The concept of Derive, reminds me of the work of artists that have mapped out their own aesthetic landscapes, as well as done projects such as mapping out houses they have lived in from their memories of the places.

Derive, however, seems more like meditation and a form of artistic research wrapped into one. A question that arose during the reading, was my wondering of the concept of wandering. What is wandering? Can the people participating in these activities talk with other people? What state of mind should you be in; are you an empty vessel? If so, what is there to gain unless you are using your memory to record your experiences? The article goes on to describe things like studying terrain or emotionally disorienting oneself. These seem to be examples of the goals and rules, but in Derive, rules and objectives seem to be determined by whoever is participating in it on a whim.

The concept of static wandering, as stationary wandering lead me to understand that as long as one sets aside a period of time for Derive in an environment with the specific mindset of doing nothing but Derive, are indeed accomplishing their task. How they go about doing it is completely up to them.

Derive seems to be something very open ended and individual, the element of individuality cannot be taken from derive, no matter how much the author describes success in Derive as freeing oneself from things. As much as this seems to be the case, taking as much as you can from it hypocritically fits well with the notion of the Derive.