Join | Login  

     Popular! Books, Stories, Articles, Poetry
Where Authors and Readers come together!


Featured Authors:  S Zachary, iG M (Jerry) Roberts, iRichard Harris, iNancy Neville, iRon Cox, iIolanthe Woulff, iJacob Taylor, i

  Home > Architecture > Articles Popular: Books, Stories, Articles, Poetry     

Barie Fez-Barringten

· Become a Fan
· Contact me
· Success story
· Books
· Articles
· Poetry
· Stories
· Blog
· 81 Titles
· 7 Reviews
· Save to My Library
· Share with Friends!
Member Since: Mar, 2006

Barie Fez-Barringten, click here to update your pages on AuthorsDen.

   Recent articles by
Barie Fez-Barringten

Metaphors, architecture and music
Relations between metaphors, creative thinking and 3D structures ©
The Six Principles of Art’s & Architecture’s Technical and Conceptual M
Architecture is an art because, as art, it too, makes metaphors
Linguistic, psychological, and cognitive sciences:architecture:metaphors
Metaphoric axioms for micro disciplinary architecture
Metaphor issues of architecture is art stasis
Metaphor cognition architecture axioms
Communication, metaphor & architecture ©
Interior Architecture/ Interior Design
           >> View all

Aesthetic principles of metaphor, art and architecture
by Barie Fez-Barringten   
Rated "G" by the Author.
Last edited: Friday, November 23, 2012
Posted: Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Share    Print   Save    Become a Fan

      View this Article

While aesthetics is a guiding principle in matters of artistic beauty and taste, metaphor is the warrant to taste and is used to form works of art and architecture. Aesthetics is also reasoning matters having to do with understanding perceptions. There fore it is appropriate to consider the aesthetic nature of architecture and metaphors.
William Wilson said that "a generous Age of Aquarius aesthetic that said that everything was art” It was during this time that we proposed that architecture is an art because it too makes metaphors and held the lecture series at Yale University. Most definitions of aesthetics concern the appreciation of beauty or good taste including the basis for making such judgments. Without a theory of metaphors these judgments mostly deal with probability and are inductive or deductive, deductive when depending on accepted premises which is the commonplace of the metaphor or inductive using logical induction. Inductive reasoning is inductive inference from the observed to the unobserved. It was given its classic formulation by David Hume, who noted that such inferences typically rely on the assumption that the future will resemble the past, or on the assumption that events of a certain type are necessarily connected, via a relation of causation, to events of another type.

Aesthetic principles of metaphor, art and architecture

queries welcome to:

                Arnold Berlant’s writes 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 metaphor and the very basis for the view that metaphor is the foundation for both art, architecture and aesthetics, and why I have spent over 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 thought and investigation. .

                   This coincidence (between aesthetics and art) confirms the intrinsic nature of this study of epistemology of architecture and aesthetics. The metaphoric evidence I believe will prove both useful to the creation, teaching and valuation of works of art as well as their architectural off-spring. In fact metaphor is the driving parte for most creative arts and architectural 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 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.

                 The commonality of all arts 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 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. 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 as 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 apparent commonality. It not only is apparent but with 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 for most that is only true by his skill in drawing, design and specifying and not his skill as a master carpenter. Before solidifying our hypothesis about architecture and metaphors we both compared architecture to the art of sculpture reflecting my wife 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? 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? “If the walls could only speak”; they do! Are you listening? 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 architects 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.

                In 1967, during the series of colloquia [2] at Yale on art, Irving Kriesberg [3] had spoken about the characteristics of painting (art) as a metaphor. It seemed at once that this observation was applicable to architecture (since scholars have long proclaimed that architecture was an art) and to the design of occupiable forms. An appeal to Paul Weiss drew from him the suggestion that we turn to English language and literature in order to develop a comprehensive, specific, and therefore usable definition of metaphor. But it soon became evident that the term was being defined through examples without explaining the phenomenon of the metaphor; for our purposes it would be essential to have evidence of the practical utility of the idea embodies in the metaphor as well as obvious physical examples. However, since then, in 1977, a group of leading philosophers, psychologist, linguists, and educators gathered at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign to participate in a multi disciplinary conference on metaphor and thought which was attended by nearly a thousand people.

               Our symposium at Yale was had a smaller attended and our proceedings were transcribed and later in 1971 partially published in Main Currents in Modern Thought.[4] 1979 research has been completed and documents in Andrew Ortony’s compendium book on metaphor and thought to advance this metaphoric comparison. 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 as 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 below are excerpts form my monograph of paradigms and axioms about architecture based on 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 [5] (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. [1] 2.


