Multiplicity In Architecture?

2y ago
166 Views
14 Downloads
2.90 MB
20 Pages
Last View : 12d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Mara Blakely
Transcription

Multiplicity in architecture?Jelle van der Neut

Multiplicity in Architecture?IntroductionThe concept of multiplicity, ‘the one and the many’, or rather the many as one, hasbeen an issue of philosophies and theories for quite some time now. The term has beenused in larger theories of organizing the world for most of that time. We have seen artpractices use this concept as a tool by which artists such as writers, painters, cinemadirectors and so on compose their work in a fascinating way. In architecture this occursas well, however in less amounts. The essay is built up as a multiplicity of key wordsof influence on this subject. She is explanatory, critical, conceptual, arbitral, subjective and incomplete. It was never a goal to give a full perspective of all that is in therealm of multiplicity. The goal is to investigate the possibilities for this concept inarchitectural practice. She is not a basic set of rules to be obedient to at all times, sheis a highly personal and selective to the author and can, will and must be transformed,added, and disrupted whenever necessary. She is temporal, piece-by-piece. She canbe a tool for a very specific architecture, not only aware of the theories, also aware ofthe practices. The subjects are related and connected to each other, it can be read as awhole in any possible order, as well as just partly. Although the intro and conclusionseem to be clearly definable as beginning and end, they also are part of the researchand should be read as part of the network.ConnectionsMultiplicities are all about making connections in every sense of the word. In fact,Deleuze states that ‘the line of flight’ and only lines of flight constitute multiplicities.1The line of flight is a concept of Deleuze & Guattari in their larger concept of the rhizome. The line of flight is the element establishing all connections and relations in multiplicities. It represents movement in any thinkable way, and lines of flight are abstractlines, as well as actors in the movement of Deterritorialisation and reterritorialization.In architecture, connections have always been important. Being aware of the complexlocal system, intern and extern, physical, visual, and sensorial can bring certain qualities to a project. Specific projects are only about connecting; are these the projectsdestined to be interpreted as multiplicities? Architecture might not only be about concepts and materials,2 but when speaking of connecting buildings, other aspects can befiltered, or abstracted. This would be controversial in Deleuze’s and Bergson’s terms,since the rhizomatic system in which the line of flight and multiplicities is integrated isto discard from all abstractions so general in the arborescent system. But since architecture is dealing with existing situations, there is no need to keep to the rhizomaticsystem, as long as the multiplicity is not harmed doing so.1 Deleuze & Guattari; A thousand plateaus;UMP; 1987; p 112 Grosz, E & Eisenman, P; Architecture from the outside, MITP, 2001; p. 1131

BifurcationA qualitative change in surfaces or planescaused by a quantitative change in the amountof possible entryways, lines of flight. It is directly influencing the complexity of a system.In nature bifurcations describe transitions formequlibrium towards a new equlibrium, one thatis more complex, less symetric.Plane of consistency“The plane of consistency (grid) is the outsideof all multiplicities.”3It can be seen as one of the basic rules for therhizomatic system, a net wherein all connections take place, lines of flight as part of multiplicities, as part of the rhizome. This planeis not organized in a hierarchical way. Rather,every actor, connected to a lot of other actors ofdifferent kinds, are in the same nonhierarchicalorder.The grid in architecture is often seen as a dull,perpendicular system to organize a project. Butthe grid can also take other forms, such as aninfrastructural regime with different speeds,altitudes, directions, movements and so on. Todeal with multiplicities in architecture the planeof consistency is highly important, connectingto other multiplicities is only possible when agood conection is esthablished with this grid.3 Deleuze & Guatarri ; A thousand plateaus; UMP; 1987; p 92

