Replying to LO24817 --
Gerrit Visser wrote:
> I subscribed to LO at least 5 years ago. Until this very day I tell people
> that it is the only list I know of that remains valuable to me.
With the exception of the Futurework list I would second what Gerrit has
said throughout his post. The one addition I would make is that every
community of dialogue needs every type of individual lest something be
missed.
A problem with the list is that I do not like writing individually to
people. I do it when I post simply as a way of giving those who I am
answering, or discussing with, a little lead time and so the chance to
reply sooner.
But as a way of talking outside of the list, I generally find it less
satisfying because outside work demands context and the kinds of
mis-reading, mis-interpretings etc. that can be useful on a list, are
often "personal" one to one. On a list the person is a category, a
profession or a representative of a type. Lists offer the possibility of
dealing with such things in an open forum and making us wiser when it
really matters in our lives. Theater does the same but on the list you
are the actor.
Styles and categories are another issue. Andrew sent me a beautiful post
with attachment that spoke from the perspective of the artist in a
valuable way. It was not new to me having worked with designers and
artists in the creation of operatic productions. But the unique way of
looking and interacting with a product from a place of respect and genuine
depth is something that is a problem in today's "flexible" workplace. It
has been a part of "virtual" movie companies from the beginning and has
evolved an etiquette for like all mass production it also involves a
shallowing of ideas (they say simplifying) to "sell" to the general
public. Genuine fine art is one of a kind and that kind of thought is
both expensive and complex.
So that kind of thought both in development and in marketing becomes very
different from the general "works of scale" that the marketplace calls
productive, meaning that you can reproduce it endlessly, lower the price
and still make a profit. In that instance teamwork or even a learning
organization is of a different style and type than what is required of a
theatrical production, a work of architecture or even a high level sports
team. Terms deeply satisfying to one productive form often seem
derivitive, shallow or even masturbatory in the other.
The conflict between what is desirable in "one of a kind" products and
their shallower "economie of scale" version is labeled "taste" and
involves a "learning curve." There are those who like to make this an
instance of elitism with only the rich having the "taste" to appreciate
the complex. That may be true of a craft like furniture or automobiles
but in genuinely complex products the rules apply to Beethoven Sonatas
just as they do to great works of engineering. The issue is simply that
you can handle the information or not. Of all of the wealthy people that
I have taught, I have never encountered a one who could get beyond their
value system and conquer the complexity to become a great singer. I
understand that there are those like Mirella Freni but most of us are like
Pavorotti who come from the trenches to solve the problems of one of a
kind products.
That creates a duality on this list that, to my knowledge thus far, has
neither been questioned or solved. I would like to see that distinction
between the short term discipline required of 99% of the work in the U.S.
and the long term daily skills that begin in childhood and must be
nurtured into old age simply to keep up. When you align that with the
other issues of perceptual types, cultural handlings of time i.e.
polychronic, monochronic etc. and those whose minds operate like fugues
(multi-streams) and those who think in single linear melodies, you have
the possibility of a great discussion but one which must be carefully
conducted, like the instrumentation of a great symphony, in order to be
successful.
Thus far we are involved in the kind of free improvisation that nurtured
so many of us in Soho in the 1970s. I would like to see it continue to
evolve but that will take a change in all of our cultures.
Regards
Ray Evans Harrell,
artistic director
The Magic Circle Opera Repertory Ensemble, Inc.
mcore@idt.net
--"Ray E. Harrell" <mcore@idt.net>
Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>
"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.