I use to love that song, "united we stand, divided we fall." I don't know if you remember it. The chorus continues 'and if we ever find our backs against the wall... we'll be together." Well it comes to mind now as I think about the Euro, that economic glue that is supposed to bind together tribes, more recently nation-states,that have traditionally been at war with each other through so much of history. When the economic crisis hit the world, my brother (the financial prophet whose counsel I take very seriously on such matters) indicated, if I didn't hear him wrong, that the Euro would be okay for a little while but pretty soon, the European Union (EU) nations would start bickering. Various countries within the EU would fare poorly and the rest of the countries would no longer want to carry them. In the EU's case, if that is what happens, a united Europe would fall back on the nation-state tradition to rescue it and go back to life as usual. Instead of 'falling' it would probably stand divided.
The EU has been an interesting and advanced experiment in learning what it means to live, relate, and try to grow together in close quarters as countries, cultures, languages collide but decide to provide the room required by respect for sovereign peoples. The Euro, the economic language crafted to facilitate exchange erasing borders between these countries, was a kind of half-way point between erecting a structure that envisaged one nation-state with multiple new municipalities (each previously a nation-state of its own) and the formal bi-lateral trade agreements that have been springing up in the last few decades around the world.
There is no question the EU form is cutting edge politico-international restructuring. And we are all still waiting with baited breath to see if this can work because we know that technology is pushing us closer together and we need to develop forms of co-existence that enable us to recognize our increasing interdependence, co-dependence, and dependence on each other. This much is true, even if we do not fall when divided, it is increasingly difficult for us to stand alone. Yet it would be paradoxical if the Euro, the very symbol of the glue binding these EU countries together in a new form of international unity caused the splitting up of its various constituent parts.
When we decided as a world to create and favor economic fictions that facilitate merchant trade over the barter system, or even over the idea that we would in fact eat what we killed, or farmed (cultivated), we were also thinking about getting closer to the many people we could not see with our own eyes as human populations grew and we invented new ways or found our long lost brothers and sisters in distant lands who introduced us to new ways of making and then earning our daily bread, rice, noodles etc. We also found the people who represented the products that others may have created but did not travel the oceans to sell -- brokers, merchants, traders, intermediaries... the beginning of white collar business. Into all of this, the idea of one form of value to ascribe to all products and goods exchanged could not be avoided and 'gold' was the easiest, most common and highest form of currency for such exchange. Since then the American dollar has been accepted as such common currency, the standard bearing value that every national currency compares itself to.
With the unification of the European nation-states and the development of a common EU currency, some of us have been allowed to dream a little of that time when the world will join in one economic effort, albeit loose-knit, joined by that certain economic thread that allows individuals to encounter each other in a world marketplace as fluid as an internet chatroom or a skype line. What is interesting is that communication technology is a more literal form of getting together. When I talk to my clients over skype from their offices or homes thousands of miles away, either we have a good connection and we are able to communicate, or we cannot and then we try again as long as we both have the intention to do so. Not so for an economic currency, another tool to engage in exchange. The Euro is not just a symbol of the European Union, it is a common form of valuing the various economies of the EU. As such, it can be the tool that divides; that makes some people, even entire nations, feel they have less than their EU neighbors and for those neighbors to feel they are better, greater, and to see clearly that they have more. You don't have to be an EU nation to go through that experience. Our economic fictions have facilitated our exploitation of our distant brothers and sisters for our own gain, and then to use that gain to belittle, exoticize, and 'colonize' those others. It is just a little less palatable to treat our neighbors that way when we have come to adopt them into our own tribe... hence, creating an expectation that we intend to take care of them when the going gets rough.
It is a test of the underlying connection, symbolized by the Euro, as to whether in this time of need for countries like Greece, Italy, and Spain, the EU finds itself as one or many. Perhaps the EU can retain its unity without the common currency ... certainly the U.K. has fared no better; even with its separate pound, it has a lot in common with its poorer EU cousins these days!
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Saturday, March 6, 2010
Management, Supervision, and Representation
There is a definite link between management, supervision, and representation, in a variety of settings. Recently, I have adopted a number of new roles, and in doing so adapted my prior learning to current surroundings. I notice in having done so, I now maintain and manage a business, supervise other attorneys, staff and their work even as I engage in many other tasks myself including client engagement, discussions, and input. In some ways these roles require the same skill sets, in others, completely different. But there is a link between them and it is important to define this link even as I come to better understand each of my new roles.
Reflecting upon these roles could significantly help me become more efficient, feel better or worse about the job I am doing, and bring to light the actual contribution I am making to those I supervise, and represent, and in turn, their contribution to my practice, business, and my own learning. I am certainly not alone in this position. Most corporate, legal, financial, and other managers are similarly placed. But this kind of self-review is more difficult when you are creating a new system from the ground up, and aside from colleagues in other firms or consultants or family and friends or client feedback, you are alone.
