 |
| Collage by Christina Fez-Barringten |
Design’s
technical and conceptual metaphors(c)
Based on the two stasis' to design being
an art: technical and conceptual metaphors (C).
By Barie Fez-Barringten
bariefezbarringten@gmail.com
www.bariefez-barringten.com
www.bariefez-barringten.com
Abstract:
Dividing the discipline’s metaphors
between technical and conceptual has not been
fully explored, nor I believe never noticed. In addition to the
multidisciplinary relevance and general use of metaphors, metaphoric axioms,
arguments in favor of the stasis of why design is an art the two realities (technical
and conceptual) of the metaphor work separately and together in six creative
ways. Many of my monographs included
analyzing and explaining the syllogism:
- Art[A] is the making of metaphors
- design is an art [A]
- Therefore design
is the making of metaphors.
Art [A] is only when skill is applied with intent and
advanced development of some skill. Till now I did nothing to reason why art [A] neither is the making of metaphors, nor
why design is an art [A]. 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 information to support inductive reasoning and to this end each below 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.
The six principles
explain the 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 completed works?
The technical is that all art [A] ,
including design, expresses one thing in terms of another by its inherent and
distinct craft. On the one hand there is the designer who acts as the owner’s surrogate and on the other the
fountain of conceptual metaphors
which expresses ideas as built conceptual metaphors otherwise known as design. Techne is actually a system of practical
knowledge as a craft or art informed by knowledge of control
disciplines.
For example,
the craft of managing a firm of designers 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 coordination, writing, and
scheduling. So much so that the
study and practice of design is devoid from the humanities and downplays
theories of design; developing rather
the crafts, skill and understandings
needed to plan, sketch, draw, delineate, specify, write, and design.
Contemporary design
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.
Introductory basis for the reader to understand the relevance or significance of this topic, or to understand why they are reading about it.
The scholar will find why design, architecture and engineering are an art [A], the definition and relationship between the technical and conceptual metaphor and the practitioner the metaphoric causes of design. The relevance to scholars is to continue their research into metaphors and design and practitioners to abridge already tried and proven principle and axioms with metaphors.
The significance will widen and expand the scope and field of information and pre-programming and programming as well as the planning and design to incorporate seemingly irrelevant and peripheral extent factors into the design process. Reading about the six principles will provide clear ways of applying theory to *practice. This study not only defines why design is an art but shows that definition to be the cause of design and when developed better quality design. To have an impact on design I have simplifies many of the metaphoric research into axioms and applied the axioms to use full principles.
Axioms definitions:
Six Axioms (shown
in Roman numerals) are self-evident principles that I have derived out of
Ortony’s Metaphor and Thought and accept as true without proof as the basis
for future arguments; as postulates or inferences including their warrants (which I have throughout footnoted as
1,etc). These axioms are in themselves clarification,
enlightenment,
and illumination
removing ambiguity where the derivative reference (Ortony) has many
applications. Hopefully, these can be starting points from which other
statements can be logically derived. Unlike theorems,
axioms cannot be derived by principles of deduction as I wrote: "The metametaphor theorem" published by Architectural
Scientific Journal, Vol. No. 8; 1994 Beirut Arab University. The
below axioms define properties for the domain of a specific
theory which evolved out of the stasis defending architecture as an art and in that
sense, a "postulate” and "assumption" . Thusly, I presume
to axiomatize a system of knowledge to show that these claims can be derived
from a small, well-understood set of sentences (the axioms). “Universality,
Global uniqueness,
Sameness,
Identity,
and Identity abuse”
are just some of the axioms of web architecture.
Francis Hsu of
Rutgers writes that “Software
Architecture Axioms is a worthy goal. First, let's be clear that software
axioms are not necessarily mathematical in nature”.
Furthermore, in
his book titled The Book of Architecture
Axioms Gavin Terrill wrote: “Don't put your
resume ahead of the requirements Simplify essential
complexity; diminish accidental complexity; You're negotiating
more often than you think ;It's never too
early to think about performance and resiliency testing; Fight repetition;
Don't Control, but
Observe and Architect as
Janitor”. In “Axiomatic design
in the customizing home building industry published by Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management; 2002;vol 9;
issue 4;page 318-324 Kurt Psilander wrote
that “the developer would find a tool very useful that systematically and
reliably analyses customer taste in terms of functional requirements (FRs).
