concerns in secondary art education || architecture as a metaphor for education

National Art Education Association

Architecture as a Metaphor for EducationAuthor(s): Jeanne PietigSource: Art Education, Vol. 50, No. 2, Concerns in Secondary Art Education (Mar., 1997), pp.45-51Published by: National Art Education AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193643 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 16:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

National Art Education Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ArtEducation.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.126.89 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 16:07:01 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=naea

http://www.jstor.org/stable/3193643?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


...AND NOW, ON v?uk.u:E: ?ums ;

mind?At educators m think of the challenges assoated with -

teachingcstuents how to appreciate architectu fin

ecae fu re architects. School administrators might think of the more practical :.

":- i

J^ . . . . . ?

:1

"

i : .' ! 1

. .. . z . .: i

? - "?: ? :.:

..

? "

learnming.d? ese are just a fethink of the chissues-all wolengerta of discussion ad dciebated with

achm students how mind when we think architecture as a fine art. education.

fessioal architect s a useful metaphor for thinkg about education: its nae curriculum neededto

| : X zi 1i :: : Z'.:.

.-come:mi nd:w wiait . . -:, ..=''. . . : 'J:: :'

processes. After reflecting on the interconnections between architecture and

education, I will turn t more practical matters by suggesting that architecture is

effective way of integrating art education in the K-12 cuculum.Befre ing to ;B: J..:: E A N :P : :: ..E.TIG

BY 57l r t ~~~~~~~~: . . . . } iPii

; 7 0 $:: ii ii 't .:. R.

ii BY JEANNE P IETIG :

-.MARCH 1997 / ART EDUCATION _



any of these issues, however, it may be helpful to ask what a metaphor is.

According to classical language theorists dating back to Aristotle (1969), a metaphor is a poetic expression having little to do with everyday language or systematic thought. Contemporary theorists like George Lakoff (1993) are challenging the traditional view by defining metaphors as "mappings across conceptual domains" (p. 239). He argues that metaphors are fundamentally conceptual, not linguistic, in nature and that they are embedded in our ordinary language and everyday experiences. The contemporary view of metaphors, adopted here, is more expansive and more powerful than the traditional view. It helps explain why we use metaphors. Like other forms of thinking, metaphorical thinking holds the promise of generating new insights.

THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN BUILDING AND THINKING

Architecture is a fertile source of metaphors in education because the act of building is often compared to the acts of thinking and teaching. Our ordinary, everyday language reflects this well. As teachers, we create lesson plans, develop working models, and engage in curriculum building. We ask our students to support their views by buttressing their arguments. Why? Because we like concrete ideas, soundly- based criticism, and theories that are on a solidfooting. After all, poorly constructed theories, like poorly constructed buildings, often fall apart.

As art educators, we try to inspire our students so that their works will tower above the mundane. We speak of frames of reference,foundational knowledge, and structure in disciplines. Occasionally, we bracket our thoughts, bridge disciplines, and deconstruct concepts. Finally, when advising

I, , . ,, i- t ' 'I r

; j / I / /

*., ,^ Ahf(o

'3heIt1orL

students, we like to design their programs so that they include both survey courses and capstone experiences. Our language is so rich in words that mutually refer to building, thinking, and teaching that it seems as if the impulse to construct a building is the same impulse that impels us to construct a theory and teach it.

Perhaps the connection between constructing buildings and constructing theories is not one of impulses or urges at all. It may simply reflect the way we think. Rudolf Arnheim (1977) claims that all systems of thought take the form of architectural structures. When the human mind organizes a body of thought, it almost inevitably does so in terms of spatial imagery. Since all thoughts are worked out in the medium of perceptual space, architecture is the embodiment of thought because it invents shapes and builds structures.

Design sketch for Green Township Regional

Library, Cincinnati, Ohio. Courtesy of Frank W.

Enneking, architect.

