I don't even know if people can understand what I write sometimes.

"The imagination has the power to define a solid simply by observing and understanding it's characteristically-shaped boundaries in three-dimensional space, even when these boundaries are only line segments permeating the void, just as a line drawing on a piece of paper can be understood and interpreted according to the permeation of the conceptually void, limited two-dimensional plane on which it exists. This is what gives Sandback's work it's power: it is not simply a random set of interconnected vertices, but a carefully thought out (although not predetermined, as Sandback points out) intuitive architecture that gives the space shape, size, and meaning. In one sense, the void ceases to be the void as a whole, and is transformed, rather, into a nested set of containers: the space now contains a virtual object defined by Sandback's yarn, which in turn contains a void which could potentially contain another virtual object, and so on. In another sense, the virtual object defined by Sandback's yarn gives constraint to the room, and so contains it, although not physically. A room tends to look larger when there are no conceivable solid objects in it, and can be shaped or changed by the objects that coexist within it, and this is Sandback's device. "