1
“Weak architecture”, as discussed in Performing Instruments (pp.31), embodies organic features that are beyond the merely referential relationship of modern, especially Metabolist structures. It seems that ‘weak’ environments reflect (on) the human condition.

How does such a paradigm shift affect our understanding of space and ourselves? What are the drawbacks of swapping a fixed spatial substrate with a vulnerable and transient one?

2
In defense of Fuller’s approach, Beesley argues that centralized control can prove crucial for regulating an unstable, precarious system (pp.39). While keeping power at the top of a hierarchical structure may render the decision-making process faster and more efficient, it compromises individual and collective agency.

How could a distributed, participatory model be a viable alternative in times of urgency?

3
Pask argued that although the individuals engaging in dialogue retain their autonomy, they mutually affect each other (pp.19) and produce a conversation which is independent of themselves (pp.22). I was wondering if Pask considered different means of conversing; a conversation carried out face-to-face is different than a disembodied one conducted over the telephone or through written correspondence. How would the conversation model change according to different media of communication? Was this conversation carried out in person (oral form) or via email (written form)?