Lacan's schema is suggested and represented in the film, which also reveals a paradox on the relationship between the eyes and objects. None of them is independent but interplay in an inevitable system.
"Just like Lacan, Beckett presents many eyes, as well as many kinds of eyes, within the self and outside it. ... The gaze, linked with the self's desire, is everywhere and unstopable In everyday experience the gaze is suddenly sensed when it appears in the visual domain unexpectedly in the form of an accident ... accident relate with the unexpected psychological performance of the gaze, what Lacan calls 'the encounter with the real'. The cones of the eye and the gaze are interdependent but more freely. When they do not perfectly match each other, accident and mistakes slip through screen and rupture the safe representations of the self."
Well, it is productive once you admit that something of indeterminacy is surrounding the process (of design) and even entering it. That means lessening the distance between architecture and life.