The writings of Immanuel Kant (1929) seem to support Arheim's claims. The 18th century German philosopher used the phrase architectonic ofpure reason to describe the aesthetics underlying systematic thinking. A similar view is advanced by Jacob Bronowski (1973a), a Polish-born mathematician and cultural critic, who argues that the systematic thinking of science is a kind of architecture.

THE ARCHITECTURE OF SCIENTIFIC THOUGHT

More than any other writer, Bronowski draws out the interconnections between the structure of architecture and the structure of thought. In his book and 13-part television series, The Ascent of Man (1973a, 1973b), he traces the cultural

ART EDUCATION / MARCH 1997

?



evolution of the human species, concentrating on the history of science. In the third chapter and the third episode, 'The Grain in the Stone," he depicts human beings as tool makers, sometimes using tools to hew wood, mold clay, and split stone in order to construct buildings; and sometimes using tools of the mind to analyze ideas and construct theories. He argues that the intellectual method underlying architecture and science is one and the same.

Architecture is one of our greatest intellectual achievements because the idea of discovering an underlying order in matter is our basic concept for exploring nature: 'The architecture of things reveals a structure below the surface, a hidden grain which, when it is laid bare, makes it possible to take natural formations apart and assemble them in new arrangements" (Bronowski, 1973a, p. 95). As analysis, architecture probes for what is there, but then, as synthesis, it puts parts together in new combinations. For

example, splitting wood or stone to lay bare its hidden structure is analysis, and reassembling the pieces to form arches and vaults is synthesis. By the same token, splitting atoms is analysis; forming atomic theories, synthesis.

Bronowski, then, likens today's scientists to architects. To dramatize this point in his video series, he makes the following observation while sitting on the lower roof of Rheims cathedral, perched among the flying buttresses: the kind of person who built the gothic cathedrals nearly 800 years ago is the same kind of person who is interested in the architecture of nature today. And who were the cathedral builders? They were independent craftsmen who traveled throughout Europe and who formed an intellectual aristocracy. The masons "carried in their heads a stock, not so much of patterns as of ideas, that grew by experience as they went from one site to the next" (Bronowski, 1973a, p. 110). They took great pains to discover the underlying order in matter, and they took great pleasure in

pushing forward their own skills. Today's scientists do the same.

So far, we have explored the interconnections between building and thinking, and we have seen how Bronowski, a mathematician, links architecture and science. Let us now turn to the writings of architects to see how they define architecture.

THE MEANING OF ARCHITECTURE

Witold Rybczynski (1989) points out that the term architect is derived from the Greek and means master carpenter or master builder. One possible definition of architecture, then, is this: it refers to the work of architects, that is, the buildings they design. As Rybczynski himself acknowledges, this approach to defining architecture, while straightforward, is not particularly helpful. Too many great buildings have been designed by non- architects. Consider, for example, the great Renaissance architects. Michelangelo was a sculptor; Leonardo

da Vinci, a painter; Brunelleschi, a goldsmith; and Alberti, a lawyer. Only Bramante, who designed St. Peter's, formally studied architecture. What about today? Not one of the three giants of the 20th century, namely Frank Lloyd Wright, Mies van der Rohe, and Le Corbusier, received a formal architectural education. All these men are called architects because they created

Classroom example of how architecture

can be incorporated into the elementary curriculum. Playing with blocks at

:Pierson Elementary School, Flint, i Michigan. Courtesy of Shaun Palma

and Liz Begley.

MARCH 1997 / ART ED U CATION



architecture, a tautology that tells us nothing.

A much more promising approach to defining architecture is to think of its buildings rather than its designers. This raises a new question. Do all buildings constitute a culture's architecture, or just a few special buildings? For a long time, critics and art historians carefully distinguished ordinary buildings from those created for nobler purposes. For example, John Ruskin (1885) argued that the purpose of architecture is to raise our spirits, which utilitarian buildings are not required to do. Another popular view was put forward by art historian Nikolaus Pevsner, who emphasized that architecture must have aesthetic appeal: "A bicycle shed is a building, Lincoln cathedral is a piece of architecture" (as quoted by Roth, 1993, p.2).

