The constitution of the group was meant as a metaphor of group work instead of a collective and anonymous project identity. Processuality was intended as style instead of a sine qua non in order to produce the involvement of active users, not exclusive or limited to insiders. The motor and materials employed were read as a futuristic adjustment of brush and canvas instead of materials economically functional to work hypotheses, chosen among the most common available on the market, at accessible costs, suiting every pocket, since our works had to be tools for esthetic productions that everybody could build. Thus the recipient was designer and executor at the same time, because those objects, once no longer unique, are without time and author, which means they can be reproduced at any time and by anyone, yet they do not loose the information qualities and quantities they convey, in the same way as the succession of day and night, and the seasons, as we would have said in 1959.

These facts extinguished art and its myth, in favor of a diffused and everyday aesthetic action, an issue that has brought a large part of its operators beyond object and environmental situations, in areas where the form is neither eternal nor unique, where it highlights its historicity and obsolescence, where it is a tool, such as in visual research and didactics, in the organization of communication through images, in those systems where the social and mass dimension of destination is privileged.

Gabriele Devecchi, “A proposito delle ipotesi Miriorama”, in: Lea Vergine (ed.), Arte programmata e cinetica 1953/1963. L’ultima avanguardia, Mazzotta, Milan 1983.