Such a tool increases the reliability of the procedure the entrepreneur applies
to chisel out a concrete project description based on a vision of the tastes of
a specific group of customers. It also ensures that future agents do not
distort the developer's specified FRs when design parameters are selected for
the realization of the project. Axiomatic design is one method to support such
a procedure. This tool was developed for the manufacturing industry but is
applied here in the housing sector. Some hypothetical examples are presented”.
[4] Metaphorical language (products) is a
surface manifestation of conceptual (program, design and contact documents)
metaphor. The product metaphor is the
residue, excrement, and periphery of the deep and complex reality of the product’s
creative process and extent reality.
As we don’t know
the inner workings of our car and yet are able to drive so we can use other
design products. What we design and what we read, not the metaphor, but a
surface manifestation of the concept metaphor.
A concept which we
can only know as well as we is able to discern metaphorical language. The
construction and the metaphor beneath are mapped by the building being the
manifestation of the hidden conceptual metaphor. To know the conceptual
metaphor we must read the product.
 |
| Collage by Christina Fez-Barringten |
Axioms:
Axiom I. Since
metaphor [B] is the main mechanism through which we
comprehend abstract concepts and perform abstract reasoning: [1] what is built is first thought and
conceived separately from the *design work, as thinking and conceiving is
separate from the outward expression, so metaphor is a process; and, interior
design metaphor is a process, and what we see is what the process issues; not
the manifest metaphor. If the metaphor were to manifest it would be a series of
interacting feelings about thoughts, words, impulses and decisions.
Axiom VII. the metaphor-building [B] clarifies our place, status and value.
As metaphor is the main mechanism
through which we comprehend abstract concepts and perform abstract reasoning so
products inform our social, psychological and political condition.
Designers and other
arts as well as users and connoisseurs can find sufficient satisfaction with
only the aesthetics of the technical before ever considering the conceptual
metaphor.
The product, song,
ballet, painting, poem has an intrinsic beauty satisfying the five senses
leaving thought and concepts for a later time. For example today we can relish
in the great royal residences of France leaving aside the sociopolitical
concepts they expressed. Voices in harmony to soft music are a background as
may be a cityscape of buildings designed in harmony with one another; both
being perceived as technical and not conceptually.
On the other hand,
after my studies at Columbia and arriving in Rome I ran to see my conceptual
metaphor of St. Peters; the form and its dazzling scale only later came into
focus. The same can be said for my first visit to Rome’s coliseum, Spain’s bull
fight arenas, Bloir Valley palaces, English castles where I first saw the
concept and later reiterated the details and architectural orders.
Conceptual
metaphors are exemplified by a game where you name a string of common
characteristics and the challenger then may answer: “things that are on
animals, in buildings”, etc. In other words people can identify the metaphor
once given a set of common characteristics. What has windows, doors, is in
Manhattan, symbol of New York and houses office workers: “the Empire State
building”. The challenger makes a metaphor between the words and association
best suited to those words. When naming the thing and its referents the
challenger is correct. Neither the referent image nor the correct answer is the
metaphor. The metaphor is the process of making the association between the
words and something stored in the mind. Whether automated, instinctive,
educated, licensed, indigenous or cultural the fact remains that a bridge that
transfers one from another permeates all forms of thought. In fact the artifact
that we see is a remnant of the technical and conceptual metaphoric processes.
To say that art is
a metaphor and then that design too must be a metaphor assumes that the art is
the manifest work and not what it represents. Early classic music in the age of Mozart known
as the Rocco period was a music of technique; it wasn’t until Tchaikovsky,
symphonies and the romantics that conceptual metaphor in music was born, yet
there was technical metaphors in Mozart’s music.
One 93 year old
lady friend once remarked that she knew when she remembered some thing that came
to mind but where was that thing stored. She even could accept the associations
that brought the recollection; but where was it until then. That was a question
which remained unanswered till she departed.
Let us leave all of that to other
monographs but now concentrate on the wonderful coincidence of these two
different characteristics of the metaphor occurring simultaneously, and
separately. What’s happening? To explain
this operation we refer to the axioms of metaphors of design and presume the
workings of the conduit.
Axiom II [B] [2] 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.
