<nettime> Lars Spuybroek: Motor Geometry

[NOX <nox@luna.nl> (by way of Andreas Broeckmann)]

[This text was published in the latest issue of the architectural journal,
Arch+ 138, October 1997. A slightly abridged version was published in:
V2_Organisation (eds): TechnoMorphica. Rotterdam, 1997. (check:
http://www.v2.nl/book/ ).]



MOTOR GEOMETRY

Lars Spuybroek

	'There's this thing, this ghost-foot,' said one of Oliver Sacks'
patients. 'Sometimes it hurts like hell. This is worst at night, or with
the prosthesis off, or when I'm not doing anything. It goes away when I
strap the prosthesis on and walk. I still feel the leg then, vividly, but
it=B4s a good phantom, different - it animates the prosthesis, and allows me
to walk.'*1
	What is it that animates a mere mechanical extension? How is it
that the body is so good at incorporating this lifeless component into its
motor system that it recovers its former fluency and grace? The body does
not care if the leg is made of flesh or of wood, as long as it fits; that
is to say, it fits into the unconscious body model created by the different
possible movements - proprioception, as neurologists term it, the body's
power of unconscious self-perception. Our legs are a 'comfortable fit' by
their very nature, but only because the leg coincides exactly with the
ghostly image invoked by the automatism of walking.
	Once a leg is frozen in immobility, it very soon no longer 'fits'.
Sacks reports one such instance: 'When, after a few weeks, the leg was
freed from its prison of plaster, it had lost the power to make all kinds
of movements that were formerly automatic and which now had to be learned
all over again. She felt that her comprehension of these movements had
gone. (...) If you stop making complex movements, if you don't practice
them internally, they will be forgotten within a few weeks and become
impossible.'*2 With practice and training, the movements of the prosthesis
can become second nature, regardless of whether it is of flesh, of wood or
- a little more complex - of metal as in the case of a car. That is the
secret of the animation principle: the body's inner phantom has an
irrepressible tendency to expand, to integrate every sufficiently
responsive prosthesis into its motor system, its repertoire of movements,
and make it run smoothly. That is why a car is not an instrument or piece
of equipment that you simply sit in, but something you merge with; anyone
who does a lot of driving will recognise the dreamlike sensation of gliding
along the motor way or through traffic, barely conscious of what one is
doing. This does not mean that our cars turn us into mechanical
=46rankensteins but that the human body is capable of inspiriting the car an=
d
making its body work become the skin of the driver. And this must true,
otherwise we would bump into everything. If we do not merge with the car,
if we do not change our body into something of four by one and a half
meters, it would not be possible to park your car, to take a curve, or to
overtake others. Movements can only be fluent if the skin extends as far as
possible over the prosthesis and into the surrounding space, so that every
action takes place within the interior of the body, which no longer does
things consciously but relies totally on 'feeling'.
	Ted Troost, the Dutch so-called 'haptonomist' (and on kneading
terms with a lot of athletics stars), gives a clear illustration of this
process: '...if the athlete learns to make the equipment (such as a ball or
bicycle) part of his feelings, he becomes one with that equipment. (...)
The same applies to the opponent. Once you start seeing your opponent as a
resistance, it takes an enormous amount of energy to beat him. If, on the
other hand, you involve him in your feelings, you can suck him towards you
as it were. You can then turn your opponent's strength to your own
advantage and can move more lightly and easily. (...) If you take a
touching, feeling attitude towards your equipment you become more sensitive
and receptive towards your surroundings. You become softer and thus less
tense at critical moments'.*3

	When this haptic sense of extension is taken seriously it means
that everything starts at the interior of the body, and from there on it
just never stops. The body has no outer reference to direct its actions
unto, neither a horizon to relate to, nor any depth of vision to create a
space for itself.It only relates to itself. There is no outside: there is
no world in which my actions take place, the body forms itself by action,
by action it constantly organises and reorganises itself motorically and
cognitively to keep "in form". As Maturana and Varela say: there is no
structured information on the outside, it becomes only information by
forming it through my body, by transforming my body, which is called
action...*4

