Finally i come to talk of talking to Francois and Steve way back last summer - its made to feel even further away than i thought as i sit here in many layers, trying like the cows outside to take some heat from the low but clear sun in a draft free spot.
Anyway, like Steve, at the time, directly after and for some weeks i found the conversation didnt sit well - it was difficult. I tried hard to understand why.....was it too challenging, not what i expected, frustrating, confusing...did I like Steve expect to go and have the practice confirmed, applauded perhaps? No, i think, i went originally because i have always liked what Francois says - he seems relevant, often states the difficult to hear point, challenges the usual rhetoric and doesnt seem to care if it upsets, triggers debate or causes complaint. So what was my problem because he did just that [i now realise that how i felt was like i feel after a really hard crit - sad, a bit dispondent and like the problems too big], its just i can only hear that on reflection, by listening again.
In the heat of the day all i could hear was: Me, im doing what i want for me - to nourish me. It made me cross, it sounded selfish, self serving and ridiculous in the current climate. You can hear if you listen i try to keep asking - Then why make your comments public? Your opting out? You have a reputation and so how can someone earlier in their career cause a reaction by just writing a blog? We need to 'do' something?...and so on. I am a woman drawn to action, i don't often go quietly and see a world that seems full of a people doing their own thing for their own ends and this doesnt seem to make it any better.
Now I see his points as insightful, useful, good and in a positive way subversive. The anarchist statement he makes:"Dont vote it only encourages them" sums it up. I can see that the personal individual action is powerful, political and not an opting out, as i accuse him of, but perhaps a silent but deadly act. I know he doesn't want to tell people what to do but in fact if we all did our own thing, nourished ourselves, thought deeply about the state, education, arts, social justice - become properly responsible for ourselves and our doings then this collective reaction would have impact, would cause change, would from the bottom up cause rupture. The what appeared selfish at the time seems now to be the ultimate small change principle...how the trickle-down effect advocated by conservatives everywhere does not produce the sort of large-scale changes that are predicted. It is instead the trickle-up effect of self-organised systems that produce the biggest changes.
Francois is a teacher in the broadest sense - he advocates ideas, he offers thoughts, is paid to turn up and have an opinion, an opinion others are interested in. So from my position, as his student, i have learn't that yes, nourish yourself - get fit, ask the right things of yourself and your doings and gather a community however small and take over the world!
Anyway, like Steve, at the time, directly after and for some weeks i found the conversation didnt sit well - it was difficult. I tried hard to understand why.....was it too challenging, not what i expected, frustrating, confusing...did I like Steve expect to go and have the practice confirmed, applauded perhaps? No, i think, i went originally because i have always liked what Francois says - he seems relevant, often states the difficult to hear point, challenges the usual rhetoric and doesnt seem to care if it upsets, triggers debate or causes complaint. So what was my problem because he did just that [i now realise that how i felt was like i feel after a really hard crit - sad, a bit dispondent and like the problems too big], its just i can only hear that on reflection, by listening again.
In the heat of the day all i could hear was: Me, im doing what i want for me - to nourish me. It made me cross, it sounded selfish, self serving and ridiculous in the current climate. You can hear if you listen i try to keep asking - Then why make your comments public? Your opting out? You have a reputation and so how can someone earlier in their career cause a reaction by just writing a blog? We need to 'do' something?...and so on. I am a woman drawn to action, i don't often go quietly and see a world that seems full of a people doing their own thing for their own ends and this doesnt seem to make it any better.
Now I see his points as insightful, useful, good and in a positive way subversive. The anarchist statement he makes:"Dont vote it only encourages them" sums it up. I can see that the personal individual action is powerful, political and not an opting out, as i accuse him of, but perhaps a silent but deadly act. I know he doesn't want to tell people what to do but in fact if we all did our own thing, nourished ourselves, thought deeply about the state, education, arts, social justice - become properly responsible for ourselves and our doings then this collective reaction would have impact, would cause change, would from the bottom up cause rupture. The what appeared selfish at the time seems now to be the ultimate small change principle...how the trickle-down effect advocated by conservatives everywhere does not produce the sort of large-scale changes that are predicted. It is instead the trickle-up effect of self-organised systems that produce the biggest changes.
Francois is a teacher in the broadest sense - he advocates ideas, he offers thoughts, is paid to turn up and have an opinion, an opinion others are interested in. So from my position, as his student, i have learn't that yes, nourish yourself - get fit, ask the right things of yourself and your doings and gather a community however small and take over the world!

but never look to hard in the mirror - or the abys
ReplyDeleteFrancois has tried to leave the following here to no avail - i post it then for him...
ReplyDeleteReading this I was reminded of the lovely Robert Burns poem, 'To a Louse':
O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!
To be wise, witty and memorable in six line is the gift of a great poet. To
be reminded that how we see ourselves is not how others see us is a gift
always available, if we pay attention.
Reading your impression of me, I can see that, whatever else I was saying, I was resisting the role of authority. I’m glad that, if the immediate experience was difficult, you feel now that you got something from our conversation.
I have never tried to be an authority. I have always liked Peter Drucker’s joke that “we are using the word ‘guru’ only because ‘charlatan’ is too long to fit into a headline.”
I write to understand what I think and why. I feel lucky to have earned a
living by doing that for so long: no one pays me a salary. I would like to think that if people find value in what I write, it is because it is true and not because I wrote it. In other words, I believe that what is said matters, not who has said it. A truth does not become a lie on the tongue of a bad person; a lie does not become true when spoken by a good one. (Of course, it’s a bit more complicated than that, but it will do for now.)
François
Thank you Francois.
ReplyDeleteYes it's interesting having an opportunity to look again or at least hear again and I got a chance to listen to myself and get a different view of our encounter. I was telling Kate that I'm been employed to work as a Guru in Canada on a project so she will be really pleased to know that it's really as a Charlatan - she will say "I recon- that makes sense" or something and she'll be right. I told her though that sometimes we all need a guru and although I'm not going to call you that you did in a very positive way move us on.