Irregardless of the details the
overall concept is “transferred “from one to the other, irrespective of
sub-dominant and tertiary design elements.
 |
| Interior section perspective and model by Barie Fez-Barringten |
Six principles are at work.
Explained by applying axioms
(shown in Roman numerals)
Predicate to six principles at work:
Axiom III. [B] Commonalities
are the keys to mapping across conceptual domains; sifting through
the program the designer seeks the “commonality” between the reality and
experience to make the metaphor. Mapping
is only possible when designer knows the “commonplace”, the commonality, the
characteristic common to both, the terms that both the source and the target have
in common in which the mapping takes place. The designer’s design agenda and
the user’s requirements find both their commonalities and differences.
As the designer structures
the program, design and specifications the designer simultaneously structures
the metaphor of the design . Design 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”.
Designers translate their design conception from philosophy,
psychology, sociology, etc into two dimensional scaled drawings and then to
real life full scale multi dimensions conventions consisting of conventional
materials elements (doors, wheels, graphics,windows, stairs, etc).[1] 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.
As the cartographer seeks lines, symbols and shadings to
articulate the world reality so the reader’s choices of heretofore unrelated
and seemingly unrelated are found to
have an essence common to both the reality and the rendition so that the
metaphor can be repeated becoming the readers new vocabulary. As the reader can
describe the route he can identify the building.
[1] Each mapping (where mapping
is the systematic set of correspondences that exist between constituent
elements of the source and the target domain).
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, for
example, reception area to receive people, doors and door frames, columns as
vertical supports, parking spaces for cars, Iron and stained glass design
patterns, and typical design details appropriated for a given building system.
[1] Aside from articulating a program designers carry-over their
experiences with materials, physics, art, culture, building codes, structures,
plasticity, etc. to form a metaphor. Identifying conditions, operations,
ideals and goals are combined to form models, plans, sections and elevations
which are then translated in to fabrication documents.
Later the
contractors and suppliers 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 fabrication 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. An informed user can read
the building’s history from its inception to completion.
Six Principles at Work:
First: Inform one another
The two inform
each other; that is the technical and conceptual learn from each other. That is
the aspects of the craft, building technology, shape and form, geometry,
strength of material, and dimensions bridge, carry-over to ideas about people,
places, events, social status, scale, significance and moods. Contrarily ideas
of pomp, pageant, royalty translate into techniques producing large scale,
great height, decorations, symbols, etc.
[2]Conduit of City-wide metaphor:
Furthermore, the reader is able to “appreciate” (to attach importance to a
thing because of its worth) the street, its geometry, limits and linearity as
an idea on the [2] conduit from the interior designer, through the metaphor and
to the reader. In formulating the design program with all its general and
specific dimensions the designer summons technical knowledge conditioning the
clients stated requirements to determine site selection, budget, building
program, financing, construction applicable government regulations traffic,
transportation and utility availabilities. At this stage both the technical and
conceptual of each metaphor of each must be articulated, valued and their
implications to each other determined. Financial access, value and importance
must be determined both by itself as what Weiss calls a [C]“emphatic against the sky”.
How will the financing affect the budget and the budget
affect achieving the program’s goal. The admixture of financial, budget and
business planning all inform one another as well as the other technical and
conceptual process.
At work is technical knowledge and abilities in banking, book
keeping, estimating, budgeting, construction contact cash flows, etc. All of
these to establish the very money available to program, plan and design. Yet
establishing the cost relative to the type of project, location, and context
tests the interaction of concept to technique and proving just one of the
conditions of the program as well as
the value of the ideal and the extent to which operational and building goals
can be achieved. The technical metaphor contains conceptual metaphors and their
combination informs the conceptual metaphors of the each subsequent metaphor
and their sub-metaphors. Each is bridge, each expresses one thing in terms of
the other and each expresses itself in terms of another. An estimated bill of
quantities will be expressed as a budget, a bank loan as a draw schedule,
etc.
Second: Prioritizing
where one comes before the other.