	'"Damn, we're lost!", Michael said to his Indian guide. The guide
looked at him devastated and said: "We're not lost, the camp is gone!"
Suddenly Michael realised that this was one of the most important
differences between his own view of the world and that of his guide: he saw
space as a fixed given, as something incredibly vast in which Man can move
freely (but also can get lost), his guide saw that space as something
enclosed in Man, as a medium continuously in flux where you by definition
can not get lost because you yourself are the only fixed point. You'll
always be on the same spot. In some cultures walking is not the traversing
of space, but the pushing away of the space beneath your feet'.*5
	This is of course a nomad's view of the world, the view of somebody
on the move, because only then the whole space can become ones skin by the
act of walking. And the tent they bring with them is part of that walking,
like a board, and never interrupts space, as a house does. So every
prosthesis always has the nature of a vehicle, something that adds movement
to the body, that adds a new repertoire of actions to the body. Of course,
the car, the bike of the haptonomist=B4s client-athlete, or his metal
ice-skates, change the skin into an interface, able to change the outside
into the interior of the body itself. The ice makes no sense at all to my
body without skates, without changing my skin into metal I would not be
able to be moved by the smoothness of the ice... And: the openness of the
world would make no sense if it would not be absorbed by my body-car. The
body just creates a haptic field completely centred upon itself, in which
every outer event becomes related to this bodily network of virtual
movements, becoming actualised in form and action.
	'Where there is close vision, space is not visual, or rather the
eye itself has a haptic, non-optical function: no line separates earth from
sky, which are of the same substance, there is neither horizon nor
background, nor perspective nor limit nor outline of form nor centre; there
is no intermediary distance, or all distance is intermediary. Like Eskimo
space." And: "The first aspect of the haptic smooth space of close vision
is that its orientations, landmarks, and linkages are in continuous
variation: it operates step by step. Examples are the desert, steppe, ice,
and sea, local spaces of pure connection'.*6

	This means an eye acts as if it were a hand, the eye not as a
receptive organ, but active and what is at hand is always nearby and close,
without any sense of depth or perspective, and without background or
horizon. So every action becomes prosthetic because it extends the feeling
reach of the skin, and, the other way around, every prosthesis, and I mean
every technological device, becomes an action, a vector-object, a twirl in
the environmental geometry. In the haptic sense there is no distinction
between body and environment, between skin and geometry, inside and
outside. So every change of muscular tone in the motor system has its
topological effect, because outside and body are networked and wireframed
into one object with its own particular coherence, where seeing and walking
and acting are interconnected into one (proprioceptive) feeling skin,
without top or bottom but with an all around orientation. Without the
orthogonality of the vertical and gravitational axis of the body's posture
in relation to the frontal and horizontal perception, but a
threedimensionality where images and actions relate to one and the same
geometry, without any X, or without any Y, or without any Z...*7

	I am not into celebrating wildness, or the wildness of any
primitivism. So
these examples that seem to date 20.000 years ago, of Indians and Eskimo's,
are not about praising the archaic of any kind. It's only that I think -
and others too, notably - we have shifted from a Space situation to a Field
condition. The effects of actions and events are becoming more and more
intertwined and networked.
	This makes our contemporary state extremely primitive! A sort of
HiTechPrimitivism, maybe of the same brutal nature as the one Baudrillard
described for America. This evaporation of space by the networks of the car
with its celebrated highways, the networks of television that have
dissolved the classic distinction between the private and the public, the
inside and the outside - just look how people behave on television, so
incredibly intimate, telling us in Talk Shows how many times they have
raped their children, or how many times they have tried to commit suicide.
Just look how people behave on the streets - even more spectral like they
are on television - or at home, baggy fit suits, inexplicable familiarity,
=46ourWheeldrives with Housemusic, open shops with their whole interior
spilled out over the streets: no inside is ever going to be stopped again
by anything called the public domain, or public morale... I remember how
Yasser Arafat almost lost the War against Menachem Begin, until the moment
he called CNN. So they organised this debate, split screen, with a
journalist in between. "Why don't you surrender?", Begin asked Arafat, "you
are completely outnumbered in soldiers and firepower - you've just got no
chance at all". "Because", Arafat answered, "while you are surrounding our
camps in the South of Lebanon, I am surrounding every European Capital, and
every other capital in the world for that matter." This is how our
conception of space and perspective has changed in thirty years of
television. Not a material Earth with some immaterial media sky put on top
of it, but a new amalgam, a new material, a new substance.
	No here and there, no horizon, no depth, everything is more than
close and at hand. This is fine with me. I have no critical relation to
this whatsoever, neither positive nor negative. I hardly care about the
contents of television, or of the Net for that matter, because it's
hypermode and constant exhilaration is not about content at all. Only this
new Field Condition is interesting, this compulsive and endless leaking of
events, which is extremely primitive and animistic - it relates to a period
even before the sedentary, before the village, maybe even before
language...


