Does the self of the building or the place have to be in the formal relation of its parts to one another? In the grammar of the system? Bernard Tschumi: excess beyond rule and form, that's where the pleasure is.
Distinguish endless differences from endless open possibilities. If differences proliferate and escape the linear or the dialectical, that is still a matter of finite possibilities, though no single closed set of them.
What is it that exceeds form but not as matter does? Is it the presence, not a potential the way shapes are potential in the clay, but a presence "on the horizon" of other forms: other traffic patterns, other joinings of spaces, other combinations of parts, other metaphors, unintended and without communities of discourse?
(Presence through absence is a way of saying potential in Aristotle. Is there some other way of talking about presence/absence that is not the same as potential?)
(c) David Kolb, 1 August 2001