My research evolves through the use of architectural drawing conventions as structures of desire; it focuses on the development of organizational modes that explore the notion of the in-between space, a space defined at the rift of binary given structures and stereotypical opposites. I suggest that this in-between area might provide us with the possibilities of a future architecture, an architecture of acceptance of the ‘other’, of the ‘different’. Influenced by readings of Irigaray and Grosz, I realize that to “live well together in a lasting way”, we have to discover new ways to co-exist in - and constantly be able to re-produce - a blossoming space which will enhance our potential of continuous transformation. I suggest that approaching the possibilities of the utopian architectural space that may be produced at the melting point of oppositional stereotypical pairs, with an emphasis on the natural/cultural opposition, is a pre-requisite factor for the realization of a ‘between me and you’ – shared – place. I will lend material from a variety of visual sources, mainly architecture and design, by focusing on plan and construction, ornament and structure, form and content. Through my research I intend to re-examine systems of classification, order and hierarchy and their effectiveness by targeting the dissatisfied, those never seriously considered by official architecture: women, plants, groups of people living in the margins of society. By examining spatial properties such as symmetry, the double and transparency and through discontinuities and juxtapositions of binary structural systems, I will work towards the creation of an open-ended system of narrative. Issues of location, constant displacement and replacement will be treated as central. My exploration involves the production of drawings, models, notebooks and stop-motion video-animations. My project will be completed by the production of a book, which will emphasize the methods and processes of exploration

The coexistence of multiple points of view and the spatial practice of the drawing collage (without recognizable traces of descent), or the visual ?samples?, as the artist insists, attain a different dimension. If I had to define these drawing?s spatiality, I would say that it is presented by the mixture of different scales and points of view, which contain each other, arousing the viewer?s desire to carefully search for their paradoxes and details. Kamma?s drawings look like mysterious empty surfaces of white or transparent paper that are completed by clusters of objects and shapes that have the tendency to expand and to be combined outside their limits. Up to a point it seems like, the logic of gothic sculpture, which as Heinrich Wolfflin once wrote, differentiates itself from the compact character of classical sculpture tending to continue into the environment. The ?paratactic? process of composing these armed ?artificial landscapes? is what insures their deterritotialization, the autonomy of each of their parts but also their interdependence. The final result multiplies their ambivalence and tensions, making them look like mystic conundrums, along with the elaborate coat of arms that are found in the epicenter of many surrealist artists.
The object?s and shape?s autonomy, the coordinative articulation and the logic of cataloguing different elements which disrupts the hierarchical structure, are the three methodological edges of Kamma?s drawing triangle.*

* This extract is from a larger text written by Yorgos Tzirtzilakis entitled ?The Secret of Green Hill?.