[3] “In principle, three steps,
recognition, reconstruction, and interpretation, must be taken in understating
metaphors, although the simplest instance the processing may occur so rapidly
that all three blend into a single mental act.” When we face a new metaphor (product)
a new context with its own vocabulary is presented, one which the creator must
find and connect and the other which the reader must read and transfer from
previous experience.
 |
| Collage by Christina Fez-Barringten |
Axiom IV. [B] Design shapes the culture. Design shapes and
forms tend to reflect common geometry; product types tend to share common properties;
building code use designations influence the selection of applicable code
requirements, architecture, forming clusters and community spaces create
opportunities for neighborhood identity and nurturing cultural identity. [4]“It's
a strange thought, that culture is a product of man-made, unnatural things,
that instead of culture shaping the architecture, architecture shapes the
culture. I. Parte, model and concept:
After assimilating the program in the process of making a habitable conceptual
metaphor, the very first step in the design process is to develop a “parte’ as [B] (presumptive) resolutions of the argument.
It is a “top-down”
approach later followed by designs which meet the parte. Alternatively, the parte
may follow the design process and be presented to defend the design.
The [5] generative metaphor is “carrying –over”
perspectives from one domain of experience to another where you build one thing
in terms of another where the other is the model, and, what you build is the
application, the model being the “ideal” of the proposed design. While
architects may initially state an ideal, it most likely evolves and even
radically changes by the time the design process yields an product
configuration.
Once achieved the “parte” (concept/gestalt) manifests and
can be articulated.
“Form follows function” is such an
order of priority where design first
organizes the operations of the program prior to shaping the product. It also
implies that the ultimate form will somehow reflect the operations and function
of the product.
Third: Sequencing where the first dominates the second.
Just the evolution
of a design, deciding on what to build, where, how and then assembling the team
each affects the other. Project managers schedule process which may continue in
parallel with *others while others are critical to the overall and the next
step occurring.
Making an design metaphor
without an agreed program can be both expensive, disappointing and result in a
metaphor which is neither compatible to the metaphoric expectation of the
users, within the limits of the finance and a nightmare to the fabricator. To
one degree or another is the subject of why there are so many “change orders”
during the course of the design and clarification process because the first metaphor was
incomplete, not comprehensive and not coordinated. The affect of the first on
the second is pronounced. Where as a well conceived and approved program
including all the technical and conceptual metaphors will only lead to the
perfect start of a controlled design process. A process which begins with a
parte, schematic, preliminary and then final design. The technical metaphor of
the allocation of spaces, building materials, and building systems all was
being coordinated with the cost of construction and building schedules.
Metaphorically the value of the design meeting the budget is dominates the
conceptual as a parameter to manifest the metaphor as a building.
A design which begins with line
drawing allocation, organizing functions as well as sketches of the possible
building configuration, once agreed can be overlaid and developed into more
detailed technical ideas and conceptualizations of the metaphor until the
architects and the owners agree on one acceptable metaphor.
[6] “Central to the mapping
process is the principle of “systematicity: people prefer to map systems of
predicates favored by higher-order relations with inferential import , rather
that to map isolated predicates. The systematicity principle reflects a tacit
preference for coherence and inferential power in interpreting analogy”.
[6]“No extraneous
associations: only commonalities strengthen an analogy. Further relations and
associations between the base and target- for example, thematic consecutions-
do not contribute to the analogy.”
Axiom V. [B]
Metaphor is a mental image. [1] Metaphor maps the structure of one domain onto the structure of another”. [1]
for example, the “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 mental images.
In this case metaphor is a mental image. “Each metaphorical mapping preserves
image-schema structure:”
In acting it is
called a” handle” where your whole character’s peculiarity is remember by one
acting device (accent, slang, twang, wiggle, walk, snort, etc) ;in architecture
the building’s roof top, cladding, silhouette, interior finishes, lighting,
gargoyles, entrance, rounded corners, etc.
Forth: Interactive Chain where the technical begets the
conceptual begets the technical and so forth.
[1] A conceptual system
contains thousands of conventional metaphorical mappings which form a highly
structured subsystem of the conceptual system.
Over the year’s society, cultures, families and individuals experience
and store a plethora of mapping routines which are part of society’s 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.
[A] Design as a surrogate is accepted at face value. As a
surrogate (a design) is "a replacement that is used as a means for
transmitting benefits from a context in which its’ user may not be a part”, design’s
metaphor bridge from the program, designs and fabricators to a product and
trusted tool. It works.
