Archives for May 2018

I don’t like to compete, especially for something that has less value than another human being (read: money, attention, etc.). I figured if someone wants to win so badly, they can have the prize.

I began competing in the dance world when I was 6. My parents protected my sanity by always asking, “are you enjoying yourself?” I enjoyed the learning, but the battle of competition was just weird.

The idea of sharing authentic joy was so ingrained in my being that I remember sitting in the balcony at competition with my friends trying to figure out if fellow competitors were smiling authentically. Were they really were enjoying themselves? Or were they just putting on an act?

The word compete has been used in two ways over the course of its history. One has to do with a coming together in the pursuit of a common end. The other literally means to set in rivalry. I think it’s interesting that today, we live in a fundamentally competitive culture that recognizes a spectrum from friendly competition to rivalry when the truth of the spectrum is more likely cooperation to competition.

There’s an old saying from the days of Vaudeville Theatre that says a performer should never follow an act that features kids or animals. Why? You’ll never overcome the cuteness factor.

I’ve had my fair share of challenges on the stage, having to follow a burlesque act, break dancers, and once, Savion Glover. There’s a particular skill set that is learned from those situations.

First we learn what intimidation feels like. The idea that whatever you do will never amount to what just happened. That feeling that you (not just your performance) will never be enough.

Then we learn how to hold our own space. We begin to measure our own value, not relative to any particular achievement but to the standard laid on our own heart born of Love. We don’t shoot for what just happened, we shoot for what we’re supposed to bring.

With that in mind we develop techniques of listening to where the audience is, meeting them where they are, guiding them to where we want to be, and then sharing what we have to share.

It happens everywhere, when someone captures the imagination of the audience, there is no going back. But what if what we bring just adds to that moment, in a different way, with a different perspective, with a different voice?

I say bring on the kids, the animals, the famous people, and the amazing ones. I’ll be rooting for you, as I wait my turn in the wings.

In a world that seems to be steeped in deconstruction, disruption, and dismantling. Those of us who see this have an ability to respond with construction, healing, and rebuilding. Not only does this go for institutions, but also, individuals. Wherever we work, whatever our skills, if we see things breaking, we have a responsibility to work in the opposite direction.

Be careful of a sharp intellect, especially if it’s your own. The sharpness of the mind is a beautiful thing when set on a path defined be values that bring life to the world. However set without guardrails the sharpness is set to defending our own choices, solving whatever challenge is before us, and gaining advantage in the world, for the sake of survival (or some other lesser good).

I’ve seen the kindest of people defend their own desires with the sharpness of a samurai sword disregarding the world views others hold. Or maybe it’s not disregard, but rather a willingness to set those views aside as not applicable, out-dated and outmoded, on account of an ability to think themselves out of having to ascribe to any of such views.

We should be careful when the mind becomes more important than the heart. Lest intellect becomes the next shiny object we chase at the cost of our neighbor.

I recently participated in this Long Table discussion about the decolonization of dance. Of all the comments that struck me during the two hour session this one hit the most:

Dance is an act of physical labor, and our culture does not value physical labor.

After some thought, I would actually go one further. We live in a society that advocates the delegation of all physical labor (aside maybe from exercise) for the sake of pursuing “our passions.”

This idea of what work is valued, who is deciding how work is valued, and what ramifications the settings of those values have, is intertwined with all the power structures that exist in our society – economic, political, and social.

Here’s the thing. If we don’t like how a particular system is functioning all we have to do is build a new one. Every entrepreneur is taught that. But the builders of the new systems take on a responsibility, and so do everyone affected and involved in a situation such as this. That is to care more about the people than the systems before them did. Otherwise we will get more efficiency, more policy, more money, maybe more diversity, but we won’t get more humanity.

There is an important difference between miscommunication and misconception.

Miscommunication happens when language is confused. Take this example: I use a series of words to attempt to convey a thought and one or two of those words take on a different meaning than intended in the listeners ear. The initial idea is heard differently than intended. Any further communication will be confusing, unless the miscommunication is identified and rectified. Miscommunication can be remedied with continued questions, adapting language, giving examples, using drawings, and other forms of thorough communication. The conversation keeps going until the initial idea is conveyed, and all parties learn something as they discover the source of the miscommunication – often just that one word that was heard differently.

Misconception is a deeper issue. Misconception has to do with a misalignment in how different people imagine a particular idea. Here’s a simple example. When I say the word “apple” what first comes to mind? Is it a deep red apple, a green Granny Smith, the snap of a Fuji apple, or the company that makes the iPhone? Each one of these options is a conception of the word apple. The concepts around words bring with them inherited meanings of purpose, sensations, and application. If concepts are misaligned communication can’t happen. We end up talking past one another. Think for a minute about what misalignment of the concepts of government, marriage, religion, or love, might lead to.

Here’s the thing. We often take the concepts we carry for granted. We don’t question them. We believe them, whatever they may be, to be correct, and shared by those around us. They are integral to our operating in the world. But we need to be careful. Misconception is often confused for miscommunication, but is actually a deeper problem, and needs different conversations to solve.

There are two points on the spectrum of generosity. Those who only give, and those who only take. Somewhere in the middle are those who do whatever work they need to do, and simply receive the provision they need to work. No quid pro quo.

Those who only give often find themselves struggling to survive, unable to “take care of themselves,” and overwhelmed by the needs they see and want to fulfill.

Those who only take, find themselves isolated, bitter, and often thinking they still don’t have enough.

Those who simply receive may find themselves most concerned about where the provision might come from, what work they are supposed to be doing, and often separated from the dominant culture.

There’s always a tension. The question is how does one resolve it? Give less? Give more? Pray more?

A funny thing happens when you count yourself bound to another human being. Whether through blood, adoption, or something deeper. You become a part of everything they are going through. And everything they are going through is connected to everything they have gone through already. They also become the same with you.

It is much easier to build institutions that help from afar, that circumvent vulnerability, that value speed and achievement over relationship. Then there are those who attempt the deep work of individual healing, going deep, one-on-one with the warring factions in the hearts of people. More power to these workers, for the greatest miracle is the re-birth of the human heart, a change at the seat of intention, a reframing of the entire world through the eyes of one person.

Imagine if this kind of change was multiplied!!