Card from the Osho Zen Tarot
This thread on circles is getting some legs. It has generated a flood of responses at the Open Space email list, Dave Pollard picked it up and today Fast Company magazine’s blog quotes Dave. Wonderful!
And yet, my favourite response so far comes from my friend Ashley Cooper who emailed the OSLIST with this gem from the poet Osho:
“Your inner being, when it opens, first experiences two directions: the height, the depth. And then slowly, slowly, as this becomes your established situation, you start looking around, spreading into all other eight directions. And once you have attained to the point where your height and your depth meet, then you can look around to the very circumference of the universe. Then your consciousness starts unfolding in all ten directions, but the road has been one.”
it makes me think of looking around the circle, everyone in front of you and yet the road is just one. it also brings the sphere that someone mentioned (sorry i don’t know who) to mind. so is this what open space is trying to do… unfold people’s consciousness, offer an opportunity to look around the circumference of the universe?
Thanks, Ashley.
For those of you who may be so inclined, this blog now has an RSS feed which can be found at the bottom of the sidebar. Other than showing that my postings all happen in 1969, it seems to work okay.
I’ve been asking around about the properties of circles. Mostly I’ve been querying the OSLIST community and there have been some fine responses. My query began with a quote from the “script” I use when I open space in OST meetings:
Circles are really rather neat forms of geometry because they force us to have a look at things in a particular way. For example in a circle, we don’t really know who “the leader” is. In fact we may be forgiven for thinking that the leader is either not here, or is each one of us. And as a leader who is not here cannot do anything, it must be that each one of is a leader.
Also circles teach us that there are some things that can only be done by groups. For example, you will notice that this circle of chairs isn’t really a very good circle. It’s actually a strangely distorted ellipse. That is because for one person to set up a perfect circle of chairs on their own is a nearly impossible task. But I’ll show you a small miracle. I’ll stand in the centre here and ask all of you to stand by your chairs. Now square up so that you are facing me and when you’ve done that check to see that you are sitting slightly behind your two neighbours. Now sit down. Have a look around. You have just made a perfect circle. This is something only a group can do and it took only a few seconds. If I had had to do that it would have taken me hours. This is important to note. It’s as if we all carry the coordinates for calibrating a circle within us but they can only be activated by acting along with several others.
Finally, here’s one more thing about a circle. If I stand in the middle then you will all agree that you are looking at me. But none of you will agree that you have the same view of me. You can see me, but your perspective is absolutely unique. It is not shared by anyone else. We agree on the object of our observation but none of us share the same perspective. Remember that today as we work on these issues. Without each perspective we would not have a full picture. If you were all behind me then none of you could say with certainty that I had a face. By surrounding me we have the whole picture, but we have to ask one another about the pieces that we are missing. If you folks sitting behind me want to know how many fingers I’m holding up, you have to ask this person I’m facing. That’s how it is with problems too. Remember that today.
Today, Alex Kjerulf, showed up with an amazing quote from the Danish polymath Piet Hein who once famously said:
“Man is the animal that draws lines which he himself then stumbles over. In the whole pattern of civilization there have been two tendencies, one toward straight lines and rectangular patterns and one toward circular lines. There are reasons, mechanical and psychological, for both tendencies. Things made with straight lines fit well together and save space. And we can move easily – physically or mentally – around things made with round lines.”
He was in the process of inventing the “super ellipse” which is a shape that mediates rectangular and circular tendencies.
Flemming Funch points to a great collection of citizen participation resources, which includes Open Space Technology and 62 other approaches to helping groups converse and make decisions.
I love collections like this. As a facilitator, I mostly design my own processes and tools for meetings depending on what the client wants. Open Space Technology is really the only “fixed” process I use. I draw heavily on Appreciative Inquiry, scenario planning, and a variety of other approaches to group work in all the design work I do, so it’s great to come across these kinds of tools to refresh my memory and spark new thinking. With a week full of designing and facilitating non-OST meeting ahead of me, Ming’s link couldn’t have come at a better time.
We’ve come to the end of the blog swap experiment, and here are my thoughts about it:
First of all, it has enriched my blog. Chris introduced some new topics to my blog, and the depth of his thinking and writing are an inspiration for me. Especially his thinking on the nature of this experiment just blew me away. He wrote very eloquently about it here, and I for one, will certainly try to shift my thinking on blogs from a “place” metaphor to a “pants” metaphor from now on :o)
I found myself getting a little worried that the swap would create some confusion and chaos for readers of my blog. If you’re just a casual visitor, you might never notice that the posts this week are not mine, and would people wonder why I’m suddenly into aboriginal music? I thought about this and decided that creating a little chaos and confusion once in a while is really a good thing, and to just lean back and see what comes out of it.
Writing on Chris’ blog made me think more deeply about what I was writing. First of all, I wanted it to be something that was relevant to the people who regularly read here, but I also wanted the stuff to be good, so I probably spent a little more time on each post than I normally do.
A great big thank you to Chris. I admire him for trying this out, even though as he writes here, he was unsure about it. I could actually sense his reluctance when we emailed about the idea a while back (don’t ask me how but I could), but it was great to try it.
To me it has been weird, fun, confusing, chaotic, scary, new, uncomfortable, interesting, and much more. In short: A real learning experience (yaaaay). And now it’s back into my old, comfortable pants. I hope to see you there (here the pants metaphor gets a little shaky).