What makes ruins something beautiful? Given the insistence with which the theme has been treated for many centuries. It Is their beauty without adhesion without prosthesis and without connections or without arms? Their recisions (would it be more correct mutilations) to which they implicitly tend, evoke without evoking? Or is it simply a matter of taste, so to speak, of the negative that binds them more to the idea of nocturnal and therefore of the sublime? A renewed force produced by a constraint and a counter-constraint: a type of reaction that rises instantaneously from a feeling of inhibition, an instantaneous detention of vital forces immediately followed by an even stronger outburst of those forces. However, their being anti-prosthesis does not distract them from the emptiness of their mutilations and therefore from a certain vision beyond what they represent, a vision that does not belong any longer to their past of wholeness.