              Whether by formal or informal reasoning, whether by deductive or inductive reasoning it is necessary to know that aesthetics’ fundamental basis for linking a specific case to general referent is, as art, bridging the craft to the craftsman, the concept to the craft and the observation to a model. . While in earlier monographs I have dealt with the specifics of these relationships this monograph presents the ways metaphors work and by induction support claims. The study shows that metaphors are not all the same and work in different ways. These different ways are the evidence for the inferences to the claims and resolution significant to aesthetics, art, and architecture; namely that artist, art critiques, philosophers, architects have an awareness of many the shapes and forms of metaphors and their possible inclusion in what can be judged and included.

                 Each of the below syllogisms is meant to provide some of the early reasoning supporting our original research. a. Art is the making of metaphors b. Architecture is an art c Architecture is an art

A. Art transfers one to another

B. Metaphor transfers

C. Art is a metaphor 

I.Aesthetics referents taste

II. Taste is a metaphor

III. Aesthetics is a metaphor

aa. Aesthetics is a metaphor bb. Architecture is a metaphor

cc. Architecture is aesthetics

Aesthetics mainstay: ’beauty is in the eye of the beholder’ where the beholder is the referent of the metaphor and the necessary completion of the judgment. While there can be an aesthetic experience, without such a referent it’s understating and taste would be irrelevant. With two referents, the social norm and the specific case, the experience and taste is, too, a metaphor. As metaphor carries-over, transfers and talks about one thing in terms of another; taste is at the heart of determining whether a work is art, its value, a work of architecture, etc. If there is no bridge then the work is another kind of metaphor, perhaps a technical metaphor linked to the craft of the art and if there is no bridge, determining how close or far from the ideal would be capricious. Yet one can describe ones feelings involving the senses. Having studied behavioral psychology many of my earlier design projects were predicated on the affects of space, volumes, planes and shapes on the five senses.

               I admired and under-studied with architect, Frederick Kiesler. Yet these relationships between aesthetics and metaphor, while useful do not wholly explain the aesthetic and sensual experience of art or architecture. It only assumes these experiences as a referent to aesthetic judgment and the making of metaphors. Included in the below 5 sections are the 73 axioms extracted from the Ortony’s Metaphor and Thought and my monographs which are possible referents to any reasoned aesthetic consideration as the warrant to an inference or the evidence of a specific claim . I have underlined the axioms for clarity. For example this work is a work of art because it is a generative metaphor. To reduce this size of this monograph I have deleted so many of the architectural examples as these might be found to be distracting from the aesthetic reasoning. The combination of all this monograph’s axioms suggest inclusion rather exclusion of will, desire and appetite into the consideration of the metaphor as all art, as all architecture is, for all, to create, use, own and enjoy. While contemporary aesthetics may focus on perception by means of the senses, cognitive capacity in creation and perception informs conceptual metaphors and the two affect any one aesthetic experience, subject and individual.

               Transferring from previous experience is not always experiential but cognitive, where the only sense involved is the initial referent, a referent to a transfer where one talks in terms of anther to make the strange familiar and find a commonality to both. 3. Metaphor and Representation [1] this section presupposes that metaphors are a linguistic phenomenon and that metaphors are somewhat “deviant” and need to be explained in terms of normal or literal uses of language, and that their main function is to provide an alternative linguistic mechanism for expressing ideas-a communicative function [1]. In his paintbrush as pump discussion as a metaphor Schon claims that by attaching to the paintbrush the way of a pump the researchers were able to better improve the design of the paintbrush as an instrument which pumps paint on the surface. By describing painting in an unfamiliar way they were able to make dominant what was already somewhat known. They then saw the brush as a pump. Before then they seemed to be different things now they were the same.

