Reflecting on the body and architecture, through Vidler’s The Building in Pain, I’ve become more aware of a strong desire through post modern thought to disband the concept of simplistic ideologies in favor of fragmented ones, for the sake of typological morphosis in contemporary humanist discourse. Vidler seems to be saying that the more we learn about ourselves, the more we feel the need to break it down and morsellize ourselves. The projection of our body can no longer communicate that which it did in the past, but we must always be looking for mediums which allow us to reflect our image and gain further understanding of our body. In this regard, our architecture becomes the tool by which we can explore the limits of our tolerance. The dynamism of the body may not, however, necessarily translate, and the fragmentation left behind throws caution to the wind; can our bodies absorb this reflected fragmentation? Dynamism becomes the whole, while the shrapnel expands ever outwards, leaving behind the original intent. Vidler quotes Sartre, suggesting we may actually leave this fragmentation behind. “The body is not a screen between things and ourselves; it manifests only the individuality and the contingency of our original relation to instrumental things.” So, should we be striving instead for holistic thought? Is a return to simplicity imminent? There must be a greater expulsion of that which is superfluous and unwanted, first and foremost. In the mean time, we continue to seek the limits by which we may relate, or set our body within architecture. We see the hierarchies in the environment, the varying levels of intensity in the contemporary human condition, and we react.