Over the span of his career as an artist, Spears, like many artists, developed a lexicon of his own, but unlike many of his contemporaries, his visual language effectively communicates how patterns interact with other patterns. To draw upon just one example of how this functions, let us consider the following; a seemingly straightforward design of linear geometries. Think about a series of four-sided polygons that are equal in both proportion and distance to one another. The diamond like shapes appear to be compositionally arranged in a checkered manner just as they look on the screen, but that is only the first registration.

Furthermore, as the phases of the registration progress the relationship between each drop becomes infinitely more complex. This begs the question why do these phenomena occur? The answer is a complex one, and yet it is rooted in the perceived simplicity of the original pattern and because patterns occur naturally, it is possible to tessellate the image to any variances of corresponding degrees. Therefore, the affect resembles elements that are found in nature i.e., the fractural—a pattern that repeats in juxtapositions unto the point that the entire design is perceived as being greater than the initial screen.

On a psychological level, the experience may be likened to pattern recognition processes which multiples subjective, visual meaning exponentially. Thus, a kind of transmutation of the pattern produces new patterns within a shared space. The rotation of any given screen then manifests with unexpected results because these shapes draw upon the brain’s natural proclivities to establish a semblance of order and thereby vacillates in its own interpretations; simultaneously constructing or deconstructing the artwork. In other words, one’s ability to acquiesce meaning relies upon a similar mechanism of cognitive functionality which is the rapid assigning of new meanings from complex abstractions.