                        To arrive at this conclusion they had to observe the working of the brush and make the observation and then apply it to the mechanism. The paintbrush was now seen as a pump and the act of painting, pumping. Schon refers to this a generative metaphor. [6] 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 WJ Gordon called the Metaphoric Way of Knowing [7] and Paul Weiss [8] called “associations”. In this sense both in interior design and 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” [6] approach later followed by designs which meet the parte. The parte may follow the design process and be presented to sell the product. Commercial retail shops maximize both visual and physical access to their merchandise by the use of glass and positioning entrances convenient to potential shoppers’ paths of travel. Attached or detached the idea of the shop as a flickering flame and welcoming transformed shops prior image as formidable container into which one ventured for surprise and possible revelation. With this is in mind designers of malls extend this accessibility to nodes on highways to be close to their prime markets. Commercial retail is now perceived as an attractive recreational experience and as such provides shoppers with a secondary perception of the metaphor; shoppers now “carry-over” from play, rest and relaxation to fulfilling their needs and necessities. On the other hand a dead metaphor is one which really does not contain any fresh metaphor insofar as it does not really “get thoughts across”; “language seems rather to help one person to construct out of his own stock of mental stuff something like a replica, or copy, of someone’s else’s thoughts”. [9] 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. Disregarding this, the architects of public housing created dead metaphors and blamed the lack of pride of ownership for their failure. In 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. Defining the operation of metaphor Reddy says that “a conduit is a minor framework which overlooks words as containers and allows ideas and feelings to flow, unfettered and completely disembodied, into a kind of ambient space between human heads.

                 There are also individual pipes which allow mental content to escape into, or enter from, this ambient space. Thoughts and feelings are reified into an external “idea space” and where thoughts and feelings are reified in this external space, so that they exist independent of any need for living human beings to think or feel them”. This most closely resembles works of architecture and what goes inside and outside works. “Somewhere we are peripherally aware that words do no really have insides (“it is quit foreign to common sense to think of words as having “insides” ……………major version of the metaphoric which thoughts and emotions are always contained in something”) That conduit [9] is the dominant theme that unites all the Tyrolean villages. Interior decoration in the Bronx and Brooklyn in the middle of the twentieth century was dominated by wall to wall drapes, cornices, valences, upholstered furniture covered with slip covers, ketch and bric-a-brac figures and “charkas” known affectionately as “Bronx Renaissance”.

                         The conduit that connected these outcomes were a system of city-wide gift stores, national gift market, central fabric suppliers and workshops and the heroic drapery hangers (of which I was one) completed their work. Conduit is the parte and design system from which choices in structure, finishes, colors, textures, etc. follow. A dead metaphor [9] is one which really does not contain any fresh metaphor insofar as it does not really “get thoughts across”; “language seems rather to help one person to construct out of his own stock of mental stuff something like a replica, or copy, of someone’s else’s thoughts”. 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” (hence, dead metaphor).

                       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. Disregarding this, the architects of public housing created dead metaphors and blamed the lack of pride of ownership for their failure. 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. Defining the operation of metaphor Reddy says that “a conduit is a minor framework which overlooks words as containers and allows ideas and feelings to flow, unfettered and completely disembodied, into a kind of ambient space between human heads. There are also individual pipes which allow mental content to escape into, or enter from, this ambient space. Thoughts and feelings are reified into an external 1.2.3 “idea space” and where thoughts and feelings are reified in this external space, so that they exist independent of any need for living human beings to think or feel them”. This most closely resembles works of architecture and what goes inside and outside works. “Somewhere we are peripherally aware that words do no really have insides (“it is quit foreign to common sense to think of words as having “insides” ……………major version of the metaphoric which thoughts and emotions are always contained in something”) “It's a strange thought, that culture is a product of man-made, unnatural things, that instead of culture shaping the architecture, it is the architecture (the environment) that shapes the culture. I would guess it makes sense after some x amount of years....maybe its in cycles: At first, culture creates the architecture, x years pass by, and then the architecture-environment modifies the culture. Then new modified culture creates new architecture, etc. [10] (2):

              But then if we only build steel, glass structures, wouldn't we suffer from the glass metropolis in the future, when another form or material is introduced to replace steel, concrete and glass?” [10] The affect of the metaphor on other metaphors with all its links and consequences is manifest in the conduit which leads to one after the other and a continuation of the first. 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”, [11] “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. [11] 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. [11] The relevance of studying architecture as 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. [11] 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 [11]. After many years living in Saudi Arabia and Europe and away from Brooklyn I visited Park Slope. I saw the stoops ascending to their second floors, the carved wood and glass doors, the iron grilles, the four story walls, the cementous surrounded and conventionally pained widows but what I saw was only what I described. I did not recognize what it was; it was all unfamiliar like a cardboard stage setting.

