44 Inflection Potential for Surprise “ARCHITECTS. All idiots: they always forget to put in the stairs.” – Bouvard et Pécuchet via Gustave Flaubert, Dictionary of Accepted Ideas, c.1870s. This article uses various meanings of the word “projection” to generate a series of interpretations of a particular architectural project (Figs. 01, 06). The project under discussion is a structure constructed of cable ties, hereafter CT_mesh. It was completed in 2011. The geometry of CT_ mesh has self-intersecting topology and its surface is made from a continually differentiated pattern (Fig. 02). By now, computational tools for deining such patterns are becoming common and their outcomes recognisable. Consequently, this paper does not attempt to argue that this structure is original as an object but instead discusses it as a material manifestation of some peculiar processes. One such process unfolds at the temporal scale of a design project; in this case, over several weeks. It is concerned with the management of control within what most people would recognise as designing. The very idea of such management is novel within the ield of architecture and the paper describes its – also innovative – implementation as layering of heterogeneous constraints. This description positions designing not as a goal-directed demonstration of pre-accumulated expertise but as a deliberate balancing act between composition and improvisation. The other process occurs at a larger temporal scale that can span multiple projects and even encompass disciplinary paradigm shifts. To illustrate, the modest experiment with the layered control mentioned above is motivated by the long-term research into biologically-inspired structures, processes and systems that are characterised by multi-layer hierarchies capable of opportunistic and non-destructive local adjustments. In relationship to this line of investigation, the examples of thinking discussed in this paper are signiicant as prototypes that begin to theorise future design and construction worklows that are – like those found in nature – lexibly adaptive to the inherently dynamic environmental conditions. To use a somewhat clumsy term, such designing-and-making worklows can be described as having greater “innovability,” 1 and this article seeks to contribute to the discussion on what might maximise this property. This inquiry is important because, at least in the experience of the author, the pursuit of innovability does not have universal or intuitive solutions. One contradiction that is tackled below occurs between standardisation and creativity. It is possible to argue that the accrual of technical knowledge depends on standardisation, compartmentalisation and reuse. For example, the sharing of knowledge through democratised tools including standardised means of electronic communication, common data structures (e.g., polygonal meshes), ixed ile types (e.g., STL or IGES) and universal machine-instruction languages (G-Code) has been credited for the continuing wave of innovation in software and the predicted “fabrication revolution.” 2 In parallel with such general trends, architectural design also becomes increasingly dependent on reusable structures such as data types, operators and expressions, algorithms and datalow programming. File standards, programming libraries and databases of components are becoming progressively more important for eficiency, collaboration and performance-oriented designing. Opposite: Fig 01. A full view of the CT_mesh structure, suspended. Note the varying densities and transitions between more and less regular patterns. See a detailed example of this in Fig. 02 and the contrasting smoothness of source geometry in Fig. 03. All photographs by the author. Stanislav Roudavski POTENTIAL FOR SURPRISE Cite as: Roudavski, Stanislav (2015). 'Potential for Surprise', Inflection, 1, 2, pp. 44–53