Patterns aren’t reductionist, they’re just names for things that are common so that it’s easier to talk/think/write about them when those are the things being discussed. Surely no one has ever told you that all code you write has to conform to some set of predefined design patterns. That would be an engineering antipattern right there. Like most things in design, they’re supposed to help you think more clearly and concisely about common problems, they are absolutely 100% not intended to circumscribe your solutions.
It is funny like some programmers, especially from Lips/functional programming equate term "design patters" with GoF book and their list of 23 specific patterns, and then proudly declare that "Lisp does not have/need design patterns". Of course it has, just different ones than Java/C#