                 I did not have a link to their context nor the scenarios of usage and the complex culture they represented. I neither owned nor personalized what I was seeing. All of this came to me without language but a feeling of anomie for what I was seeing and me in their presence, years later I enthusiastically escorted my Saudi colleagues thorough Washington, DC’s Georgetown showing them the immaculately maintained townhouses. I was full of joy, perceptually excited but my colleagues laughed and were totally disinterested. These were not their metaphors and they could hardly wait to leave the area to find a good Persian restaurant to have dinner. They, like my self years before did not see what I saw and more relevantly did not “get-the-concept”. Both of the above anti-metaphor cases were conceptualized without words as would be positive cases of metaphor. Aesthetics must be familiar to be perceived; metaphors make the strange familiar. [7]. Metaphorical language is a surface manifestation of conceptual metaphor. [11] 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. [11] 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 [11]. Owner occupied specialized works of architectural metaphors may begin with long periods of research, observations, and analysis ; conclusions and redesign and re-thinking of existing or utility of new systems; setting our system feasibility, pricing and meeting budgets, palling and programming, diagramming and design of sub systems and systems but when complete the metaphor is accessible, usable and compatible.

                   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. Like the onomatopeics metaphors Lakoff’s mappings of conceptions [11] override the overt spoken and descriptive and rely much more on Mnemonics (something intended to assist the memory, as a verse or formula) .However, for Lakoff the 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. This is the primary referent in aesthetic judgment and the ideal in the architectural program. 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 architects translate their architectural conception 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 (doors, windows, stairs, etc). 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. 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. 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 contactors, specialty contractors, environmentalist, neighbors and community organization frost read the drawings and map their observations to their issues to form a slanted version of the reality.

                        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. 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. Before building, the suppliers, contractors and specialist make “shop drawings” to map the metaphor and present the graphic evidence that they can fill their claim to build for compensation. The architect’s team now gathers reviews and coordinates al of these warrants to assure their mappings do not interfere, nullify but additively contribute to the reifying of the source to the target and build the final product, on time, on budget and within the allowed schedule. After opening the public users have the opportunity to map any and all the information that is superficially available form the shell, to its nuts and bolts. Many enjoy reading the project while it is being constructed to read the work and conceptualize the final form the bits and pieces they observe, mapping a single task to its final outcome and so forth. So the mapping of construction by onlookers, contactors is all part of the mapping process. 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.  

                 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. Mapping is the systematic set of correspondences that exist between constituent elements of the source and the target domain. [11] Many elements of target concepts come from source domains and are not preexisting. To know a conceptual metaphor is to know the set of mappings that applies to a given source-target pairing. The same idea of mapping between source and target is used to describe analogical reasoning and inferences; and is a fixed set of ontological (relating to essence or the nature of being) correspondences between entities in source domain and entities in target domain. Examples: Love Is a Journey Life Is a Journey Social Organizations Are Plants Love Is War Schemas [11] 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. Identifying conditions, operations, ideals and goals are combined to form plans, sections and elevations which are then translated in to contract documents. Later the contractors map this metaphor based on their schemes of cost, schedule and quality control into schedules and control documents. It is not until equipment, laborers and materials are brought to the side that the metaphor starts to form. Once formed the only evidence for the user (reader) are the thousands of cues from every angle, outside and inside to enable use and understanding. The latter half of each of these phrases invokes certain assumptions about concrete experience and requires the reader or listener to apply them to the preceding abstract concepts of love or organizing in order to understand the sentence in which the conceptual metaphor is used.

                  Operationally, the work’s entrance is the first clue about the sequence of experiences of the metaphor taking us to the anticipated lobby, then reception followed by sequences of increasingly private (non-communal) and remote areas until reaching the terminal destination. The very size, context and location is couple with theme of parks, gated communities, skyscraper’s roof tops and cladding becoming a metaphor. The very outer edges of a metaphor portend of its most hidden content. Once we understand the metaphor and the mapping from the context to the form the mapping continues from entrance to the foyer and mapping from the context and cladding to every detail. We carry-over and map the metaphor as we delve deeper into its content and inner context always mapping the first to the current metaphor. In linguistics and cognitive science, cognitive linguistics (CL) [11] refers to the school of linguistics that understands language creation, learning, and usage as best explained by reference to human cognition in general. It is characterized by adherence to three central positions. First, it denies that there is an autonomous linguistic faculty in the mind; second, it understands grammar in terms of conceptualization; and third, it claims that knowledge of language arises out of language use.