Multiplicity in Architecture?Focus“That which properly belongs to the mind (in the argument on numeric conception) isthe ‘indivisible process by which it has the capacity to concentrate attention on different parts of a given space.’’ 4Focalisation should be seen as a ground condition for all transformations. In the perception of a single object, focus is highly important, change of focal point is decisivefor the establishment of new relations. Attractors being noticed by focalisation can leadto Deterritorialisation and reterritorialization of multiplicities.We have seen this concept as main subject in Lars van Trier’s ‘The five obstructions’where a series of different transformations in the same fabula is distracting focus fromthis story of ‘The perfect human’, giving the fabula five different perspective. (See assignment 2 & 3)Single SubstanceThe Dutch philosopher Baruch Spinoza denies the dualistic division between mind andbody, God and nature. He thinks that God and nature are two words for the same reality. God is not placed above all things, God is in all things and He has no personality.“Gilles Deleuze qualified Spinoza as the “prince of philosophers” for his theory ofimmanence, which Spinoza resumed by “Deus sive Natura” (“God or Nature”). Such atheory considers that there is no transcendent principle or external cause to the world,and that the process of life production is contained in life itself.”5This solution to dualism seemed to appeal to Deleuze; it has influenced hem and Guattari in their plane of immanence.Plane of immanenceDeleuze employs the concept of immanence as opposed to transcendence. With this hedenies dualism and idealism.“It is only when immanence is no longer immanence to anything other than itself thatwe can speak of a plane of immanence.”634 Bergson, H; ‘Time and free will’; p. 84; In: Hauptmann, D; ‘Like already measuredthreat rewound onto as spool: a(n)notation on Bergson’s two forms of multiplicity;In: Healy, P * Bruyns, G, ‘De-/signing the urban: Techno-genesis and the urban image’, 010 Publishers, 2000, p. 1625 5Antonio Negri, The Savage Anomaly: The Power of Spinoza’s Metaphysics andPolitics;transl. 1991, UMP6 Deleuze, G; Immanence: A life

“Rather on the plane of immanence there areonly complex networks of forces, particles,connections, relations, affects and becomings:“There are only relations of movement andrest, speed and slowness between unformedelements, or at least between elements that arerelatively unformed, molecules, and particlesof all kinds. There are only haecceities, affects,subjectless individuations that constitute collective assemblages. [ ] We call this plane, whichknows only longitudes and latitudes, speeds andhaecceities, the plane of consistency or composition (as opposed to a plan(e) of organizationor development.”7This plane is the basis for all multiplicities andrhizomes. It makes the whole theory feasible,not only as a philosophical theory, bur also forpractices. For literature for example, Deleuzeand Guattari have clear visions:“The ideal for a book would be to lay everything on a plane of exteriority of this kind, ona single page, the same sheet: lived events,historical determinations, concepts, individuals, groups, social formations. Kleist inventeda writing of this type, a broke chain of affectsand variable speeds, with accelerations andtransformations, always in a relation with theoutside. Open rings. His texts, therefore, areopposed in every way to the classical or romantic book constituted by the interiority of asubstance or subject.”87 Deleuze & Guatarri ; A thousand plateaus; UMP; 1987; p 2668 Ibid.; p. 94

Multiplicity in Architecture?Deterritorialisation“How could movements of Deterritorialisation and processes of reterritorialisation notbe relative, always connected, caught up in one another? The orchid deterritorializesby forming an image, a tracing of a wasp, but the wasp reterritorializes that image.The wasp is nevertheless deterritorialized, becoming a piece in the orchid’s reproductive apparatus. But it reterritorializes the orchid by transporting its pollen. Wasp andorchid, as heterogeneous elements, form a rhizome.”9Deleuze’s example of the orchid and the wasp explains de- and reterritorialisation quitewell. The orchid makes a connection with the wasp by luring it with an image. Thisenables the orchid to reproduce. Is this also possible in culture, or between culture andnature? This has to do with merging two environments. It is artificial deterritorialisation, but it appears of interest. Merging a building with its surroundings for exampleextends the building and at the same time the surrounding is extended into the building,and makes both boundaries unclear and brings the two closer together.TransformationsFor Deleuze, all that exists is substracted from one single substance by an ever differntiating process of modifications of this substance. These modifications are crucial to theheterogeneity of the rhizome. This ontology is summed up by Deleuze in the mathemathical formula ‘plurism monism’. The way in which these modifications are done areseveral:“It can be torn, reversed, adapted to any kind of mounting, reworked by an individual,group, or social formation.”10For architecture, modifications or transformations of a pure substance can be interesting. And when we take this very literal, leaving much freedom for the public and lessfor the architect. Series of transformations of a singularity are being used in architecture already. FOA’s Cruise Terminal in Yokohama is an exaple of this. The projectknows a direction wherein the section is transforming in a series of something likeone hundred nonidentical sections. To the beholder, this building is a flux over a linewith a start and en end. Its function delivers a lot of different movements, the buildingrepresents that. The clear beginning and end may not represent other characteristics ofmultiplicity, nevertheless, a multiplicity of sections has potential architectural quality.(see also addition 2)9 Ibid.; p. 1010 Ibid.; p. 135