Liquid architecture is not the mimesis of natural fluids in architecture.*8
=46irst and for all it is a liquidizing of everything that has traditionally
been crystalline and solid in architecture. It is the contamination of
media. This means the smooth merging of, for instance, wall and floor, of
body and geometry, of object and environment, of floor and volume, of
action and form - of course, this is called inter-action, because the point
of action is always exactly in between object and subject, and this "in
between" is where skin, environment and interface come together. The liquid
in architecture has earlier been associated with the easing back of
architecture for human needs, of real time fulfilment. This soft and smart
technology of desire can only end up with the body as a residue where its
first steps in cyberspace will probably be its last steps ever. But the
desire of technology seems far greater and a far more destabilizing force,
since our need for the accidental is far greater than our need of comfort.
	Liquid architecture is always trying to connect one act to another,
of putting a virus in the program itself, about the hyperbolic linking of
events, where every object and every event can have unforeseen and
unprogrammed effects. Noth ing, no function, no object can remain isolated;
everything is brought in a continual process of transformation to the other
- everything is necessarily opened up and leaking away. Liquid architecture
is not about nice and pleasing or sculptural forms - because there is
always the risk of toppling things over. Of form being swallowed in the
abyss of the formless, of the unspeakable monstrosities of the ugly beyond
ugly - and without that risk, in a more cultural sense, the act of
architecture seems absolutely worthless.

	In the course of discussing the water pavilion*9 we will encounter
many words and terms concerning the fluid, and its conceptual radicalism,
but also its "primitive" basis, its ever so old appeal on concepts of body
and movement and perception and geometry...

	Our software makes its ellipses from circles, every quarter of the
ellipse, symmetrical on two axis X and Y, is made out of four circle
segments, every radius increasing one after another. The building starts
with a small ellipse, with the long axis vertical and it ends, some 60
meters further on, with a larger ellipse which has its long axis perfectly
horizontal. In that sense this building is nothing more than the
metamorphosis of a door, the anamorphosis  of a threshold - a complicated
corridor.
	Imagine the curves connecting all the centres of the circles being
torn apart, bend and twisted again by outside forces, the wind, the dunes,
the ground water, the Well, and internal forces trying to keep the
ellipses, that is to say: trying to go smoothly from one circle segment to
the other. The ellipses are being stretched, but not dented or cracked. The
basis of the geometry is the vector-based changing of splines connecting
circles, defining ellipses, in this way line and force become connected in
this geometry. Line is not separated from point, but every vertex is the
basis of a vector, able to be displaced by outside forces but always
related to the other points in the wireframed network. If one changes the
position or direction of the vector, the other ones change too, according
to their mutual dependency. In this case the line becomes an action, and
not the trace of an action, in this building maybe walking is like drawing.
	Is one, while drawing with a pencil, acting digitally - what
splines are created with the biomechanics of the arm and digits? Not just
following a  supposed path shaped by an image in the brain. There is a
haptic feeling of a line, not the image... While drawing the whole body is
on a path, while the skin is lofted. You cannot just put line A at your
wish on line B, because every act is the changing, or deformation of
another act and line, it goes, as Deleuze says, step by step... This
building is a bundle, a braid of splines. It derives its coherence from the
moving, in its soft network there is no distinction made between form and
deformation.