                 Therefore the metaphor of architecture is inherent not in the media of the building’s presence, parts or bits and pieces but in the mind of the reader and that the articulation of the metaphor as thinking and third that our use of the metaphor increases our know ledge of the metaphor and reading metaphors comes out of practice. The more we view paintings, ballets, symphonies, poetry, and architecture the better we become at their understanding and its metaphor further dwells in the reader while the building and its parts exist with out being understood. Extrapolating: the writer of the speech is as the architect and the speaker is as the reader of the metaphor where the metaphor can only be experienced to be understood. Walk though an unlit city at night and feel the quite of the building’s voices because the readers have no visual information and with access to the closed buildings the metaphor is a potential with being a reality. Yet the potential for cognition does exist and is real but is not understood apart from its experience. Indeed, primary aesthetics information is received through the senses. (Arnold Berlant) For example, humans interact with their environments based on their physical dimensions, capabilities and limits. [11] The field of anthropometrics (human measurement) has unanswered questions, but it's still true that human physical characteristics are fairly predictable and objectively measurable. Buildings scaled to human physical capabilities have steps, doorways, railings, work surfaces, seating, shelves, fixtures, walking distances, and other features that fit well to the average person.

                Humans also interact with their environments based on their sensory capabilities. [11] 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. [11] It is dramatically represented by Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man 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 [11] 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. Mappings are not arbitrary, but grounded in the body and in every day experience and knowledge. [11]. Mapping and making metaphors are synonymous, the person and not the work make the metaphor.

                   Without the body and the experience of either the author or the reader nothing is being made. The thing does not but the persons have the experiences. As language, craft, and skills are learned by exercise, repetition and every day application so are mappings. Mappings are not subject to individual judgment or preference: but as a result of making seeking and finding the commonality by practice. Architects learn to associate, create and produce by years of education and practice while users have a longer history approaching and mapping for use and recognition. Yet new metaphors are difficult to assimilate without daily use and familiarity. Often the owners of new building will provide its regular occupants with orientation, preliminary field trips and guided tours. Many buildings restrict users’ access by receptionist, locked doors and restricted areas. 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. [11] Over the year’s society, cultures, families and individuals experience and store a plethora of mapping routines which are part of our mapping vocabulary.

                       As a potential user when encountering a new building type such as a hi-tech manufacturing center we call upon our highly structured subsystem to find conceptual systems which will work to navigate this particular event. Another example is as a westerner encountering a Saudi Arab home which divides the family from the public areas of the house as private. In the high tech building doors will not open and corridors divert visitors away form sensitive and secret areas. In the Arab home the visitor is kept in area meant only for non-family members and where the females may not be seen. There is a common conventional metaphorical mapping which uses a highly structured subsystem of the conceptual system. There is a similarity and an ability to accept and the constraints. The metaphor or the work of architecture includes each and every nut and bolt, plane and volumes, space and fascia, vent and blower, beam and slab, each with there mappings parallel to operational sequences, flows representations, openings and enclosures so that they operate in tandem and compliment one another. The conventions come from the experiences of doors that open, elevators that work, stairs that are strong, floors that bear our weight, buildings that don’t topple, and basic experiences that prove verticality, horizontality, diagonals, weights of gravity, etc.

                   There are two types of mappings: conceptual mappings and image mappings; both obey the Invariance Principle. . [11] “ Image metaphors are not exact “look-alikes”;[11] many sensory mechanisms are at work which can be characterized by Langacker’s focal adjustment (selection, perspective, and abstraction); images and Image-schemas are continuous; an image can be abstracted/schematized to various degrees; and image metaphors and conceptual metaphors are continuous; conceptual metaphorical mapping preserves image-schematic structure (Lakoff 1990) and image metaphors often involve conceptual aspects of the source image. (“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 fitting, coupling and joints occur), again this simultaneity of ideas and image operating in tandem where we see and know an idea simultaneously; where the convention of the architectural space and the metaphor of the conception converge. Image mappings in architecture finds schemes from a repertoire of superficial conventions except in a Japanese or Arab house where we are asked to sit on the floor or eat without knives and forks or find no room with identifiable modality of uses, or a palace with only show rooms where living is behind concealed walls. In cognitive linguistics, the invariance principle [11] is a simple attempt to explain similarities and differences between how an idea is understood in "ordinary" usage, and how it is understood when used as a conceptual metaphor.