Contemporary critics are challenging this lofty view. Why? The idea that architecture is something special, something refined, poses problems, as the following two stories illustrate. Architectural historian Leland M. Roth (1993) recounts the experiences of a metal building manufacturer who made barn structures and offered his customers a wide choice of historical, ornamental, clip-on door frames such as Colonial, Mediterranean, Classical:

After a windstorm had damaged a number in one area, the factory representative telephoned customers to find out how the structures had fared. One customer, whose Colonial door frame had been stripped off while the barn itself survived, replied, 'The

building's fine but the architecture blew away." (p. 2)

The other anecdote, recounted by Rybczynski (1989), also points to the folly of rigidly distinguishing architecture from ordinary buildings. He describes his efforts to build a boat shed. When he consulted an engineer friend for advice on the project, the first question his friend asked was "Do you want something cheap or something architectural?" (p. 3).

As both of these stories demonstrate, a more expansive interpretation of architecture is needed.

ARCHITECTURE REDEFINED Rybczynski (1989) suggests that we

think of architecture as a continuum: "Instead of emphasizing the dissimilarities between grand and humble buildings, it is more useful to imagine a continuum, with prominent buildings for prominent purposes at one end and more ordinary buildings, for everyday functions, at the other" (p. 11). Roth (1993) goes one step further by defining architecture as the total environment built by humans; it includes landscapes as well as urban spaces. We now have a more adequate way of interpreting architecture: it includes all buildings, noble and humble, as well as landscapes and cityscapes.

There are many advantages to adopting a more inclusive definition of architecture. An architectural history that focuses only on public monuments and buildings of prestige is aristocratic; it gives a false impression of the social period during which the buildings were constructed. Often, modest structures in the periphery of monuments are essential to correctly interpreting the monuments themselves. Mount Vernon is but one example: "Slave

cabins, outhouses, herb gardens, and water vats complete the meaning of the plantation house" (Kostof, 1985, p. 15). If we neglect these subsidiary buildings, we may misread the focal point of our investigation.

We see, then, that to fully understand a Gothic cathedral, we must do more than study its soaring spires, its stained glass windows, its pointed arches, and its flying buttresses. We must also study the homes and shops wrapped around its base, the winding streets and pathways, the encircling protective wall, and the vineyards clustered on the hillsides. Similarly, to complete the meaning of a country school house, we must look at the two outhouses, the large woodshed, the solitary water pump, the sheltering trees, and the grassy play areas. All these elements and the spaces they create constitute architecture.

ARCHITECTURE AND EDUCATION: THE UNAVOIDABLE ARTS

What else can be said about architecture? Like painting and sculpture, it is a visual art. It is therefore a product of the imagination, a mode of symbolic discourse, a physical record of human aspirations. Although all the arts serve social ends, architecture is preeminently a social art, both in its method and its purpose. Finally, architecture is an unavoidable art. We cannot survive without architecture. Like many animals and insects, humans build shelters for protection from the outside elements. Architecture, then, is the act of modifying the environment to meet this basic need. Architecture is unavoidable

ART EDUCATION / MARCH 1997



in yet another sense. Except for those rare occasions when we are in the wilderness, we are almost always surrounded by human artifacts. Architecture is an art form we inhabit, and its influence is pervasive. (Gardiner, 1983; Kostof, 1985; Roth, 1993)

Many more parallels can now be drawn between architecture and education. First, both are social arts, having social functions and serving social ends. Second, both modify nature. Let me elaborate. Aristotle (1969) observed that education perfects the deficiencies of nature. Architect Louis I. Kahn expresses a similar sentiment: "Architecture is what nature cannot make" (as quoted by Roth, 1993, p. 1). Third, both architecture and education are unavoidable arts. Just as individuals cannot survive without shelter, societies cannot survive without education. This, at least, is the view put forward byJohn Dewey (1916), who describes education as a process of transmission and communication that assures a society's continued existence. Education is a necessity of life.