“.Transformation ought to be seen as a typeof movement, the flow of matter through time;and it is time, and only time, that makes the newboth possible and necessary.”11This necessity of novelty extorted by timeshould be read critically in relation to theconcept of multiplicity that this essay is referring to, since a lot of this writing is inspired byDeleuzian concepts, who has used Bergson’sideas on time and space, and durée.1 Sections of the YokohamaCruise Terminal. source: FOA,2 Yokohama Cruise Terminal,source: flickr.com11 Sanford Kwinter; Architecture of time; MITP; 2001; p. 76

Multiplicity in Architecture?Duration (Durée)Duration is the subjective concept concept of the perception of space-time, another ofHenri Bergson’s concepts. For him, the conventional way of seeing things in a succession of cause and effect is an abstraction of our consciousness. Tracking a movementon a system of infinite reference points (grid) would not refer to the movement as itshould be. An image of a moving object, taken with a slow shutter speed, the movement seems to be accentuated, where tho object itself is being abstracted into something vague. Movement cannot be divided into series of parts.“ the mistake, he consistently argues, is in thinking that succession places the elements in time, as opposed to space.”12Bergson means that movement is not to be simply divided into a single variable such astime.“Duration, by contrast, is a multiplicty of succession, heterogeneity, differences in kindand qualitative differentiations. It is continuous and virtual. Duration is divisable ofcourse, but is transformed by the act of division”13This virtual concept is hard to grasp in reality. The distiction between time and spaceconsidering movement, however is relevant. Movement is change, transformation,but also connecting. In architectural design practice, speed and movement are gettingmore and more important. This implies different movements, speeds, and thus differentperceptions of time and space. An specific architectural project can be distinguished bytaking this as primary notion.Image“For Henri Bergson, matter is an aggregate of “images,” by which he means “acertain existence that is more that that which the idealist calls a representation, butless than that which the realist calls a thing -- an existence placed halfway between the“thing” and the “representation.” (Matter and Memory, preface, p.9) Bergson seeksto consider matter before that disassociation which idealism and realism have broughtbetween the existence of matter and its appearance. He appeals to a pre-philosophical “common sense” that believes that matter exists just as it is perceived -- as animage.”14712 Bergson, H; ‘Matter and memory”; New York Zone Books; 1988; p. 71; in: Healy,P & Bruyns, G, ‘De-/signing the urban: Techno-genesis and the urban image’, 010Publishers, 2000, p. 15713 Grosz, E & Eisenman, P; Architecture from the outside, MITP, 2001; p. 11414 Christian Hubert Hypertext; www.christianhubert.com

This concept of matter as an image does notdirectly relate to that of multiplicity. Howeveris does relate to the perception of space in time,or duration. It is important to realize that forDeleuze in ‘Cinema 1’ film is not to be simplified as 24 images in a certain interval; theimages are sections of a flow of movements andevents. Speed is of influence to this too. Thisis also true for music, as Deleuze and Guattariexplain in the example of Glenn Gould. Accelerations and decelerations can transform pointinto lines, movement. 15Can speed and movement also change architecture towards a sense of duration and timespace? For certain assignments this can bedone, for example where different velocitiescome together. The static image of a buildingchanges in different speeds, and adding accelerations and decelerations enforces this imagemore.RhizomeOne of the most well known concepts ofDeleuze & Guattari is that of the rhizome. Itis opposed to the ever-accepted arborescentsystem in Western society especially. Important aspects of the rhizomatic system are theheterogeneity, connectivity and non-hierarchy.In ‘A thousand plateaus’ Deleuze and Guattaridescribe six characteristics of the rhizome:“1 and 2. Principles of connection and heterogeneity: any point of a rhizome can be connected to anything other, and must be. This isvery different from the tree or root, which plotsa point, fixes an order.3 Enric Miralles OlympicArchery Range, Barcelona15 Deleuze & Guattari, A thousand plateaus, UMP, 1987; p. 88

