smooth & striated - vs - the fold

I pulled the same conclusions as pawel from the smooth/striated text. deleuze describes the attributes of both spatial qualities, but argues that they are able to shift back and forth - striated to smooth and vice versa. so, one quality could not exist without the other, since they are definable by what they do and don't have in common.

the fold text was a little tougher to get through - perhaps its easier if one is already familiar with leibniz's work? deleuze explains the fold through the idea of a finite body being transformed through an infinite number of folds. the labyrinth he references is therefore not a system of lines, but one entity that is now able to create space. the process of folding is why organisms exist. it creates dimensionality (not in the metric sense, though). so, there is never a scenario of just one fold in matter. there are always multiple folds within folds.

this idea seems impossible to represent architecturally, as eisenman attempted. if one of the essential concepts is this immeasurable folding, there is no way to include so much detail in a built solution. and, the way that I understand the fold is that it isn't a quantifiable thing... it is a force acting on matter. seems like it's not enough to create only a structural iteration of the idea. does that mean that no designer will ever be able to capture it? there are a whole lot of them trying, at the moment.

how does the baroque house fit into all of this? I'm having trouble making that connection.