Informal is an extraordinary work. I guess the reason why it's so shocking is that the content of the book is not like those static structural forms or solutions that we see in structural class. The case studies that Balmond brings to the table are very recent and genuine by star architects. I guess I was shocked by the fact that all these architects are not structurally oriented architects such as Foster/ Piano/ Calatrava/ Hopkins. Rather, they are theoretically approaching architects such as Koolhaas/ Liebskind; or, tectonically approaching architects such as Siza. I never thought projects by them had anything to do with structural or mathmatical innovation. Reading Informal, one can easily detect where the originality lie in each project. Sometimes it's in the irregularity of geometry or sometimes it's in mathmatical mystery. Balmond contends that they are all in mother nature. Unlike a formal structural engineering (e.g. Peter Rice) Balmond's originality comes from the informal networks. In High-tech, the ingenuity of structural entity was condensed into joinery. Informal networks is much more diverse and complex than that. It is against the conventional formal structural idea of hierarchy/center/symmetry. Balmond argues, formal approach is defining a problem in a "fixed" or "contained" manner; hence, leading to a same old idea of solution/ detailing. In Informal, Balmond redefines it in a more active/dynamic geometry, to bring about unexpected realities. Sometimes through structural innovation and sometimes through special surface treatment, Balmond promoted and realized the ideas of star architects. Overall, he has freed architecture from the "Cartesian Cage".