Multiplicity in Architecture?3. Principle of multiplicity: it is only when the multiple is effectively treated as asubstantive, “multiplicity,” that it ceases to have any relation to the One as subject orobject, natural or spiritual reality, image and world.4. Principle of asignfying rupture: against the over signifying breaks separatingstructures or cutting across a single structure. A rhizome may be broken, shattered at agiven spot, but it will start up again on one of its old lines, or on new lines.5 and 6. Principle of cartography and decalcomania: a rhizome is not amenable toany structural or generative model. It is a stranger to any idea of genetic axis or deepstructure.The rhizome is altogether different, a MAP AND NOT A TRACING. Make a map, not atracing.”16The principle of multiplicity is essential in all this. “Multiplicities are rhizomatic”17,and rhizomes multiple. Connections between multiplicities form a rhizome. These connections are crucial in the rhizome, just as the fact that the rhizome is always changingby qualitative and quantitative transformations.In Italo Calvino’s ‘Five memos for the next millennium’ Calvino speaks of Proust as awriter who writes in multiplicities.“Proust’s work grew denser and denser. The net is composed of points in space-timeoccupied in succession by everyone, which brings an infinite multiplication of the dimensions of space and time.”18The multiplicity of multiplicities seems to be aiming for a rhizome, as well as theendlessness of the stories Calvino describes. Calvino seems to be well aware of thetheories of Bergson and Deleuze when he writes about literature works written in anencyclopaedic way. Deleuze however, denies the rhizome as being encyclopaedic,since the rhizome is not describing the world, it is in the world and makes connectionsbetween all sorts of multiplicities.19 He sees in Kleist a good example:“Kleist invented a writing of this type, a broken chain of affects and variable speeds,with accelerations and transformations, always in a relation with the outside. Openrings.They (Kleist’s books, red.) are designated by indefinite articles, or rather by particles (some couchgrass, some of a rhizome .).”20916 Ibid.; p. 717 Ibid.; p. 818 Italo Calvino; Six memos for the next millennium; HUP; 1988; p. 11019 Deleuze & Guattari, A thousand plateaus, UMP, 1987; p. 1120 Ibid.; p. 9

The difference between Kleist and Proust seemsto be that Proust is trying describe the wholeRhizome, while Kleist does so of some of it,one or some multiplicities, it is part of one ormore rhizomes.The lesson to be learned here may be that in anarchitectural project making connections without hierarchy, to let it become that ‘some couchgrass’ in the bigger system. Letting it becomethe rhizome would be impossible since the outside cannot just be forgotten. On an architectural and practical level, the plane of consistencymight be of even greater importance to this thanin the theory.Rationally speaking, this whole concept shouldbe discarted when we realize that in buildingpractice there always is a hyriarchical order.Should we therefore declare multiplicity inarchitecture impossible? There are many waysto represent the multiple in architecture. TheSpanish architect Miralles, for example, implements the natural ground condition very well,and at the same time he makes use of elements,transformed in a series. This is differentiatingthe physical space, as well as fitting it into therhizome.10

Multiplicity in Architecture?MultiplicityThe term multiplicity has more than one interpretation. Henri Bergson distinguishesdiscrete and continuous, where the discrete is differentiating in a qualitative and dividable way and the continuous quantitative and in dividable, referring to his concept ofduration. 21Italo Calvino has a more practical approach to the issue, while referring to literature inspecific in his ‘Six memo’s for the next millennium’ he sees multiplicity as“The contemporary novel as an encyclopaedia, as a method of knowledge, and aboveall as a network of connections between the events, the people and the things of theworld”22The latter part of this quotation is strengthened when he discusses Gadda as a goodexample. Connections seem to be of great importance to the noun multiplicity.“.Being tangled in a system of infinite relationships between everything and everything else.”23Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari deny the encyclopaedic image of multiplicities ingeneral, since the encyclopaedia describes all the world’s things, while for D & G therhizome, constructed of multiplicities, is in the world.To be able to work with the theories of Bergson, Deleuze and so forth we need to takestheir side in this. And so, some characteristics need to be defined.- “Multiplicity must not designate the many and the one, but rather an organisationbelonging to the many as such, which has no need whatsoever of unity in order to forma system.” 24This would mean that a multiplicity is undividable and continuous, according to Bergson’s two kinds of multiplicities. These quantitative multiplicities are in pure duration.Constant change in space-time is essential.- “Multiplicities are defined by the outside: by the abstract line, the line of flight orDeterritorialisation according to which they change in nature and connect with othermultiplicities.”251121 Bergson; ‘Time and free will’; p. 121; in: Healy, P & Bruyns, G, ‘De-/signing theurban: Techno-genesis and the urban image’, 010 Publishers, 2000, p. 16022 Italo Calvino; Six memos for the next millennium; HUP; 1988; p. 11223 Ibid.24 Gilles Deleuze, ‘Difference and Repetition’ p 23025 Deleuze & Guattari, A thousand plateaus, UMP, 1987; p. 11

