notes on art-making and dialogue

I am investigating the role of the visual arts as a means of providing ease of entrance into deep and healing dialogue. The process of art-making holds the potential of moving the individual participant into a distinctively positive psychological condition. Movement from left to right brain functioning is a common experience among visual artists and is attended by consistent sensations or mental states that are considered desirable. I have personally experienced this and have repeatedly heard students describe the benefits. Some of those experiences have been expressed as:

·        a general sense of well-being

·         feeling a sense of empowerment/security in owning this activity as a creative resource

·         an increased awareness of  intrapersonal communication and self-talk

·         confidence in the ability to be genuinely creative

·         a greater openness to the world

Deep and healing dialogue can occur when right brain processes are combined with an intentionally safe environment, unconditional acceptance and dialogic intention and facilitation. Positive benefits do surface.   Martin Buber's work in dialogics provides a rich foundation for understanding the healing transition from what he calls the “I-it” to the “I-Thou” of essence dialogue that offers rare transformative engagement.

 “It is characteristic for I-Thou relations that only in them real encounter happens when all is

left behind, all preconceptions, all reservedness is given up, when one fully engages in the

encounter with the other and carries on a real dialogue with him. The relation to the Thou is

immediate." Martin Buber

the way we do things....

 

" We have the power and freedom to use communication to create the social worlds we desire." Katherine Miller  

       Katherine Miller discusses the constraining power of communication and its almost diabolical (my adjective) tendency toward calcification. In my 27 year experience in a non-profit organization, I have seen creative risk, personal growth and helpful organizational progress blocked because of communication constructed and then carefully protected from the threat of change. "The way we do things","the proper channels", and "red tape" are telling statements that illustrate a kind of "communcation" that is resistant to change and deadening to effective interaction. ( In evangelical lyric: “I shall not be, I shall not be moved”).

a response

I am sure that many of these posts tend toward dry and boring to the casual reader. It is my hope, though, that the words will prevail and the reader will not "bounce" off the page. The following is a response to a group project on the Marxist-based Critical Theory as it relates to communication. Naomi is my energetic, young, creative partner in this.

Naomi and I were challenged and changed by our exploration of the Critical Theory and we want to offer a brief response to all the reading, video viewings, and discussions on Skype. It is delightful to permit and observe in yourself the altering of assumptions. Stan Deetz remarks that, “to engage life in a fresh and new way puts at risk what we took for granted.”

Our study led Naomi to see the value of Critical Theory for personal empowerment. When the ability to actualize our power as individuals, as humans, is denied, we are in a sense prevented from being fully human.  We are dehumanized. When we are given the tools to rise from this cage placed upon us by society as marginalized members of society, we have the privilege of being free to create. When we are able to create we help each other to grow as a culture. Her discovery dovetails with mine.

I began our study with stunted enthusiasm. The Marxist-born theory initially seemed colorless and harsh. It morphed gloriously. Naomi says it well,

“UNBELIEVABLE!!! Makes my mind hungry!” (NaomiSkype IM.2011).

My perceptual shift happened while watching a YouTube video by Stan Deetz. He talks about the limitations we place on situations when perceiving a problem as “fixed.” By doing this we shut out creativity and leave place for discussion only. If a thing is “fixed”, nothing changes. His enthusiasm for deep reflection, and creativity that precedes collaborative action displaced my previous view and redefined Critical Theory for me.

“You do not think out of the box by commanding the box! You think out of the box precisely by bringing ideas together that don't allow dominant ideas to continue to dominate.” Stan Deetz

Toward the middle of assembling the final presentation for this project, we both laughed at how this project loosely reflects the very elements of the Critical Theory that resonate with us: The overworked marginalized Gonzaga students are presented with vast amount of information that must fit on twelve Power Point slides. Instead of simply complaining and laboring in discussion of the issue, we were empowered to rise above the cage placed upon us. Through acceptance of the issue, deep reflection, and creative thinking, we arrived, as Deetz says, “at something fairly radical.” The twelve slide presentation offers information equal to approximately eighty slides through the use of imagination, technology, and loss of sleep. Critical Theory rules. 

I will post the product this next week.

committed deviants

In my conservative adult life I never read the New York Times. In recent years, though, I have had a high regard for much that I read there. My understanding of its place in the scheme of things is broadened. I guess we would all like to think that these powerful media kingpins  possess impeccable integrity, but probably few of us can claim that, so we probably should not be too disappointed that these Supermediapowers may also walk on the shady side.  British Prime Minister William Pitt succinctly stated, "Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it." Awareness of the propensity of the media to set agenda and for large portions of the population to blindly buy into acceptable ways of thinking certainly goes a long way toward providing us clarity and objectivity as we listen to what mass media dispenses.

I find comfort in the small group of “doubting Thomas” journalists (e.g. the Knight Ridders, Bob Simon, etc) It is heartening to know there are brave and discerning souls out there serving as a voice for objectivity at risk of job and reputation. Moscovici, the French psychologist, lauds the valuable impact of these “committed deviants” on public opinion. If so, we might hope for an growing membership.

I have been outside the TV grid for about 20 years or more. I am not certain this is a positive thing, but it has served to shield me somewhat from the impact of that commanding mass media tool. Communication theorist, Noelle-Neuman “regards all types of media as agents of that hypothetical sixth sense” whereby we sense the social climate . Culture testifies to the persuasiveness of Oprah. This is a household name to many who follow her daily. I wonder if being part of that bunch of “committed deviants” who serve as a contemporary Paul Reveres ( mass media could be lying, mass media could be distorting), might entail aborting the influence of these types of personalities by either curbing our viewing or by being more intentional and aware when we do engage those potent influencers.

