

5. "The Metametaphor of architectural education",

North Cypress, Turkish University. December, 1997

6."Mosques and metaphors" Unpublished,1993

7."The basis of the metaphor of Arabia" Unpublished, 1994

8."The conditions of Arabia in metaphor" Unpublished, 1994

9. "The metametaphor theorem"

Architectural Scientific Journal, Vol. No. 8; 1994 Beirut Arab University.

10. "Arabia’s metaphoric images" Unpublished, 1995

11."The context of Arabia in metaphor" Unpublished, 1995

12. "A partial metaphoric vocabulary of Arabia"

“Architecture: University of Technology in Datutop; February 1995 Finland

13."The Aesthetics of the Arab architectural metaphor"

“International Journal for Housing Science and its applications” Coral Gables, Florida.1993

14."Multi-dimensional metaphoric thinking"

Open House, September 1997: Vol. 22; No. 3, United Kingdom: Newcastle uponTyne

Cardiff University, UK. April 2010

16. “Word Gram #9” Permafrost: Vol.31 Summer 2009 University of Alaska Fairbanks; ISSN: 0740-7890; page 197

17. "Metaphors and Architecture." ArchNet.org. October, 2009.at MIT

18. “Metaphor as an inference from sign”; University of Syracuse

Journal of Enterprise Architecture; November 2009: and nominated architect of the year in special issue of Journal of Enterprise Architecture explaining the unique relationship between enterprise and classic building architecture.

19. “Framing the art vs. architecture argument”; Brunel University (West London); BST: Vol. 9 no. 1: Body, Space & Technology Journal: Perspectives Section

20. “Urban Passion”: October 2010; Reconstruction & “Creation”; June 2010; by C. Fez-Barringten; http://reconstruction.eserver.org/;

AI & Society. ISSN (Print) 1435-5655 - ISSN (Online) 0951-5666 : Published by Springer-Verlag;; 6 May 2010 http://www.springerlink.com/content/j2632623064r5ljk/

Paper copy: AIS Vol. 26.1. Feb. 2011; Online ISSN 1435-5655; Print ISSN 0951-5666;

DOI 10.1007/s00146-010-0280-8; : Volume 26, Issue 1 (2011), Page 103.

22. “Does Architecture Create Metaphors?; G.Malek; Cambridge; August 8,2009

Pgs 3-12 (4/24/2010)

24. “The sovereign built metaphor”: monograph converted to Power Point for presentation to Southwest Florida Chapter of the American Institute of Architects. 2011

25.“Architecture:the making of metaphors”:The Book;

Contract to publish: 2011

Cambridge Scholars Publishing
12 Back Chapman Street
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE6 2XX
United Kingdom

Edited by

Edward Richard Hart,

0/2 249 Bearsden Road

Glasgow

G13 1DH

Lecture:

http://globaluniversity.academia.edu/BarieFezBarringten/Books/1449761/Architecture_The_Making_Of_Metaphors

Aesthetic, architecture, Architecture is a metaphor, art, Artificial intelligence, automatic, function, interactive, kinetic, show, space, sustainable, transfers, Barie Fez-Barringten
http://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=2433463466927232250#editor/target=post;postID=4762025633656742696