	We loved the idea of wheelchairs from the first day on. Could we
not only design something completely within the law governing accessibility
for wheelchair-people, i.e. the steepness of ramps, but could we also think
of a prosthetic geometry, a geometry of wheels, a geometry of speed and
imbalance. Not one part of the building is horizontal, and not one slope
stays with the same gradient. Conceptually the building has not been 'put
on' the ground, but has more or less been dug out. The essential
instability is achieved by the idea that ground is all around, the floor
becomes hyperdimensional and tries to become a volume. It is like the
mathematical description of a mountain slope as a fractional dimension:
from a distance purely Euclidean and two-dimensional, and while zooming in
you are suddenly in and not on a spatial surface, with rocks all around,
with a dimension of 2.724... When dealing with a haptic, three-dimensional
body, a body without the distinction between feet and eyes, the difference
between floor and ceiling becomes irrelevant. With this kind of topological
perception you'll loose the idea that action is on the ground and that your
eyes are transported blindly and are only concerned with the walls and
maybe the ceiling too. Every building is generally based on this dichotomy
of transport and vision, where the programmatic is on the floor and the
formal is in the elevation. But, to paraphrase Jeffrey Kipnis, in this
building the information on the floor is blended with the deformation of
the volume. In the H 2 O eX PO there is no horizon, no window looking out,
there is no horizontality, no floor underlining the basis of perspective,
there is no X and no Y or Z. This is of course the moment of dizziness,
because walking and falling become confused. Or, as the manual of 3D Studio
MAX says - in the chapter on animation: walking and running are special
cases of falling... This imbalance is the very basis of this building, and
also the basis of every action, because not one position is without a
vector. This building is not only for wheelchairs and skateboards, it is
also for the wrong foot, just next to the leg one stands on... That is why,
instead of a window, there is a well. The Well is an other kind of horizon,
more like a window to the centre of the earth, a hidden horizon, not
horizontal, but vertical, on the axis of vertigo, of falling. For a haptic
body, where everything is networked to its motor system, is an open system,
fluid, far-from-equilibrium, where feedback loops can either become
positive or negative, that is, by movement it can gain coherence, but it
can also loose everything and fall.

	Three bodily systems make up for the feeling of balance: 1. the
visual, 2. the balance organs behind the ears, and 3. proprioception: the
body's self-perception, its own haptical sphere of possible muscular
movements. Especially the last one is the basis of animation, because it
creates a gestalt, an image-construct out of its own actions: by moving, by
restoring every imbalance step by step like a skateboarder the body becomes
smooth, and drags as much into his sphere - in its essence we are talking
about something round, about the body as a planet - from the environment as
it possibly can. For a haptic body is a closed organisation and constantly
organises itself.

	Then, where is the point of action, where is the source of the
Will? Here, the body is placed on a vector, just like a surfer, and is
obliged to react on that outer force, but can change its direction or goal
at any time. The architecture is charging the body because its geometry is
one where points become vectors. In an architecture that has become
transported and moved, where its geometry has become a prosthetic vehicle
by contamination, the source of the action is exactly in between body and
environment. This is not a subject versus an object, but an interactive
blend. Part of the action is in the object, and when the object is
animated, the body is too.
	The interactivity is not only in the geometry, it is in the
materials too. It is the action that moves through the material - not a
form with a certain speed or on the move, but action in the form. The
design does not distinguish architecture and information as separate
entities, not even as separate disciplines. The design did not stop with
the concrete and steel, which were considered as liquid, but in stead moved
on with cloth and rubber, then the ice, and the mist, of course the fluid
water, moving on to electronic media, interactive sound, light and
projections. We did not separate the material from the so-called
immaterial, there was only substance and action.

	Building is violence, it is force, sometimes excessive force. It is
not drawing or generating the geometry at your office, and then building it
- the drawing itself is part of the violence necessary to deal with matter.
But there is never as much resistance in materials as there is in habits.
We thought of pouring concrete as just another way of gardening... A sort
of hardening of the earth. This is being put out of balance too, the weak
foot... On the other hand, experience can work out perfectly. The steel
construction would never have been possible if the contractor would not
have picked up one of the cheapest beams you can get and torqued it with
his hands, just by lifting it. So it is weak in one direction and strong in
the other. This is like memory metal, it is steel plus experience, steel
plus action. There is no unequal relation between form and material, the
form is constructed by deformation and is part of the material-vector:
stretching the material itself, use force, that is draw...

	As we did not separate architecture from exhibition, we neither
separated form from information - in this sense the building is not a void,
or a space, but more like a medium (comparable to the feeling of immersion
while being under water), a blend made out of different ingredients. First,
the material form is directly related to the movement of the visitor, the
water - taking over the action and wetting not only the building, but also
the visitor - is continuously on the move, and as a third ingredient of
this aggregate, there is the interactive electronic installation that
creates the movement of light, sound and projections activated by actions
of the visitors. That is why, when speaking of animated form*10 we can
hardly distinguish between form and installation, between the geometry and
the machine.
	The water-installation was, by request of the client, based on the
hydrological cycle, so, after a three-dimensional door that opens
hydraulically, but only a few degrees, just enough to let people in - after
this, there is the so-called 'glacier-tunnel', a frozen corridor. There is
already water on the floor, later more and more is added, and the water
connects all these events, little wells and springs and mist coming from
the ground. Further on, the so-called rain bowl, where you see the sky in
the bowl with time-lapse images of cloud formation, then suddenly there is
rain, but rain that seems to be drawn out of the image: the drops of water
are illuminated with a stroboscope in such a way that the rain seems to
fall upwards from the bowl up to the ceiling.*11 Then, there is the Well,
containing 120.000 litres of crystal clear water, formally acting as the
main force of instability and conceptually as the treasury of the closed
cycle of water. At the bottom of the well there are projections of enormous
drops of water falling in slow-motion - under water creating ripples on the
water, as slow as fluid glass.
	The vertigo relating to the motor system is always directly linked
to the hallucinatory in the sensorial sense.