"Buying the War"

Note:
This is a response to Bill Moyer's documentary, "Buying the  War"(http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/btw/watch.html). I am looking at the contents of this film through the lens of theory: Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann's "Spiral of Silence"* and the "Agenda Setting Theory"* of Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw.


For much of my adult life I ascribed to a conservative “Christian Right” agenda  (Berlet, 2004). Concerning the war on Saddam post 911, I was appended to all that supporting the war included.  I love the New Yorker cartoon depicting a fat cheetah pollster in a trench coat holding a clipboard and pen. He is asking the housewife if she has ever owned a fur coat (Griffin, 2009, p. 377). The look on her face characterizes me post 911.I would have said “no” with enthusiasm (honestly would not have noticed it was a cheetah). Had some flag-bedecked pollster come to my door asking if I supported the war, I would have invited him for tea. 

But in the past five or six years my paradigm has shifted significantly to a broader view.  At one time Bill Moyer’s documentary, “Buying the War”, would have been to me a categorical heresy.   I still function in the same social, family, and church context and because of the stark differences that have occurred in me, I have learned to walk softly.  I don’t believe my carefulness is out of “fear of isolation” (Griffin, 2009, p. 373)  as much as reluctance to offend or labor at coercing others into joining me. I agree with Csikszentmihal and other scholars in their concern that  Noelle-Neumann focuses too narrowly in her “Spiral of Silence”* on fear as the sole cause of silence.  I believe that the few friends I have who share my political thinking have served to keep me from succumbing to the pressure to conform to these views that no longer resonate in me.

Moyer’s documentary is disturbing.  I remember my mindset as we entered the war. I was one of that large mixed group cheering Bush with no reservation. I am left feeling not just a little bit duped. I have heard about these possibilities, but had no idea the scope of it. Neumann writes of the kinds of people who “form this vocal minority that remains at the top of the spiral in defiance of threat of isolation. She calls them the “hard core and the avant-garde” (Griffin, 2009, p. 379). I don’t know how far up that spiral I have ascended in recent years, but I can look back and see I was indeed lower in the spiral for many years. I love the visual Neumann uses-- “The Downward Spiral of Silence” (Griffin, 2009, p. 378).

One of the building blocks of Noelle-Neumann’s model of public opinion is the hesitancy of individuals to voice minority views (Griffin, 2009, p. 377). In the face of exceptional support of Bush’s war plan, we see a remnant refusing to buy the argument for the war. This attests to the balance of media power and personal choice that McCombs and Shaw conclude as distinctive of the agenda-setting theory (Griffin, 2009, p. 360). Bob Simon, Jonathan Landay, Eric Boehlert , and Phil Donahue are a few mentioned in this interview who affirm that there is indeed a choice in the face of mass media noise.

But personal choice can be and is influenced by mass media.  Could it be that a default position that attests  the comfortable assumption people will choose freely is much easier than confronting  the ethics of honest motives?   These are clever people who know that “Terrorist attacks and their aftermaths are also the moments in which audiences are most vulnerable, anxious, and eager to watch” (Liebes, 1998). These “guardians of political dialogue” (Moyers, 2007)  hold a place of epic duty that was clearly ignored.

 “We look to news professionals for cues on where to focus our attention. ‘We judge as important what the media judge as important’” (Griffin, 2009, p. 359). In Moyer’s interview Bob Simon relates the methods of the “gatekeepers,”  “Just repeat it and repeat it and repeat it. Repeat Al Qaeda, Iraq. Al Qaeda, Iraq. Al Qaeda, Iraq. Just keeps it going. Keep that drum beat going. And it was effective because long after it was well established that there was no link between Al Qaeda and the government of Iraq and the Saddam regime, the polls showed that an overwhelming majority of Americans believed that Al Qaeda… that Iraq was responsible for September 11th.”  Psychologist Serge Muscovici  joins Neumann in pinning hopes on the two groups (avant- garde and the hard core) who will divest the spiral of silence of its power, but he adds another , “the committed deviants”…a minority that stands firm (Griffin, 2009, p. 379). The avant-garde are an isolated bunch. The hard –core may be subject to intolerance, but this bunch of firm-standing folks pursuing a cause may be those who interrupt that incessant drumbeat the mass media tries to pass off as truth.

*Note on the “Spiral of Silence"

A theory developed by Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann.  “The Spiral of Silence is the increasing pressure people feel to conceal their views when they think they are in the minority” (Griffin, 2009).

* Note on the "Agenda-Setting Theory"

A theory developed by journalism professors Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw that states, " The mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their news agenda to the public agenda" (Griffin, 2009).

References

Berlet, C. (2004). Guide to the Christian Right. Retrieved February 1, 2011, from Political Research Associates: http://www.publiceye.org/christian_right/cr_intro.html

Griffin, E. (2009). Communication: a first look at communication theory. New York, NY: McGraw Hill Higher Education.

Liebes, T. (1998). Television's disaster marathons: A danger to democratic processes? (T. C. Liebes, Ed.) Media, ritual, and identity.

Moyers, B. S. (2007, April 25). Buying the War. (B. Moyers, Interviewer)

 Photo credit:  http://tenniswritercoug.blogspot.com/2010/04/those-never-silenced.html