ARCH-222s20_EXCERSISE-1.1_Riley_Greenheck
In part 0.3 ‘Walking Out of Cubism,’ it is said that minimalism has created a shift that changes the way you view a space. The new way of viewing space is by creating spaces for things such as art that make it a “specific object.” The minimalistic principles are creating a structurally sound design that is represented through a visual which allows the viewer to understand how it was constructed. Minimalist is constrained as they have rules and guidelines to their design, then postminim
alism is created which creates a much more definitive design. The two are committed to similar things but on different spectrums, as postminimalism remains “committed to tangible things and visibility where the minimalists are concerned with underlying structures and ideas.”
In part 0.6 ‘Distributed Institutions’ the rules of classical architecture such as precise rules of axiality, symmetry, and formal hierarchy, which fully regulated designs still continue. Specific buildings such as institutions, government buildings, and museums contain some form of classical architecture as they need to represent being a durable institution. Even in new styles, there has been a “history of permuting relationships around the general premise that relationships should remain critical.” 
This continuation of a style begins to fade as there is a change within groups as media is influencing people to fade from such places as a library. The designs need to change to bring people to an understanding that such locations as a library have more accessible information than just looking for things online.
In part 0.1 ‘From Object to Field,’ it is said: “a field condition could be any formal or spatial matrix capable of unifying diverse elements while respecting the identity of each.” 
People have different ideas about field conditions. Some may 
view the field conditions as required pieces of design. These required pieces change with time as there are different influences from life determining the design layout.
In part 0.2 ‘Geometric vs. Algebraic Combination,’ the idea of organic geometric unity which is seen in classical architecture have a specific order. There is a wide variety of these rules but overall “beauty is the consonance of the parts such that nothing can be added or taken away.” There is a layout which stayed relatively consistent that designs need to be one unified thing. 
The new designs are turning into spaces that can be added to without having an identical structure and add beauty without changing anything substantial.
In part 0.5 ‘Flocks, Schools, Swarms, Crowds’ prove that things are fluid and need minor adjustments. In the 80s an artificial intelligence theorist name Craig Reynolds creating a programmed simulation of birds flying in groups with minor variables that did not determine that they would have to be in a flock. The flock was created even though restrictions on distancing between objects were given the objects needed to come close enough to form one unit. 
This observation of simulation gives a visual into a very important idea in architecture which is “variations and obstacles in the environment are accommodated by fluid adjustment. A small flock and a large flock display fundamentally the same structure.” No matter how big or small an architectural design is there will be a sense of unity as spaces created should form together.
1. the notion of “structurally sound” design is speak of the system (rule) that generates the object rather than the object itself. Minimalism is thus a methodlogy rather than a style. So from cubism to minimalism the shift is from the object to the system that make the object. from compositional thinking to generative thinking. The former would exhaust itself while a simple stweak in the later would generate countless of object. In this light you get an instruction rather than a product. Tape a banana, a glass of milk, or a leaf to a wall and the meaning of the “comedian” will change. Think of how memes work in this very same manner 🙂
2. same thing the style is the object – the proportion is a system that generates the assembly of the object base on relationship of scale. However this is only one type of system. Imagine if the system was different say on musical number, or light, of human traffic. The comment is a direct critique of how architecture has been contraining itself thinking that the only system of relationship that is valid is the propotional system, but as time goes on we can see how this is an outdated idea. It must choose a different system that is based on other things.
3. The drawing is a bit clearer. You showed the uniqueness of the unit in the varying length of the line then applied a rule. In this case the rule was equal spacing and aligning on a bilateral horizontal axis, from here you get a field which resembles sound wave. if you change the rule the result will be different. Thus the unit is less important than the designing of the rule/system (i.e relationship between the unit).
4.yes because so long as it follow the rule or the system it will fit in. The order is a proportional system which is based on scale in mathematical function. Say you either scale up by 3/4 or scale down by 3/4 you can put any number in as the beginning and the whole thing would be tightly fited. Because it was created by a system and simply from 1 single number as a unit.
5. the flock is another example of the system rather than the focus on the unit. If one design the system or the relationship between different object well and follow it consistently, then a field or flock will emerge with new clarity. Thus one has freedom in the unit if the system is consistent.
Most of the drawing you have are representational rather than diagramatic. I would suggest thinking about the structure (the system) rather than the object or result of that system. You can study a thousand objects, but if you can’t draw out the system then none of them make any sense. Or the application of such object would not make sense because the new system is not the same. Much like how it would be odd to wear white at a funeral and black at the wedding because the social system/rule dictates the color as a social code for respective event. Identify the unit and the system think larger 🙂