[A] “It makes sense,
therefore, to speak of :
a. Two sides to a
surrogate, the user side and the context side (from which the user is absent or
unable to function). “Each of us uses others to achieve a benefit for
ourselves. “We have that ability”.
b. “None of us is
just a person, a lived body, or just an organism; we are all three and more. We
are singulars who own and express ourselves in and through them. As Weiss
proclaims
c. That we cannot separate these three from
each other so that it follows that we may find it impossible to separate us
from the external metaphors. Inferences that are not yet warranted can be
real even before we have the evidence.
d. Metaphors are accepted at face value and design
is accepted at face value.
Accustomed to surrogates design is made
by assuming these connections are real and have benefit. Until they are fabricated
and used we trust that they will benefit the end user. Assembling the product we
assume the occupancy, frequency and destinations. We each are surrogates to one
another yet fitted into one message. When this passage had been used as read as
had been other passages, corridors and links.
e. Like a linguistic, the building stands, like a great, stone dagger, [A] emphatic against the sky. The stair, the exit, the space calls, gives emphasis
and is strongly expressive.
Fifth: Triangulation
where the technical and the conceptual combine and form a single cognition
containing the characteristics of both technical and conceptual.
[7]Metaphor is in
the mind: So while design is the making
of metaphors and designers 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, and, it is there that the creator and the user may have a
commonality (not commonplace). Ideally, if one designs one’s own house,
decorates one’s own room there will likely be that commonality. If an designer
is selected from a particular context his metaphor will likely be sympathetic
(common) to the culture of the area. Or, a concerted effort on the part of the
design team to assemble the relevant and commonplace information.
[7] Designers make a spatial representation in which local
subspaces can be mapped into points of higher-order hyper-spaces and vice versa
is possible because they have a common set of dimensions.
Designers organize
broad categories of operations and their subsets seeing that they are different
from each others so as to warrant a separate group and that their subsets fit
because they have common operational, functional conditions, operations, models
and object is. Hotel front and back-of-the-house operations; Hospital surgical
from outpatient and both from administration and offices are obvious sets and
subsets. Sport cars are different from sedans and casual cloths are different
from evening gowns.
Sixth: Co-mingling of
vocabulary between technical and conceptual
Stratification and leveling where
either the conceptual or the technical characteristics simultaneously exist on
separate levels.
A. Diagonal
association may occur between conceptual and technical on different levels as a
technical on one level finding commonality with conceptual on another
level.
[8]” A metaphor involves a
nonliteral use of language”. The building design and the program cannot be a
perfect mapping. A non-literal use of language means that what is said is to
have an affect and but may not be specific. At
each moment in its use the metaphor may mean different things, least of which
may be any intended by its authors.
Axiom VI. Elegant design metaphors are
those in which the big idea and the smallest of details echo and reinforce one
another. Contemporary designers 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. The designer’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.
[7]
People ascertain the deep metaphor that
underlies one or more surface metaphors by filling in terms of an implicit
analogy”. A unique product metaphor may be reckoned by its apparent
similarity to another from a previous experience. As a grain silo is to a
methane gas plant and to oil tank storage; what may be implicit are the shapes,
appurtenances, and locations.
[7] We see the design metaphor, we read its extent, we synapse,
analogies and metaphorize absorbing its information, contextualizing and as
much as possible resurrecting its reasons for creation. The interior design metaphor only speaks
through its apparent shape, form, volume, space, material, color, etc that the
concepts which underlie each are known to the user as they would to a painting,
poem, or concerto.
[7] Design is often more suggestive and trusting rather
than being pedantic; it leads and directs circulation, use recognition while
abstracting shapes and forms heretofore unknown, but econometric. Furthermore, as observation, analysis and use fill in the gaps users inference the
locations of concealed parts, connectors and connectors; 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 which represents when explored and inert what we call beautiful,
pleasurable and wonderful. Upon entering a traditional church in any culture we
anticipate finding a common vocabulary of vestibule, baptistery, pews, chancel,
and choir area including transepts, chapels, statuary, altar, apse, sacristy,
ambulatory and side altars. In any country we can drive most cars and find wash
rooms in most public buildings.
[9] A “problem of the metaphor concerns the relations between the means of
expression and design meaning, on the one hand, and designer’s meaning or
sketch meaning, on the other” “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”.
[9] What are the principles which relate fabricated design meaning to metaphorical design meaning”
where one is comprehensive, complete and coordinated while the other is merely
an incomplete scanty indication of a non specific.
