Greg Lynn: Folds, Bodies, & Blobs - Body Matters

In Lynn's article, architecture is described as being dependent on the concept of the whole, as opposed to focusing more on the parts that make up a whole. Within architecture, there is a search for a universal model; a model that is static, and can readily be described in terms of whole numbers. The intricate functions that make up the whole in architecture are ignored under this premise in favor of a more generalized approach. Bodies stem from interactions amongst several component parts, and cannot be reduced to a more general system. A body could be described as anexact, a term coined by Edmund Husserl to describe which is neither exact nor inexact. In architecture, the parts of the body are both more and less than the whole.

One alternative for the description of architectural organization pertains to the behavior of elements on the local level and how they contribute to the formations of bodies in architecture. This idea of the body stemming from local interactions conflicts with the ideal versions of the body and the whole. This idea lends itself to focus on stable, though not necessarily static, bodies. Bodies are able to grow over time through forces of differentiation. These forces build up the body; bodies are constantly giving additions over time.

The idea of the parasite has been used to describe that which cause instability within an existing form. One version of the parasite is described as the necessary component in the deconstruction of the whole. Another version of the parasite is described as that which much adjust its environment to support its continued existence; the parasite creates a new entity. Another variation of the parasite is described as being necessary for the formation of the whole; the whole presents and exterior, and the parasite builds its interior. Other parasites are described as being vehicles for providing a necessary interaction between bodies dependent upon one another for survival (e.g. bees and flowers).

(This concept of the parasite stands out to me. I can see a possible interpretation to describe the forces that evolve architectural form. Form would be the body and function would be the parasite. As functions evolve, and become more sophisticated, they must adapt the form of the environments they inhabit, resulting in the development of new buildings. i.e., the functions of industry brought on by the innovations of the Industrial Revolution gave rise to the construction of factories.)

Monstrosities are bodies that are different from those typically found in nature. One way these bodies can be formed is through the combination of different parts, forming a new whole that can not be understood through its component parts alone. This brings on the idea that whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The Sphinx of Egypt is an example of such a body; the body of the lion and the body of the human can not readily be envisioned as the form they create when united.

Gestures can be used to describe forces related to the body. Electrocardiogram readings can be read to interpret the emotional state of a person. Captures of a body and motion can be used to illustrate the forces acting upon the body at specific points in time. These gestures are only useful as is; an "average" of these gestures would be unable to describe a realistic body. This presents the idea that forces interact across intervals while the body remains in stasis.