You are full of coherent conflictions, dichotomies several as you sit outside here among brothers and sisters. Although you appear simple at glance, you play as sculpture upon investigation, revealing new levels of thought. I would discuss such.
First and most present is the burnishing of your surfaces. Although all of your structure is constructed geometrically, your stainless steel faces show the reflecting brushes of a free hand, nigh upon chaos. Your form upon glance is that of geometric, industrial, constructed origin. Your straight lines, right angles, even your ellipses and hexadecagon, your stainless steel materiality, your cleanly welded connections and planar restrictions suggest not a free amalgamation but strictly logical assembly, thought-out fabrication.
Next comes from your still geometric assemblage the totemic presence that many of Smith's other works carried. Your shape in this regard has been described as planar appendages jutting from a boxy torso upon four stilt-like legs. And although other may attribute this organic flow to other, but still organic, forms, your precedence and may freedom of analysis yet shows man in your form. Although irrefutably reduced and abstracted to near non-objectivism your stance portrays still of the organic. I believe it comes from the angular progression of those planar appendages, flowing in an arc over your tilted head, showing not many arms but a movement or form of just two. Your geometric construction betrays again its origin to display free-form expression.
Indeed this separation emphasizes your this third dichotomy in your being. Although only forming a third of your height, your superstructure, your extraordinary construction, contains two thirds of your elements and exponentially more interplaying complexity. The two-thirds tall legs are in face pressed to such simplicity as to further repeat this difference. First and especially noted in my positive-negative analysis of your form, your legs seem much too straight and narrow to be true to your physical form. I checked several times of my measurements and my drawing before I could convince myself that the proportions were true to your life. Thankfully for form and possibly stability, your legs a tied by this ellipse. Not only does this single piece tie and attach your legs together, but is serves as a much needed break from the straight and narrow of your stilt-like legs. Even when it seems out of place in first glance, as if fallen from the superstructure above, this piece as the rest seems all so natural when placed in a negative-positive eye.
So what do these dichotomies explain, do these conflictions portray, these differences exclaim? I know not specifically and I think not should it be limited specifically in argument. Instead it talks to the simple appearance, existence, possibility of such apparent contradictions. Instead of contradicting they act more as colors, the opposites not being repulsive together but in fact, and they are called such, complementary (colors) they serve well together and are used as one of the most simple implementations of colors to create interest and cohesion, not confusion and disparity. What Superstructure on 4 asks of art, of me, of us, is to look for such plays of conflict and hidden dichotomies as we travel the day, to seek revel and understanding in these acknowledgements, and to leave our own distinctive complements as well.