[9] How does on thing remind us of another? The basic principle of an expression with
its literal meaning and corresponding truth-conditions can, in various ways
that are specific to the metaphor, call to mind another meaning and
corresponding set of truths”. Unlike a legal brief, specification and
engineering document a work of architecture with all its metaphors tolerates
variety of interpretations, innuendo and diverse translations. Building owners are asked to translate a two
dimensional set of drawings ass fulfilling their design requirements to what
might eventually be built.
Post script
In another time
when kingdoms created their dynasty’s iconic buildings, the designer and
artisans took their ques from the reigning monarch. In our modern pluralistic
society the free reign of ideas and opinions as to contexts and their meanings
are diverse. As the doctor takes the Hippocratic oath, the lawyer vows to
defend all so designers capture the ethos ( [1] The Oxford English Dictionary, is
defined as "the characteristic spirit, prevalent tone of sentiment, of a
people or community” ) of the time into fabricated metaphors.
Not only is my
childhood quest relevant but the essence of the responsibility of today’s designer
who not only reasons the technical but individually reasons the conceptual. It
is to the designer 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 products, artifacts, buildings, parks,
and places we set into the environment.
It is a public and
private charge 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 designer is to do
much more than design but design masterfully.
Citations listed alphabetically:
Conrad, Ulrich; [4]
Fraser, Bruce; [8]
Gentner, Dedre ;
[6]
Jeziorski, Michael; [6]
Lakoff, George;
[4]
Miller,
George A.; [3]
Nigro, Georgia;
[7]
Ortony,Andrew;
Reddy.
Michael J.; [2]
Schon, Donald A. ; [5]
Searle, John R.; [9]
Sternberg,
Robert J.; [7]
Tourangeau,
Roger; [7]
Weiss,Paul; [C]
References:
All the below references are from 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
[1] The contemporary theory of metaphor by George Lakoff
[2] The conduit
metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language: by Michael
J. Reddy.
[3] Images and models,
similes and metaphors by George A. Miller
[4] In Programs and
Manifestoes on 20th-Century Architecture about Glasarchitektur Ulrich Conrad'
[5] Generative
metaphor: A perspective on problem-setting in social policy: by Donald A. Schon
[6] In the Metaphor
and Science section of the book: The
shift from metaphor to analogy in Western science by Dedre Gentner and Michael
Jeziorski
[7] Metaphor, induction, and social
policy: The convergence of macroscopic and microscopic views by Robert J.
Sternberg, Roger Tourangeau, and Georgia Nigro
[8] Interpretation of novel metaphors by Bruce
Fraser
[9] Metaphor by John R. Searle
Section on “Metaphor and
Representation”:
Footnotes:
[A] 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.
[B] Axiom Roman Numeral references: Metaphor’s Architectural Axioms monograph
by Barie Fez-Barringten
[C] "Surrogates," published by Indiana
University Press. By Paul Weiss
[D] “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
*Three levels of axioms matching three levels of disciplines:
- Multidiscipline: Macro most general where the metaphors and axioms and metaphors used by the widest and diverse disciplines, users and societies. All of society, crossing culture, disciplines, professions, industrialist arts and fields as mathematics and interdisciplinary vocabulary.
- Interdisciplinary axioms are between fields of art [A] whereas metaphors in general inhabit all these axioms drive a wide variety and aid in associations, interdisciplinary contributions and conversations about board fields not necessary involved with a particular project but if about a project about all context including city plan, land use, institutions, culture and site selection, site planning and potential neighborhood and institutional involvement.
- Micro Discipline: Between architects all involved in making the built environment particularly on single projects in voting relevant arts[A], crafts, manufactures, engineers, sub-con tractors and contractors. As well as owners, users, neighbors, governments agencies, planning boards and town councils.
Researched Publications: Refereed and
Peer-reviewed Journals: "monographs":
Barie Fez-Barringten; Associate professor Global University
1. "Architecture the making of metaphors" (C)
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. 12TH
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 (C) ”: monograph converted to Power Point for presentation to
Southwest Florida Chapter of the American Institute of Architects. 2011
25.“Architecture:the
making of metaphors (C) ”:The Book;
Contract to publish: 2011
Cambridge
Scholars Publishing
Edited
by
Edward Richard Hart,
0/2 249 Bearsden Road
Glasgow
G13 1DH
UK
 |
| Design program diagram by Barie Fez-Barringten |
