Wonderful discussion. If I may, I add the following.
I agree, we make no claims, nor should we, regarding psycho/spiritual transformation", nor can we guarantee actual epiphanies. We do, however, set the stage for learning and change, create the conditions and perhaps improve the skills which enable a deeper sensing, flexing and transmission of the potencies comprising leadership, for example. Like every good teacher, we want to help those we work with to think better and different, that is, to have multiple options for how they think both in quality and duration. Of course, we never tell anyone "what to think", but we do want to inflect, energize and otherwise inspire the possibilities of thinking by "transmitting knowledge, encouraging discussion, permitting insight, enlarging frameworks, improving craft, nurturing confidence...". In all cases, we are also "transmitting" something beyond our knowledge and skills, more akin to our attitudes, values and personal essences. This is not only inescapable, it is often the most powerful thing that we do transmit. In this light, we are from time to time actually "inspiring" to others and on other occasions, hopefully rarely, its opposite.
In listening to our recent discussions, I have been reminded of two poems which capture in the art of this form some of the insights we ourselves are endeavoring to express. The first is entitled THE WOOD CARVER, and many of you may be familiar with it. It was first brought to my attention many years ago by Parker Palmer as a vehicle for exploring what we are capable of in crafting the body of our own lives. It never fails to spark rich discussion.
THE WOODCARVER
Khing, the master carver, made a bell stand
Of precious wood. When it was finished,
All who saw it were astounded. They said it must be
The work of spirits.
The Prince of Lu said to the master carver:
“What is your secret?"
Khing replied: “I am only a workman:
I have no secret. There is only this:
When I began to think about the work you commanded
I guarded my spirit, did not expend it
On trifles, that were not to the point.
I fasted in order to set
My heart at rest.
After three days fasting,
I had forgotten gain and success.
After five days
I had forgotten praise or criticism.
After seven days
I had forgotten my body
With all its limbs.
“By this time all thought of your Highness
And of the court had faded away.
All that might distract me from the work
Had vanished.
I was collected in the single thought
Of the bell stand.
“Then I went to the forest
To see the trees in their own natural state.
When the right tree appeared before my eyes,
The bell stand also appeared in it, clearly, beyond doubt.
All I had to do was to put forth my hand
And begin.
"If I had not met this particular tree
There would have been
No bell stand at all.
“What happened?
My own collected thought
Encountered the hidden potential in the wood;
From this live encounter came the work
Which you ascribe to the spirits."
From The Way of Chuang Tzu, ed. and trans. by Thomas Merton, pp. 110-111.
The second poem, perhaps less well known, is by D. H. Lawrence, and underscores in its genius something that we do 24/7 whether in artist mode, teacher mode, facilitator mode or free form. In as much as we are all transmitting all the time, intentionally or otherwise, with consummate skill or otherwise, the process is inherently transactional and as potent as our own life force or lack thereof. Because my colleagues and I frequently stand on the stage and actually perform, we are particularly sensitive to this dynamic and have fashioned a manifesto of sorts from it which we frequently recite at the close of our "Concerts of Ideas". I share this with you as well.
WE ARE TRANSMITTERS
As we live, we are transmitters of life.
And when we fail to transmit life, life fails to flow through us.
That is part of the mystery of sex, it is a flow onwards.
Sexless people transmit nothing.
And if, as we work, we can transmit life into our work,
life, still more life, rushes into us to compensate, to be ready
and we ripple with life through the days.
Even if it is a woman making an apple dumpling, or a man a stool,
if life goes into the pudding, good is the pudding, good is the stool,
content is the woman, with fresh life rippling in to her,
content is the man.
Give, and it shall be given unto you
is still the truth about life.
But giving life is not so easy.
It doesn’t mean handing it out to some mean fool, or letting the living dead eat you up.
It means kindling the life quality where it was not,
Even if it’s only in the whiteness of a washed pocket-handkerchief.
D. H. Lawrence
Our Manifesto, inspired by the poem above.
We are transmitters,
natural transmitters of mysterious transmissions.
Whatever it is that we as parents and professionals give or transmit to our children and colleagues,
it is far more than our mastery of subject.
It is very much palpable essences of who we are and our own impulses toward growth.
We are transmitters of life, or the absence of life.
Our choice is clear.
Sometimes it is our art forms which can speak with greater precision to the mysteries of our human interactions and creative capacities. Hoping this adds to our fascinating discussion.
John
-----Original Message-----
From: Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Weir
Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2016 10:53 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Quality of art products in arts-based methods in organizations
I agree with Steve. Focussing on craft gives a semi-objective frame of reference and some comparative possibility. On the whole I fear (like Piers), notions of " psycho/spiritual transformation" which do worry me. How do we know? over what timeframes? by what criteria are "transformations" measured. In terms of encouraging competent leadership it is mastery of the transactional that encourages the capability of the transformational. Likewise with "epiphanies". What gives us teachers the right to create transformations and produce epiphanies?. What we are doing is transmitting knowledge, encouraging discussion, permitting insight, enlarging frameworks, improving craft, nurturing confidence...
David.
David Weir
Hadleigh House
Main Street
Skirpenbeck
York
YO 41 1HF
01759371949
07833366773
[log in to unmask]
On Sun, 12 Jun 2016 12:37:25 +0000, "Taylor, Steven S" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Focusing on craft helps my thinking a bit on this. It raises the
> question for me, what does insisting on high(er) standards of
> craftsmanship do for the person who is engaging in the artistic
> process? Especially, in an environment where the purpose is not to
> create art? My guess is that insisting on standards of craftsmanship
> does a variety of things, such as pushing the person to stay with
> their senses (which I think is one of the deep lessons of artistic
> practice (see http://digitalcommons.wpi.edu/oa/vol1/iss1/15/ for
> Claus’ explanation)). I would also think that there is something
> valuable in a craft orientation (see
> http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-014-2116-9#/page-1
> for more) and it might help people learn this craft orientation.
