Architectural space, conceptually, is static and permanent, whilst human condition is evolutive.

Is this the reason why there are so many unpleasant spaces unbearable to us, and others of which we do not even know the existence and some that produce extreme pleasure without any plausible explanation?

On many occasions I have been able to witness as a space transforms itself following the surrounding occurrences. They may be extremely subtle or they may have great impact, yet the most important thing is the fact that things may occur there, both in time and space.

If we could adequately convert one of that static architectural space's limiting planes into a work generating "visual happenings" evolving or transforming itself, it could also be possible then to establish a more efficient or more coherent relationship between man-space-habitat.

In past centuries a single person "the artist", conceived and realized everything. The ensuing fragmentation of knowledge has led us to having the action of artists and performer divided between many personages from diverse professions and specialties. If there were conviction among the team of architects, engineers, urban professionals and promoters that the artist must be part of the team, they would call the most convenient one for each solution. But what happens now is that this is not an issue. When having to decide on a new building, industrial plant, urban space or city project, calls are made to the engineer, architect, landscaping specialist, calculator, geographer, air -conditioning technician, without any thought of calling the artist. Subsequently --possibly-- some one may say: "Well, take a look at this beautiful space we have here. Perhaps we should add a sculpture. Why don't we call this artist?" And they call the first one coming to their mind without this implying that he or she could be the most suitable one for this space. It would be more logic that, when planning some urban or architectural project, the artist be already included in the team at the start, just as other professionals are.

Urban environment could degrade even more if my former consideration are not borne in mind, Works may not be installed without first having considered the location, space, the kind of work and the level of the artist being called. Private promoters and the State have great responsibility in this decision, since they are the only ones contracting works at an urban level. The information that we are generating here should be addressed to them, and not just to architects and urban specialists.

The city as a support for the artistic work

I believe that a work of art integrated to the city should raise an until then unseen happening under permanent mutation. Some sort of fascinating experience, leading to an intimate rupture fact facing the "automatic behavior" that we adopt when moving along urban space.

Cities are hyper-saturated with "standard information", lacking affective interest. These are automatic readings to unleash mechanical collective behavior actions, as stopping at a red light or going to the other side of the street through the pedestrian crossing…