	In Tam=E1s Waliczky's small film The Garden from 1992, made with
video manipulation and computer animation, we see a little girl running
around in a garden, stretching out her hands for a dragonfly, sitting down
under a big tree, climbing up the ladder of a slide, and then sliding down
- we see all this and at the same moment nothing like it. In fact, during
the whole movie*12 she does not move, she moves her hands and feet all
right, but her head never leaves the centre of the screen. We see the tree
folding under her legs, we see the rungs of the ladder shrink and bulge
under her feet, we see the slide deform under her body, nothing moves, but
everything changes shape, we see the dragonfly, as the girl reaches out for
it with her hand, grow unproportionally, and shrink, and disappear on the
moment she shifts her attention.
	She does not move around in a perspective world where things are
between the eye and the horizon, no, through her actions she is in perfect
balance and stays fixed on the vertical axis: she has become the
vertiginous horizon of things, she has become the vanishing point of the
world. Things become part of her body by topological deformation, not by
perspective distortion. She has become the gravitational centre of a field,
or better, a sphere of action - a motor field - her own planet... This is
not perception but proprioception, everything immediately becomes networked
within the body, where the seen is the touched and the felt, where no
distinction can be made between the near and the far, between the hand of
manipulation and the sphere of the global.

	In H 2 O eX PO we build in a very complex interactive installation,
combining different electronic systems of sound, light and projections to
extend the concept of deformation related to action. In this sense, as
noted above, the form of the building and the interior itself is notonly an
installation, but also interactive. In stead of exhibiting faked realities,
in stead of running a show, in stead of just projecting films or virtual
realities we made an installation which could connect behaviour of human
beings to the behaviour of fluid systems, in this case water. As the
building tries to liquidize people - "you'll become water" - they can also
manipulate the building in their turn, which opens up the idea of
presentation, of program and function to the unstable and dynamic. In fact,
this building/installation does not have a 'program' (although in some
parts it clearly does), because it can be completely different with
thirteen shy people, forty brats or three hundred elderlies, or any
combination of these.
	The continuous surface of the interior is covered with different
sensing devices. Light sensors, touch sensors and pulling sensors. Every
group of sensors  operates on three levels of interaction: first, the
topological deformation of a projected wireframe grid in real-time, called
WAVE (light sensors), RIPPLE (touch sensors) and BLOB (pulling sensors).
Secondly, these 'special effects' also operate real-time - that is: on the
moment a visitor acts on a sensor the computer reacts within milliseconds -
by changing the overall lighting of the interior space and thirdly, the
sound. Three effects on the same moment. Nearby, the changing of the grid,
further away, the light and the sound. Local action, which is orderly in
effect interferes with others on the larger scale and becomes more and more
complex. Every group of sensors is also grouped in space and is accompanied
by the wireframe projection. The light and the sound are connected to a
cable way - the sp(L)ine of some sixty meters in length - that runs through
the building, made up by 190 blue lamps - and 190 microprocessors and over
20 loudspeakers*13
	Imagine yourself walking or running up the central slope towards a
wireframe projection in front of you on the floor. While walking you
activate a few light sensors, one after the other, and step right in the
projection - you'll be covered in a grid of light - the waves start running
through the mesh. Now you start to run with the waves, activating more
sensors, creating more waves... This is the local effect. At the same time
there is a pulse of light going through the 190 blue lamps, which is
normally at his own speed - but this pulse is speeded up by the number of
people activating the light sensors. So, when it is crowded, the heartbeat
goes up...
	Even more complicated are the touch sensors. In four groups of two
and three. Sometimes on the floor, sometimes next to you, or even above
your head. Every group of sensors is covered with a wireframe projection.
=46or instance, two sensors, bulging out of the surface, in fluorescent
yellow, with a pair of feet painted on them, covered with such a
projection. Now you dare to step on the sensor, and suddenly ripples shoot
from your feet, circular decaying waves in the wireframe. Now, somebody
jumps onto the second sensor, a few meters away from where you stand, and
the ripples shoot from his feet too... and interfere with your ripples
halfway. While you both start jumping up and down, you're also pushing away
the sound as well as you're both activating the light running on the
sp(L)ine: suddenly a high level of blue light splits in two and slowly
fades away. So, next to the pulse of light there are also other waves of
light, all interfering with each other.
	The Blob - conceptually related to the well: both attracting
forces, central in position and as the well contains the projection of a
drop of water falling in slow-motion, the blob is like a drop of water in
zero-gravity. A sphere in wireframe projected on a steep slope between four
pulling sensors. When pulling gently the sphere deforms into a blob - with
the computer running the projection doing about 200.000 calculations per
second - and when pulling harder it almost breaks, but it doesn't, and when
letting go, the blob softly bounces back towards it starting position. Four
people can pull at once, deforming the blob in four directions - while at
the same time - with the same sensors - they 'pull the sound' from the well
and... when pulling at their hardest they freeze the light on the sp(L)ine
in its last position.
	Why still speak of the real and the virtual, the material and the
immaterial? Here, these categories are not in opposition, or in some
metaphysical disagreement, but more in a electroliquid aggregation,
enforcing each other like in a two part adhesive, constantly exposing its
metastability to induce animation. Because, where is the sun, anyway? Left
out and reflected by the outer skin of stainless steel, the sun is left
behind in a museum*14, this building is lighted from the inside out, by the
endogenous sun of the computer - that must be why the light is so blue - ,
doing thousands and thousands of real-time calculations, shining on
everybody, and rendering the action.
	See these spectral bodies, their motor system exactly coinciding
with the reality engine of the computers.



