[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-664744-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-664744-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","athens-journal-of-architecture-volume-5-issue-1-despite-resemblance-scale-models-and-the-representation-of-architectural-objects","Athens Journal of Architecture - Volume 5 - Issue 1 - Despite Resemblance, Scale Models and the Representation of Architectural Objects","","Reconsiders how scale models relate to architectural objects by revisiting Nelson Goodman’s discussion of resemblance and representation in “Languages of Art.” Challenges the idea that representation depends on resemblance, arguing that the link between model and object is strictly arbitrary and convention-based. Drawings and photography may rely on conventions, but the paper extends this scrutiny to scale models. It analyzes how their radical difference from the object shapes architectural design and representation, treating models as inherently fictitious, highly abstract stand-ins rather than natural counterparts.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/athens-journal-of-architecture-volume-5-issue-1-despite-resemblance-scale-models-and-the-representation-of-architectural-objects/664744/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/athens-journal-of-architecture-volume-5-issue-1-despite-resemblance-scale-models-and-the-representation-of-architectural-objects/664744.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Riley","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-10-29",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":22},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What central argument does the paper make about architectural representation in scale models?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"It argues that representation is strictly arbitrary and convention-based, rather than grounded in natural resemblance between a model and its architectural object.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"How does the paper extend Nelson Goodman’s ideas to scale models?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"It applies Goodman’s claim that “almost anything may stand for almost anything else” to question the assumed natural closeness of scale models to what they represent.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"Why does the paper claim that the difference between a scale model and its architectural object matters?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"Because representation requires distinction: if a scale model reproduced the object in full complexity, it would be the object itself, not a representation. The consequences of this difference are treated as unresolved but essential to design inquiry.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},664744,1793271162,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,95,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":92,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":22,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":79,"read_time":144},1374391975076,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/14000253ca4ec9f6853?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1783305029341752051","Athens Journal of Architecture-Volume 5, Issue 1– Pages 77-98  \nDespite Resemblance-Scale Models and the Representation of Architectural Objects  \nBy João Miguel Couto Duarte 􀀍  \nThe challenge of exploring „Inter and Transdisciplinary Relationships in Architecture‟ might be embraced as a possibility to outward as much as to inward the comprehension of architecture and its design. This paper aims to reconsider the relationship between scale models and architectural objects after Nelson Goodman‟s discussion about resemblance and representation in „Languages of Art‟, thus allowing a new understanding of the role of architectural representation in architectural design. In „Languages of Art‟ the still common belief that representation profits from some sort of resemblance to its object is deemed untenable. It is strictly arbitrary the relation between one and the other. That is why – Goodman remarks – “almost anything may stand for almost anything else.”Drawings and photography might confirm Goodman‟s statement since only a convention seems to allow the recognition of a three-dimensional object in a bidimensional one. But that is not the case with scale models. Due to its nature it remains comfortable to think about a scale model as having a natural resemblance to an architectural object, thus seeming its closest representation. Nevertheless Goodman‟s proposals must be considered. Also scale models must be scrutinized as strictly arbitrary representations, resting upon a system of conventions instead of a set of proprieties shared with the architectural object it is meant to replace. And being confirmed its strictly arbitrariness, that is, being confirmed that is devoid of any natural relation with its subject, scale model‟s role in architectural design must also be scrutinized. This paper will first discuss scale models‟ representational nature and, subsequently, how the radical difference it holds from the object thus represented matters to architectural design. Scale models ought tobe comprehended despite the resemblance deluded with the architecture they allow to envision.  \nInitial Considerations  \n“The deceptively convincing nature of models can easily mislead one into ignoring their essentially fictitious representational character as well as their inherent high degree of abstraction.”1  \nAlongside other systems of representation, scale models are still trusted by architects to invent the world.  \nScale models are singular representations. Being singular because of all forms  \n􀀍Assistant Professor/Research Fellow, Lusíada University/CITAD, Portugal.  \n1. C. Gänshirt, Tools for Ideas an Introduction to Architectural Design (Basel Boston Berlin: Birkhäuser Verlag AG, 2007), 153.  \n[https://doi.org/10.30958/aja.5-1-4](https://doi.org/10.30958/aja.5-1-4) doi=10.30958/aja.5-1-4  \nVol. 5, No. 1 Couto Duarte: Despite Resemblance-Scale Models and the…  \nof representation at the architect‟s disposal scale models seem to be the closest to architectural objects. As the architectural objects, scale models have a threedimensional existence and are the outcome of a building like process. Between one and the other there seems to be a natural resemblance, sometimes enhanced by the fact that a scale model might stand as a quasi-architectural object. Large sized walk-in scale models confirm it.  \nBut scale models are also singular representations because it still remains largely unacknowledged the nature of the links that allow them a relation with architectural objects. Apparently those links are warrant because scale models reproduce some of the proprieties held by the architectural object they are meant to replace, by virtue of sharing with those objects the aforementioned threedimensional existence. Hence the natural resemblance that seems to exist between them and the common classification of a scale model as an iconic model.2 But that seeming capacity of reproducing proprieties cannot hide the differences that will always stand between ","cbCaihT4VYRtc95L","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihT4VYRtc95L","pdf",531300,22,"English","# Despite Resemblance, Scale Models and the Representation of Architectural Objects\n## Initial Considerations","[{\"question\":\"What central argument does the paper make about architectural representation in scale models?\",\"answer\":\"It argues that representation is strictly arbitrary and convention-based, rather than grounded in natural resemblance between a model and its architectural object.\"},{\"question\":\"How does the paper extend Nelson Goodman’s ideas to scale models?\",\"answer\":\"It applies Goodman’s claim that “almost anything may stand for almost anything else” to question the assumed natural closeness of scale models to what they represent.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the paper claim that the difference between a scale model and its architectural object matters?\",\"answer\":\"Because representation requires distinction: if a scale model reproduced the object in full complexity, it would be the object itself, not a representation. The consequences of this difference are treated as unresolved but essential to design inquiry.\"}]","Athens Journal of Architecture - Volume 5 - Issue 1 - Despite Resemblance, Scale Models and the Representation of Architectural Objects | PDF",55]