Another analogy comes to mind if we consider architecture as a field of study. The move from a restrictive to an expansive definition of architecture has a direct parallel in education. The debates about the meaning of architecture should prompt us to conceive of education in equally generous terms. Education embraces all the agencies in society that affect children and young adults such as television, film, music, religion, family life, and the workplace. Education, in other words, is much more than schooling.

IMPLICATIONS FOR CLASSROOM PRACTICE

If architecture offers us a new way of thinking about education, it also holds the promise of becoming an integrating force in the school curriculum. Unlike most subjects, the study of architecture is inherently interdisciplinary. It is an area of study that can be approached in a variety of ways, drawing on the different skills and talents of teachers, and building on the different interests and capacities of students at every grade level. Specialists in art education are valuable members of the school community who can help their colleagues develop materials, identify local resources, and integrate ideas

Classroom example of how architecture can be

incorporated in the secondary curriculum. Designing

bridges at Livingston Technical Academy, Howell,

Michigan. Courtesy of Mary B. Grimm.

across the entire curriculum. Here are a few of the ways the study of architecture can be used as a thematic focus in K-12 schools.

Art Education. Architecture is an art form that creates spaces for the enjoyment of all the arts. It "frames" paintings, murals, and tapestries, and it provides settings for aesthetic events like music, dance, and drama. Architecture not only "contains" the arts but often is "contained" by them.

MARCH 1997 / ART EDUCATION



(Van Gogh's View of Saintes-Maries and Monet's paintings of Rouen Cathedral come to mind.) Specialists in art education can teach students how to deconstruct the aesthetic meanings of architectural works. Students, after all, need help in interpreting the personal and social meanings of art, which is "perhaps humanity's most essential, most universal language" (Boyer, 1985).

Physical education and dance. Students need to experience architecture with their bodies as well as

interdisciplinary. their minds. Teachers in physical education and dance can help students interpret their bodily responses to the ebbs, flows, weights, and rhythms of architectural spaces. Architecture functions as a potential stimulus for movement. A building incites us to action: "It is one partner in dialog with the body" (Bloomer & Moore, 1977, p. 59).

Literature. Architecture compliments literature in many ways since both are products of the human imagination. Like literature, architecture speaks to the human condition and leaves a record of human aspirations. Unlike literature, architecture uses a nonverbal mode of symbolic discourse. Nevertheless, the language of architecture shares many of the traits of ordinary language (Alexander, 1979).

Anthropology. Because architecture addresses a basic human need, the need for shelter, it is a pervasive feature in every culture. All buildings, noble and humble, can be viewed from a cross-cultural perspective, noting similarities in function as well as differences in style. The similarities call attention to the common factors of human existence, while the differences illustrate that "every culture has its own collective identity" (Dewey, 1934, p. 330).

History. Architecture reflects the

political beliefs, social structures, and power relations at play in different cultures during different historical epochs. For example, the design of Monticello illustrates Thomas Jefferson's rejection of English colonialism and his commitment to the rationalistic ideals of French enlightenment thought. The slave quarters next to his home illustrate other social realities.

Science. Because works of architecture are feats of human engineering, the history of architecture and the history of science and technology are intertwined (Bronowski, 1973a). Science teachers can help students understand the properties of different building materials, the principles of physics applied to building construction, and

the reasons why buildings stand up or fall down (Salvadori, 1980; Levy & Salvadori, 1987). For example, students might discover that the method of support used in skyscrapers (skeletal framing) is the same method of support used in prehistoric huts, teepees, and modem tents. Students also can compare human architecture with the architecture found in nature such as bird's nests, sea shells, and prairie dog communities.

Mathematics. The study of geometric shapes can give students insights into the basic elements of architectural composition. A dome, for example, can be viewed as a bisected sphere or an arch rotated 360 degrees. Architectural plans, on the other hand, illustrate how three-dimensional objects can be transformed into two- dimensional planes. Young children love playing with building blocks, and older students might enjoy constructing scale models of buildings. Mathematics will be enhanced when students discover some of its practical applications.

