The Architectural Relevance of Gordon Pask Usman Haque reviews the contribution of Gordon Pask, the resident cybernetician on Cedric Price’s Fun Palace. He describes why in the 21st century the work of this early proponent and practitioner of cybernetics has continued to grow in pertinence for architects and designers interested in interactivity. It seems to me that the notion of machine that was current in the course of the Industrial Revolution – and which we might have inherited – is a notion, essentially, of a machine without goal, it had no goal ‘of’, it had a goal ‘for’. And this gradually developed into the notion of machines with goals ‘of’, like thermostats, which I might begin to object to because they might compete with me. Now we’ve got the notion of a machine with an underspecified goal, the system that evolves. This is a new notion, nothing like the notion of machines that was current in the Industrial Revolution, absolutely nothing like it. It is, if you like, a much more biological notion, maybe I’m wrong to call such a thing a machine; I gave that label to it because I like to realise things as artifacts, but you might not call the system a machine, you might call it something else. Gordon Pask1 Gordon Pask (1928–96), English scientist, designer, researcher, academic, playwright, was one of the early proponents and practitioners of cybernetics, the study of control and communication in goal-driven systems of animals and machines. Originally trained as a mining engineer, he went on to complete his doctorate in psychology. His particular contribution was a formulation of second-order cybernetics as a framework that accounts for observers, conversations and participants in cybernetic systems. Pask was one of the exhibitors at the ‘Cybernetic Serendipity’ show staged at the ICA, London, in 1968, curated by Jasia Reichardt, an exhibition that became the inspiration for many future interaction designers. The interaction loops Gordon Pask, cybernetician. of cybernetic systems, such as Pask’s Colloquy of Mobiles (1968), where actions lead to impacts on the environment that lead to sensing and further modification of actions, are core the Architecture Machine Group at MIT (later to become the to the notion of a Paskian environment. He is also known for Media Lab). It may be argued that these collaborations were his Conversation Theory, a particularly coherent and too far ahead of their time and were not fully grasped by the potentially the most productive theory of interaction wider architectural community, but they did help to set the encompassing human-to-human, human-to-machine and foundations for dynamic, responsive and authentically machine-to-machine configurations in a common framework. interactive environments. There has recently been a ground swell of interest in Pask’s The extent of Pask’s research, theories and artefact work by architects, artists and designers,2 though his design/construction was enormous.3 As such, different groups association with architects stretched back to the 1960s, of people find completely different tracts from his back through to the early 1990s, with collaborations undertaken in catalogue relevant to their own work. In the 1960s, he worked particular at the Architecture Association, London, and with with the architect Cedric Price on his Fun Palace project as 54 humans, devices and their shared environments might coexist in a mutually constructive relationship. If we think of having conversations with our environments in which we each have to learn from each other, then Pask’s early experiments with mechanical and electrochemical systems provide a conceptual framework for building interactive artefacts that deal with the natural dynamic complexity that environments must have without becoming prescriptive, restrictive and autocratic. In this context, his teaching and conversational machines demonstrate authentically interactive systems that develop unique interaction profiles with each human participant. This approach contrasts sharply with the ‘Star Trek Holodek’ approach often attempted in so-called intelligent ’A rch i t e c t u re of Conversations‘, sketch by Gordon Pask to annotate a conversation between two individuals (designer and co-designer) giving rise to an e n v i ronment; an external observer can attribute intelligence to this enviro n m e n t . Now, at the beginning of the 21st century, Pask’s Conversation Theory seems particularly important because it suggests how, in the growing field of ubiquitous computing, A photo of what is believed to be the last remaining fragment of a SAKI humans, devices and their machine. The queries and correct responses are defined by metal ‘bits’ placed shared environments might in an array, much like punch cards were used in early computers. coexist in a mutually environments, which presumes that we all see all things in constructive relationship. the same way and which denies the creative-productive role of the participant in interactions with such environments. Pask recognised, for example, that interpretation and context are resident cybernetician, introducing the concept of necessary elements in language – as opposed to locating underspecified goals to architecture systems. In the 1970s, meaning itself in language – which is particularly important Pask’s contribution to the philosophy of MIT’s Architecture to consider for any design process, not least the construction Machine Group was focused around the notion of architecture of architectural experience. as an enabler of collaboration.4 And in the 1980s and early His theories on underspecified and observer-constructed 1990s, architects such as John Frazer at the Architecture goals have been a major influence on my own work. In 1996, Association were particularly interested in how Pask’s tutored by Ranulph Glanville, former student and collaborator adaptive systems might be applied to the architectural design of Pask, and Stephen Gage, also a Pask aficionado, my final process in order to evolve building forms and behaviours. architecture school project, Moody Mushroom Floor, was an Now, at the beginning of the 21st century, Pask’s interactive floor system of sound, smell and light that Conversation Theory seems particularly important because it determined its outputs in relation to fluctuating goals and suggests how, in the growing field of ubiquitous computing, perceived responses – no behaviour was preprogrammed. 55 An early Paskian machine. Gordon Pask and Robin McKinnon-Wood, MusiColour, 1953 The performance system was installed at several locations around the UK. This image shows the control system as installed at Mecca Locarno in Streatham. MusiColour appeared for a final time in 1957. More recently, Open Burble (2006) was an attempt to build a The MusiColour Machine,6 constructed in 1953, was a constructional interactive system, in the sense that the performance system of coloured lights that illuminated in participants both affected the structure, by moving it concert with audio input from a human performer (who throughout a park, and constructed the way the structure might be using a traditional musical instrument). MusiColour responded to them by designing and assembling the modular should not be confused with today’s multicoloured disco structure themselves as they chose. Finally, the ongoing lights that respond directly to volume and frequency in a projects Paskian Environments (with Paul Pangaro, another preprogrammed/deterministic manner. Rather, with its two former student and collaborator of Pask) and Evolving Sonic inputs (frequency and rhythm) MusiColour manipulates its Environment (with Robert Davis, Goldsmiths’ College) aim to coloured light outputs in such a way that it becomes another provide concrete and pragmatic strategies for implementing performer in a performance, creating a unique (though non- Pask’s theories in an architectural context. random) output with every iteration. What follows is an understanding of how Pask’s lifetime The sequence of light outputs might depend at any one work can be made even more relevant than ever to the practice moment on the frequencies and rhythms that it can hear, but of architecture. Pask certainly thought and wrote a lot about if the input becomes too continuous – for instance, the the field, but some of the concepts described here are founded rhythm is too static or the frequency range too consistent – on my interpretation of his projects, which even he may not MusiColour will become bored and start to listen for other have considered architectural. In places I simply try to extend frequency ranges or rhythms, lighting only when it to the field of architecture the approaches he invented; in encounters those. This is not a direct translation: it listens for others I use concepts that he constructed to consider certain frequencies, responds and then gets bored and listens alternatives to our current assumptions about architecture. elsewhere, produces as well as stimulates improvisation, and Four of Pask’s projects in particular give hints about how reassembles its language much like a jazz musician might in to create richer, more engaging and stimulating interactive conversation with other band members. Musicians who environments. It is worth bearing in mind that each of these worked with it in the 1950s treated it very much like another predates the common digital computer and was therefore on-stage participant. constructed mainly using analogue components. The The innovation in this project is that data (the