Which of the following is true?

1. ‘Our project has no site.’

2. ‘Our project has (potentially and/or theoretically) all the possible sites in the world.’

3. ‘Our project has one ideal site – that site might be so ideal that our project can never reach it.’

4. (Or maybe our project is so ideal that it can never accommodate itself, it can never fit into any site, no matter how short a time.)

5. ‘Of course our project has a site: it’s just that it has one site after another, it has any one site only for the time being, the change from one site to the other is never-ending.’

6. ‘Well…it’s somewhere in-between no site & all sites…’

.

- If a project doesn’t have a site, does it crave a site? (Or do you, as designer, crave a site for it – or have a site for it in the back of your mind even though you might not
admit it?

.

- Or is the principle of our project that it can never have a site, that it has to reject/deny any & every site, that if it happens to stay in one place too long it better leave sooner or later, before it’s too late, before it becomes part of the site or before the site becomes part of it?