CONCLUSION From both a theoretical and a

practical perspective, architecture has much to offer education. Architecture not only is a fruitful metaphor for thinking about educational aims and processes, but it also can be a focus of interdisciplinary study in the school curriculum. To fully appreciate architecture, students need to deconstruct its meaning from a variety of perspectives: artistic, social, and scientific. Moreover, students need to experience architecture with their minds, bodies, and spirits.

The ideas sketched out in the preceding section illustrate in a general way how architecture can be linked to

A ART EDUCATION / MARCH 1997

nlike most subjects, the study of architecture is inherently



every subject in the school curriculum. Obviously, teachers will need to be far more specific in designing units that are suitable for classroom use. Specialists in art education have an indispensable role to play in this process. Developing activities with an architectural focus is a creative process that is limited only by the will and the imagination of the teaching staff. Specialists in art education can help their colleagues tap into some of these creative energies.

Jeanne Pietig is a Professor in the Department of teacherEducation at Eastern Michigan University.

REFERENCES Alexander, C. (1979). The timeless way of

building. NewYork: Oxford University Press.

Amheim, R (1977). The dynamics of architecturalform. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Aristotle. (1969). Politics andpoetics. (B. Jowett & T. Twining, trans.). New York: Viking.

Bloomer, K C., & Moore, C. W. (1977). Body, memory and architecture. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Boyer, E. L. (1985). Art as language: Its place in schools. In Beyond creating: The placefor art in America's schools. Los Angeles: The Getty Center for Education in the Arts.

Bronowski, J. (1973a). The ascent ofman. Boston: Little, Brown.

Bronowski, J. (1973b). The grain in the stone. (M. Jackson, Director). In A. Malone & D. Gilling (Producers), The ascent of man. London: BBC.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Free Press.

Dewey, J. (1934). Art as experience. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons.

Gardiner, S. (1983). Inside architecture. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kant, I. (1929). Critique ofpure reason. (N. K Smith, trans.). New York: St. Martin's Press.

Kostof, S. (1985). A history ofarchitecture: Settings and rituals. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (2nd ed.) (pp. 202-51). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

The Educationally Interpretive Exhibition Rethinking the Display of StudentArt

by Kelly Bass Teresa Cotner

Elliot Eisner Lee Hanson

Thomas Yacoe

The interpretive exhibition of student artwork is intended to help people understand the relationships between thinking and the creation of visual art.

The interpretive exhibition is based upon an educational model, rather than on a

gallery model.

The interpretive exhibition is based on different premises to help people understand that art activities are opportunities for students to learn to use their minds.

It illustrates the cognitive outcomes involved in the making of visual images.

It is a signpost for students, parents, teachers, and administrators to consider new directions for the display, interpretation, and viewing of student artwork which illu- minate the educative experience of art making.

The exhibit represents, describes, and interprets the educational content of art edu-

cation-weaving visual images with the threads of conceptual thought.

This landmark booklet describes what, how, why it was done, the use of the educational interpretive exhibition, and is accompanied by full color photos illustrating the exhibition's construction.

Call today for your copy! 1-800-299-8321 (8:15 am - 4:30pm ESTM-F; MasterCard and Visa orders only)

Member price, $10 (plus $2.50 postage and handling) Nonmember price, $15.00 (plus $2.50 postage and handling)

Levy, M., & Salvadori, M. (1987). Why buildingsfall down: How structuresfail. New York: W. W. Norton.

Roth, L. M. (1993). Understanding architecture: Its elements, history, and meaning. New York: Harper Collins.

Ruskin, J. (1885). Collected works. New York: John W. Lovell.

Rybczynski, W. (1989). The most beautiful house in the world. NewYork: Penguin Books.

Salvadori, M. (1980). Why buildings stand up: The strength of architecture. New York: W. W. Norton.

MARCH 1997 / ART EDUCATION



concerns in secondary art education || architecture as a metaphor for education

Documents