To be more concrete, connections and deterritorialisations form multiplicities. These areformed and deformed constantly and so differentiates constantly. Transformations in form,size, capacities and properties are always happening.For architecture, this mobile heterogeneity isquite difficult to achieve. Computer added active architecture changing in shape by outsideinfluences are known, as well as user adaptablearchitecture where users can adapt the building by their needs. But this is mostly known asflexibility and does not make new connections.Architecture is static, users are not. Focus canalso claim that the other way around. The outside can define architecture, contextual aspectscan be the main driving force for a design,and so can this characteristic be interpret intoarchitecture.- “Multiplicities cannot be counted ormeasured.”26Deborah Hauptmann has a striking oneliner tothis, “One in intuition but multiple in space”27The ever-changing characteristics of the multiplicity and the fact that neither beginning norend is clear results in the uncountability of themultiplicity. Where does the one stop and wheredoes another start is vague.- “All multiplicities are flat, in the sense thatthey fill or occupy all of their dimensions: wewill therefore speak of a plane of consistencyof multiplicities, even though the dimensions ofthis “plane” increase with the number of connections that are made on it.”2826 Manuel DeLanda, A New Philosophy of Society, 2006, p. 1127 Hauptmann, D; ‘Like already measured threat rewound onto as spool: a(n)notation on Bergsons two forms of multiplicity; In: Healy, P * Bruyns, G, ‘De-/signing theurban: Techno-genesis and the urban image’, 010 Publishers, 2000, p. 16128 Deleuze & Guattari, A thousand plateaus, UMP, 1987; p. 812

Multiplicity in ArchitectureA multiplicity should use all its possible relations to others, and in doing so no possibilities are left opened. For an architectural project this would mean that everythingon which the project could get hold on should be used. Making all possible connectionsto other multiplicities should not only be interpreted physical, but also psychological.Doing so would be a great effort for the architect. It might even be impossible, sinceits boundaries are vague and in practice there are always other influences beside theabstract conceptual ones.Conclusion“Philosophy is not, for Deleuze, a mode of mastering the real, framing its rules, understanding its principle ”29There certainly are possibilities for architecture to use multiplicity as a design tool. Thefragmented text above shows these possibilities and its problematic issues. Some of thecharacteristics will need to be ignored in order to deal with it on an architectural level,other need to be interpreted in a rather banal way. Interpretation, perception and mimesis are highly subjective and can therefore hardly be called academic. Trying to do sobrought up some positive ideas to bring multiplicity in specific design assignments, butdoing it by all the rules would be impossible.This does not make this research a failure; I would see it more as incomplete. Makingit complete would mean integrating all aspects of influence to the theme, where here isonly some writing on multiplicity. But then again, completion is never achieved, andincompleteness leads to abstraction, the thing that Deleuze was opposing to to beginwith.After wordThis essay is the result of a theoretical course of a Dutch School of Design master classat the Delft University of Technology. Various readings and assignments were involvedto the weekly meetings. In addition to this, the design studio that I was involved ininfluenced me in my interest in multiplicities, transformations, series, and so on. Theultimate goal was to be able to combine the two projects in order to be influencing eachother in some positive way, resulting in a more interesting and academic design, aswell as a to practice related theoretical study.29 Grosz, E & Eisenman, P; Architecture from the outside, MITP, 2001; p. 11313

Quite soon, however, it became clear that thedesign critic was not interested in my plans,and so both projects had to be done separately,which was frustrating me a lot. Nevertheless,my interest in multiplicities was still there, andthis indeed has influenced the design, althoughit may not have been aware to the critic involved. Looking backward, the architecturaldesign certainly has elements of multiplicity,such as Deterritorialisation between the infrastructural regime and the nature on site. Variousconnections are made, physical, visual, andsensorial. In that sense the two projects haveclear relations. While composing this text Irealized that the unconscious is more powerfulthan I thought. But it might have been better,considering the fact that it came all out of theunconscious, without any critical notes from thedesign critic.The assignments for this course were all verymuch related to the subject, so the choice forone was not very hard.Constructing the essay was quite difficult.Relating theory to practice in the chosen wayof dealing with fragments has the danger ofbeing superficial and to realize the right levelof depth was hard. Therefore it is suggestive,and certainly never finished. Own experiencean insight from design course, analysis of otherarchitectural works are highly subjective. Nevertheless, I think I have found some things towork with in specific projects.14

154 research schemeMultiplicity in Architecture?