                       [11] The invariance principle offers the hypothesis that metaphor only maps components of meaning from the source language that remain coherent in the target context. . [11] The components of meaning that remain coherent in the target context retain their "basic structure" in some sense, so this is a form of invariance. Architecturally, users encounter a habitable metaphor with their experience engrafted in a particular mapping inherent in their catalog of mappings. This mapping has its own language , vocabulary say of the way doors, windows floors, stairs and rooms names work and the user brings this vocabulary into, the target metaphor, say a new office building. Of course there will be all sorts of incongruities, similarities and differences. However this principle points out that the office building vocabulary will retain its basic structure. This means that while the vocabulary the user brings to the target from the source will be unchanged still keeping the images of doors, windows, etc as they were in the residential the office will be unchanged and unaffected. For example when an architect designs a bank from his source in the size, décor and detail of medieval great hall the target of banking with all its vocabulary of teller windows, manager’s carols, customer’s areas, vaults, etc will not change into medieval ways of serving, storing and managing the business. When I designed a precinct police station for Bedford Stuyvesant I brought the community, park and community services onto the street and public pedestrian sidewalks while housing the police offices, muster and patrol functions to the back and under the building. While the building metaphor is now a community service police station mapping components of meaning from the source language of user and community friendly, human scale, public access and service which remained in the target police station. Yet, the traditional vocabulary of all the police functions remained coherent, perceived and understood. 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. [11] For example, onomatopeics are metaphors and can be onomatopoeic (grouping of words that imitates the sound it is describing, suggesting its source object, such as "click", "bunk", "clang", "buzz", "bang", or animal noises such as "oink", "moo", or "meow") ? In this case an assemblage instead of a sound. As a non-linguistic it has impact beyond words and is still a metaphor. [11]. Then a metaphor is much more than the sum of its parts and is beyond any of its constituent constructions, parts and systems, its very existence a metaphor. In both his books on Emphatics and Surrogates Dr. Paul Weiss amplified this theory.

                       [16] Elegant architectural metaphors are those in which the big idea and the smallest of details echo and reinforce one another. [17]. 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. Both the architects’ ant the public could not help but know the rules and seek confirmation from one end to the other. The architect’s parte and the user’s grasp of cliché parte were expected and easy “fill-in” proving the learned mappings, learned inference trail and familiarity with bridging. Filling in where people ascertain the deep metaphor that underlies one or more surface metaphors by filling in terms of an implicitly analogy”. [17] It is the “filling in” wherein the synapse (a region where nerve impulses are transmitted and received, encompassing the axon terminal of a neuron that releases neurotransmitters in response to an impulse) takes place. Synapse is metaphor where two are joined together as the side-by-side association of homologous paternal and maternal chromosomes during the first prophase of meiosis. [17] How this happens is as biblical as: “faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” where our mental associations are themselves the metaphor, the evidence of the works we do not actually see. We see the metaphor, we read its extent, we synapse, analogies and metaphorize absorbing its information, contextualizing and as much as possible and resurrecting its reasons for creation. The architectural metaphor only speaks through its apparent shape, form, volume, space, material, etc that the concepts which underlie each are known to the user as they would to a painting, poem, or concerto.

                      Observation, analysis and use fill in the gaps users inference the locations of concealed rooms, passages and supports, the user infers from a typology of the type a warehouse of expectations and similes to this metaphor from others. In this way there are the perceived and the representations they perceive represents which when explored, inert what we call beatiful, pleasurable and wonderful. [17] 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 [17] .

              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. [17] 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.  





Web Site: Aesthetic principles of metaphor, art and architecture

Want to review or comment on this article?
Click here to login!

Need a FREE Reader Membership?
Click here for your Membership!

Books by
Barie Fez-Barringten

Second Coming


Twenty Years in Saudi Arabia (Introduction)

Holy Spirit and I by Christina Fez-Barringten

Buy Options
Barnes & Noble, more..

Where Christ is forbidden

Barnes & Noble, more..


Buy Options
Amazon, more..


Buy Options
Amazon, more..

Architecture:the making of metaphors

Buy Options
Amazon, Barnes & Noble, more..

Precinct Police Station in Bedford Styvestant Brooklyn by Barie Fez-Barringten

Precinct Police Station in Bedford Stuyvesant Brooklyn By Barie Fez-Barringten:AIA/NCARB/Yale M.Arch68’ The below are most of my original drawings as presented to the Yale..  
Featured BookAds by Silver
Gold and Platinum Members

Architecture:the making of metaphors by Barie Fez-Barringten

Architecture: The Making of Metaphors Author: Barie Fez-Barringten Date Of Publication: Feb 2012 Isbn13: 978-1-4438-3517-6 Isbn: 1-4438-3517-X ..  
Featured BookAds by Silver
Gold and Platinum Members

Authors alphabetically: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Featured Authors | New to AuthorsDen? | Add AuthorsDen to your Site
Share AD with your friends | Need Help? | About us

Problem with this page?   Report it to AuthorsDen
© AuthorsDen, Inc. All rights reserved.