>
> And I suspect it may often trigger anxiety in people, the “I’m not an
> artist” feeling, “I’m not a writer”, etc. I sometimes ask my students
> to use crayons and I tell them, “no one ever created a great work of
> art with crayons,” just to reduce the anxiety of asking MBA students to draw.
>
>
> And I suspect it triggers anxiety in facilitators. I know that I don’t
> have the craft skill in drawing to help people to a higher level of
> craftsmanship in their drawing, so I don’t try to. In short, insisting
> on craftsmanship requires some mastery of that craft. So, I have no
> problem in insisting on craftsmanship when I ask students to write and
> perform stories because I have some craft skills (developed over many
> years of
> practice) there. I know how to help them raise their level of
> craftsmanship and I think something useful happens when I do that.
>
> - Steve
>
>
>
> On 6/12/16, 6:03 AM, "Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations
> Research Network on behalf of Piers Ibbotson" <[log in to unmask]
> on behalf of [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >How about this: "Art is a matter of opinion". Craftsmanship maybe not.
> >What this conversation has opened up for me is some useful questions
> >about the purpose of arts based activities in areas that are not
> >about training or developing artists. In my practise I have only been
> >interested in the processes and their effects. Respect for the
> >processes and discipline when engaging in them are the craft
> >constraints I emphasise. I have always been wary of attempts or
> >claims to bring about psycho/spiritual transformation. Partly because
> >I am not sure that's what I should be doing and also because I am not
> >convinced that engagement with artistic PRACTICE necessarily achieves it.
> >Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: David Weir <[log in to unmask]>
> >Sender: "Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network"
> > <[log in to unmask]>
> >Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2016 08:34:25
> >To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >Reply-To: David Weir <[log in to unmask]>
> >Subject: Re: FW: Quality of art products in arts-based methods in
> >organizations
> >
> >What is "high standard"? Who judges this?
> >Whose will prevails in matters of artistic standards?
> >
> >David
> >
> >David Weir
> >
> >Hadleigh House
> >
> >Main Street
> >
> >Skirpenbeck
> >
> >York
> >
> >YO 41 1HF
> >
> >01759371949
> >
> >07833366773
> >
> >[log in to unmask]
> >
> >
> >On Thu, 9 Jun 2016 19:58:32 +0000, "Taylor, Steven S" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >> Forwarding this response from Piers - I concur that Jane Hilberry¹s
> >>point is about insistence on good craftsmanship and I wonder if
> >>that gets us to a different conversation than talking about quality
> >>in art products?
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/9/16, 1:25 PM, "[log in to unmask]"
> >> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hmmm. Muddle here about craft and art I think. Well crafted can be
> >> >unoriginal. Profound can be, on the face of it rough, but never
> >> >poorly crafted. Peter Brook useful here? Poor theatre vs deadly theatre.
> >>Artists
> >> >very rarely produce good art let alone people in a workshop. An
> >> >insistence on good craftsmanship is a very useful constraint when
> >>trying
> >> >to bring about insight in a group (Jane Hilberry's point I think).
> >> >Artists don't make "Art" remember, they make books or plays or
> >> >films or paintings and if they are making a living at it, what
> >> >they make will be well crafted.
> >> >Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
> >> >
> >> >-----Original Message-----
> >> >From: "Taylor, Steven S" <[log in to unmask]>
> >> >Sender: "Aesthetics, Creativity, and Organisations Research Network"
> >> > <[log in to unmask]>
> >> >Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2016 12:15:47
> >> >To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >> >Reply-To: "Taylor, Steven S" <[log in to unmask]>
> >> >Subject: Quality of art products in arts-based methods in
> >> >organizations
> >> >
> >> >Hi, everyone
> >> >
> >> >Last week at EURAM, Philippe Mairesse spoke about his work with
> >> >accounting students and talked about how he pushed the students to
> >> >do work that was better art. I am also struck that Jane Hilberry
> >> >also
> >>spoke
> >> >about how she pushes students to write better poetry
> >> >(http://digitalcommons.wpi.edu/oa/vol1/iss1/6/). This has gotten
> >> >me thinking about the question of quality of the art
> >> >(product/outcome)
> >>when
> >> >using arts-based methods for leadership/managerial development
> >> >in
> >>short
> >> >does it matter if the art is good if we¹re not doing it to produce
> >> >good art? I don¹t think anyone would claim that the LEGO
> >> >sculptures created
> >>in
> >> >a Serious Play process are good art, or even that the facilitators
> >> >try
> >>to
> >> >get people to create better (rather worse) art as part of the process.
> >> >
> >> >My first take on this is that pushing for better quality art also
> >>pushes
> >> >farther into deeply embodied and often mysterious knowing and away
> >> >from just representing our cognitive processes in visual (or
> >> >poetic or
> >> >whatever) forms. It pushes us into more ambiguous and more
> >> >interesting forms that also allow to go to new places (Barry &
> >> >Meisiek¹s
> >>departures)
> >> >than something more straight forward and cognitive does. Thus the
> >> >push for better art also has a very useful purpose.
> >> >
> >> >So, what do you think? How does concern for the quality of the art
> >> >product/outcome fit into your own practice of arts-based methods
> >> >in organizations (if you have one and it does)? How would you
> >> >think about this? What questions does this raise for you?
> >> >
> >> >Regards,
> >> >
> >> >Steve Taylor
> >> >
> >> > Steven S. Taylor, PhD
> >> >[cid:4FEA4C90-AEE4-4F3C-99DF-657EB4452699]
> >> >
|