5 design project result16

17

Multiplicity in Architecture?BibliographyBergson, H; ‘Matter and Memory’; Dover Publications; 2004Calvino, I; ‘Six memos for the next millennium’, Vintage; 1996DeLanda, M; ‘A New Philosophy of Society’; Continuum; 2006Deleuze & Guattari; ‘Capitalism and schizophrenia, a thousand plateaus’; Continuum;2004Deleuze, G.; ‘Cinema 1’; Continuum; 2005Deleuze G.; ‘Difference & repetition’; CUP; 1994Grosz, E & Eisenman, P; Architecture from the outside, MITP, 2001Healy, P & Bruyns, G, ‘De-/signing the urban: Techno-genesis and the urban image’,010 Publishers, 2000Kwinter, S; ‘Architecture of time’; MIT Press; 2002Negri, A, The Savage Anomaly: The Power of Spinoza’s Metaphysics and Politics(transl. 1991, UMP)Spinoza, B; ‘Ethics of Spinoza’; Citadel Press; 1995Online sourcesTheory section Christian Hubert Studio: www.christianhubertstudio.comPlatform for philosophical dialogue www.capitalismandschizophrenia.org18

Deleuze states that ‘the line of flight’ and only lines of flight constitute multiplicities.1 The line of flight is a concept of Deleuze & Guattari in their larger concept of the rhi-zome. The line of flight is the element estab

Related Documents:

*gzmt - Start of geometry input in the form of Gaussian Z-Matrices. 0V1 - charge and spin multiplicity of your molecule. Spin multiplicity 2S 1 where, S is the total electron spin of the molecule. If a molecule has 1 unpaired electron, S 1/2 and the spin multiplicity 2 * -End of coordinate definition. 3. Close the input file. 4.

What is Computer Architecture? “Computer Architecture is the science and art of selecting and interconnecting hardware components to create computers that meet functional, performance and cost goals.” - WWW Computer Architecture Page An analogy to architecture of File Size: 1MBPage Count: 12Explore further(PDF) Lecture Notes on Computer Architecturewww.researchgate.netComputer Architecture - an overview ScienceDirect Topicswww.sciencedirect.comWhat is Computer Architecture? - Definition from Techopediawww.techopedia.com1. An Introduction to Computer Architecture - Designing .www.oreilly.comWhat is Computer Architecture? - University of Washingtoncourses.cs.washington.eduRecommended to you b

1 Integrated Math 3 Module 5 Honors Modeling with Functions Ready, Set, Go! Homework Solutions Adapted from The Mathematics Vision Project: . 4 ( ) 1 19. 5 1 multiplicity 2, multiplicity 2, and 3 20. 4 ( ) . 18 Name Modeling with Functions 5.5H Ready, Set, Go! Ready Topic: Us

The the zeros of H(z) are the roots of the polynomial b 0 z M b 1 z M 1 b 2 z M 2 b M (10) and the poles of H(z) are the roots of the polynomial zN a 1 z N 1 a 2 z N 2 a N: (11) In addition, if N M, then z 0 is a zero of multiplicity N M; and if M N, then z 0 is a pole of multiplicity

Moving Identities: Multiplicity, Embodiment and the Contemporary Dancer By Jennifer Roche, MA A thesis submitted in p

multiplicity of (my)selves which, following the idea of not distancing mathemati-cal work from body movement improvisation, seeks to articulate the possible spaces in between. The concrete performance art piece is the result of a continu-ous reconfigura

Bones are a multiplicity. But Freud wants the dream to signify the death of someone. “Jung was surprised and pointed out that there were several skulls, not just one. Yet Freud still. . .”3 A multiplicity of pores, or blackheads, of little scars or stitches. Breasts, babies, and rods. A mu

N-FUNCTIONS VIA PENALIZATION METHOD CLAUDIANOR O. ALVES, AILTON R. DA SILVA Abstract. In this work we study the existence, multiplicity and concentration of positive solutions for the quasilinear problem u V( x) (juj)u f(u) in RN; where ( t) R jtj 0 (s)sdsis an N-function, is the -Laplacian operator, is a positive parameter, and N 2. 1 .