Lars Spuybroek


'Motor geometry' was written as a lecture for the Berlage Institute in
Amsterdam, and Cooper Union in New York, earlier this year.


Lars Spuybroek leads a studio by the name of 'NOX'. They published their
own magazine with the same name, did video installations and television,
electronic arts installations, published texts and taught on numerous
schools of architecture. Lars Spuybroek is also editor of FORUM.


NOTES

1. Oliver Sacks, The Man Who Mistook his Wife for a Hat, Picador, 1986., p. =
66.
2. Oliver Sacks, A Leg to Stand On, Picador, 1991, Afterword, note 2.
3. Ted Troost, Het lichaam liegt nooit, Centerbook, 1988, p. 168. Only
available in Dutch.
4. H. Maturana and F. Varela, The Tree of Knowledge, Shambala, 1984,
Chapter Seven.
5. Derrick de Kerckhove, The Skin of Our Culture, Somerville House Books,
1995, p. 29.
6. G. Deleuze and F. Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus, The Athlone Press,
1988, p.382, 492 and 494.
7. Maurice Nio and Lars Spuybroek, X and Y and Z - a manual, ARCHIS, 11/1995=
=2E
8. Liquid Architecture, Marcos Novak, in: Cyberspace: First Steps, ed.
Micheal Benedikt, MIT Press, 1993, p. 225.
9. The 'water pavilion' was commissioned at the end of 1993 by the Ministry
of Water Management and Delta Expo, a private-public partnership. The
commission was split in two parts, a fresh water half to NOX, and a sea
water half to Kas Oosterhuis. H 2 O eX PO was opened for the public May
this year. This text only concerns with the fresh water part.
10. Maurice Nio and Lars Spuybroek, De Strategie van de Vorm, de Architect,
themanummer 57, 11/1994.
11. Later, when the Ministry of Water Management will imply more literal
information to this system, this first part of the building will be related
to the three water systems that supply Holland: melt water from the
glaciers (river Rhine), water from the springs (rivers Meuse and Scheldt)
and rain, water from heaven.
12. T. Waliczky does not term The Garden as a movie, and rightly so,
because only the shots of the girl have been recorded on tape, but later on
completely transformed with computer manipulation.
13. Always, when describing installations and machines we will end up
giving technical data. As we consider the nature of the prosthetic, we must
conclude that the conceptual is directly linked to the technical.
14. Paul Virilio, Museum of the Sun, in: Technomorphica, V2-Organisation,
1997. We also refer to: The Art of the Motor, Minnesota, 1995 and the
republished Function of the Oblique, AA Publications, 1996 and ARCH+
124/125, p.46.






---
#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@icf.de and "info nettime" in the msg body
#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner@icf.de