Thelema and Authority
-
@anistara said
"i have many friends who are goddess oriented, really... and pretty much against hierarchy and order. from a metaphysical perspective, it seems like the world would be flat without it."
Fact is, you are always going to need some organizing principle. And direct experience is a very good way to figure out what works and what doesn't work.
But here is the rub. Simply assuming it is all going to happen organically, without any one person taking up the responsibility of stating, assessing, and critiquing the group effort, and that everyone will behave reasonably well without attempting to consolidate power and making themselves the center of attention is extremely naive.
Marxism was a very well intentioned effort at dealing with all of this, but it didn't take into account that people are generally self-serving pircks—many were not content to remain on the farm, and those that were ended up being exploited by those who didn't. But this is a political philosophy, and to be fair, spiritual communities tend to have a better track record.
The idea of progress is not going to go away. It's too much of an ingrained expectation. Growth, even growth in our understanding about how there is no growth, will have to be sustained.
Love and Will
-
Well, I have a professional interest in groups that purport to be group driven, group inspired, group managed, without out the old hierarchies. I have directed a number of projects that were designed as explorations in group process.
Actually, this kind of thing happens a lot in your standard, unfunded, young theater company type theater. The myth of ensemble based work is quite magnetic and many groups and individuals make similar attempts with the idea of being revolutionary, and of rejuvenating the theatrical impulse. Most of these experiments are awful, in every sense of the word.
A curious fact about such efforts is that almost all of them have had to find viable substitutes for the old structures that made work under the old paradigm possible: directors, designers, stage managers, and so on...
Which only shows the degree to which theater is not interested in utopia. Rather, it is interested in making something admirable. This need to prove the validity of the method by the quality of the result is very important to me. So much so that anyone who wants to argue that product is not important, or that success is not a measurable quantity, to this degree, I have nothing to say. In my world these people are self-deluders, or con artists.
There is in fact a proof that I have never failed to see manifest itself when such efforts are in the zone. It is emergent design. This is the same unexpected, unplanned beauty that is common in music—improvisational jazz ensembles, drumming circles (sometimes), and other abstract styles of music dependent on improvisation. It happens because of the shared language, and the mutual attempt to speak with each other via the shared concepts beneath the more superficial elements of the language that is shared.
@Dar said
" Didn't I mention this was a group of autocrats?"
What I am describing is not autocratic—this effort to communicate, to have a dialogue. Few things are more impressive and mind blowingly transformative than artists at the height of their game deciding the most important thing they have to do is serve a spontaneous, group inspired impulse.
This emergence seems very Thelemic to my mind, but that's just me.
Love and Will
-
Did I mention I love RobertAllen?
-
I think formal authority or hierarchy are not, in themselves, the problem. True, authority can be used as a tool for abuse, but one can be just as tyrannized or terrorized by a formal, hierarchical group, as an angry mob, a housewife, or a 8 year old school bully.
Any time there is a power disparity between two people, there is potential for abuse.
The key question is how the power structures are set up. Is it like the Catholic church, designed with little to no built-in safeguards to protect against criminals abusing their power? Are people in positions of power screened carefully, and monitored? Are accusations taken seriously?
There are noticeable signs if an organization is set up to empower the individual, or to gather and abuse power. The same is true for informal groups.
One of the warning signs I have learned to watch for in "natural" non-hierarchical situations is people talking about how informal they are about power. If the informal group is organized "democratically" and doesn't want to discuss ground rules ("artificial" rules about power) it is often the case that one or two members dominate the group, in sly, manipulative ways. Challenge that organic power in any way, and watch how quickly you are punished.
The key is to look for these signs - not to avoid any situation that superficially resembles a situation in which we've been the victim of an abuse of power. Getting screwed by a bad contract you sign doesn't mean that you should never sign another contract. It means you should read it carefully, and maybe even consult a lawyer before you sign!
I think it's telling that, when going into business with a friend, one of the most common pieces of advices is to make sure you have your agreement in writing! Rather than being the source of all misery, a formal, "artificial" power structure that is entered into knowingly by both parties is probably one of your best protections against abuse.
-
@Takamba said
"Did I mention I love RobertAllen?"
Praise indeed, and from such a snappy dresser! Tell me, where do you get those stunning tin foil hats, or do you make them yourself?
Love and Will
-
Any people in scandinavia?
-
Robert Allen had some great insight as well, esp. in his assessment of the "post-modern" features.
We need judgement.
We need an organizing principle.
We need hierarchy.
To channel these powers efficiently and effectively.There are shepherds and sheep. This is nature.
I've been in the midst of groups such as you mention and they are typically populated by passive-aggressive sensitives who don't like differences being pointed out, resent authority and make virtues out of their collective weakness.
-
@Dar said
"To channel these powers efficiently and effectively...
Channel them where?
Outwards? Downwards? Horizontally?"
Group, authority, hierarchy, support...
It's hard to have much of a real discussion or even to communicate ones own position effectively without defining the terms. I am reminded by recent posts, including my own, that there is a lot of variation on what constitutes success. There may even be some disagreement as to whether success is a viable concept because it tends to imply popular and financial considerations—old patriarchal ideas intended to dumb down creative energy and make it safe for the powers that be.
Every now and then someone will challenge me with the question: what are you trying to do with this thing you are making? Most of the time this is just an initial volley designed to talk me into a more conservative approach. They want me to make something already understood and generally accepted as 'good' because it flatters a target audience and sells tickets.
More often than not, my answer is not satisfactory to this person. It usually takes the form of something along these lines: because the artists need to connect with their own creative impulses, and It is my hope that this effort will be visible in the final project and form the primary image for the audience, who will then take this 'sense of permission and possibility' home with them as a stirring in their own hearts to engage the world creatively.
There are other models. The salon model for example, which is simply a place where people can share and feel supported. This is good for the growth of the individuals, but rarely is transformational outside the group except in very indirect way.
Love and Will
-
@Dar said
"Do you recall the film about 'Temple Grandin'?
"No, I don't know the film. I will go to the movies, though film is not a big deal for me, so I miss a lot in that respect.
@Dar said
"We make our art and we sacrifice our blood, our sweat and our tears to it, and these are not a lesser sacrifice to the Goddess. As an artist - in what do you trust?"
I'm not so sure we sacrifice our creativity so much as it sacrifices us.
What do I trust? I trust that I will be creative tomorrow. That this energy is infinite and equal to all eventualities. Also, if we should fail, utterly and beyond redemption or renewal, it will only be because we forgot this essential truth about creativity. l also trust my desires because I can know these better than anything else.
At the same time I understand Saturn's anxiety—the creative imagination is equally dark as it is bright. People who eat their children have my sympathy as much as I give my respect to those who propagate wildly.
Love and Will
-
@RobertAllen said
"
@Dar said
"Do you recall the film about 'Temple Grandin'?"No, I don't know the film. I will go to the movies, though film is not a big deal for me, so I miss a lot in that respect.
"It is called Temple Grandin, it was produced by HBO. It shouldn't be difficult to find.