The trick to good supervision and management, I think, is to feel less alone. Listen well. Hear both compliments and criticisms from others for what they are. Keep your eyes and ears on the ground and keep your focus; and correct, correct, correct constantly. Correct yourself, correct your attorneys and staff and supercede if and when you have to, liberally. In the end, you have to trust your instincts to guide you in everything even those matters that may be new to you, because it is you who is ultimately responsible for your files, your clients, yours and your firm's reputation. You are more apt to make the correct tactical decisions (with the right team behind you) because you are taking the risks, big and small, everyday; no one else. A couple of instances in my litigation cases have already taught me that.
Obviously it is important to treat your attorneys and staff well. You rely on them and they need to know that you do so in order to rise to the level of responsibility you expect of them. Trusting them to do their job, will instill in them greater scrutiny of their own work, and greater respect for your critiques, comments, and suggestions. As with my children, a mutual respect and love enters the picture because of the kind of intimacy a small firm creates. I tend to applaud good and great work, and depending on the personality of my attorneys and staff, criticize openly or tacitly so they recognize the kind of expectations raised by the situation. A glass half-full person, I am more apt to see myself as blessed at the end of the day, no matter what a particular moment may have brought on during the day. And my attorneys and staff are reminded of this. Although they are counted on to do their jobs in a formidable manner, an error will not end anyone's life. We are on the path to learning and growing everyday. None of us is perfect; of that they will remind me as will others. However, because of such expectations I am apt to recruit only the very best and the brightest.
As for representation of clients, it is not dissimilar in nature to the above. There are elements of supervisory control that are required but also, a depth or intimacy without which you cannot gain client trust, to know the story as necessary to optimally represent that client. I have previously intimated that my goal with clients is growth -- theirs and mine. We teach each other to align to the quest and to provide the other with the tools necessary to reach our common destination. Clients can also vary. Some want more control over the process of representation, and a good deal of contact, and some less. This variation is often based on personality, but sometimes also on the specific needs of the situation. Litigation clients can, for instance, be very perturbed by the circumstances giving rise to the litigation and call for a good deal of closeness so that I can understand the story and situation quickly. Corporate clients sometimes have a transaction that needs to be completed yesterday in which case, learning the clients objectives is key but a good amount of independence may be required to complete documentation. Others are looking for long-term growth through relationship development and partnership.
Management of the business on the other hand, is more objective and independent of the interpersonal. Unlike supervision and representation, the feedback is clearer. Tracking informational, financial, and marketing data, is detail oriented administrative work. However, common elements surface -- the ability to delegate, supervise, keep focus akin to a supervisory mandate and the element of intimacy that comes from looking at details repeatedly, to see if there is improvement in the way attention is paid to them.
If this blogpost appears dry, it's because it is. There are so many aspects to practicing law and starting a new law firm and they are not all exciting in the way we tend to think of headline cases. Creating a sustainable law practice is a commitment day in day out and requires the kind of passion necessary to attend to the details of management, supervision, and representation. This is only possible with constant focus, the creation of trust and intimacy, and a commitment to learning with eyes wide open.
Reflecting upon these roles could significantly help me become more efficient, feel better or worse about the job I am doing, and bring to light the actual contribution I am making to those I supervise, and represent, and in turn, their contribution to my practice, business, and my own learning. I am certainly not alone in this position. Most corporate, legal, financial, and other managers are similarly placed. But this kind of self-review is more difficult when you are creating a new system from the ground up, and aside from colleagues in other firms or consultants or family and friends or client feedback, you are alone.
The trick to good supervision and management, I think, is to feel less alone. Listen well. Hear both compliments and criticisms from others for what they are. Keep your eyes and ears on the ground and keep your focus; and correct, correct, correct constantly. Correct yourself, correct your attorneys and staff and supercede if and when you have to, liberally. In the end, you have to trust your instincts to guide you in everything even those matters that may be new to you, because it is you who is ultimately responsible for your files, your clients, yours and your firm's reputation. You are more apt to make the correct tactical decisions (with the right team behind you) because you are taking the risks, big and small, everyday; no one else. A couple of instances in my litigation cases have already taught me that.
Obviously it is important to treat your attorneys and staff well. You rely on them and they need to know that you do so in order to rise to the level of responsibility you expect of them. Trusting them to do their job, will instill in them greater scrutiny of their own work, and greater respect for your critiques, comments, and suggestions. As with my children, a mutual respect and love enters the picture because of the kind of intimacy a small firm creates. I tend to applaud good and great work, and depending on the personality of my attorneys and staff, criticize openly or tacitly so they recognize the kind of expectations raised by the situation. A glass half-full person, I am more apt to see myself as blessed at the end of the day, no matter what a particular moment may have brought on during the day. And my attorneys and staff are reminded of this. Although they are counted on to do their jobs in a formidable manner, an error will not end anyone's life. We are on the path to learning and growing everyday. None of us is perfect; of that they will remind me as will others. However, because of such expectations I am apt to recruit only the very best and the brightest.
As for representation of clients, it is not dissimilar in nature to the above. There are elements of supervisory control that are required but also, a depth or intimacy without which you cannot gain client trust, to know the story as necessary to optimally represent that client. I have previously intimated that my goal with clients is growth -- theirs and mine. We teach each other to align to the quest and to provide the other with the tools necessary to reach our common destination. Clients can also vary. Some want more control over the process of representation, and a good deal of contact, and some less. This variation is often based on personality, but sometimes also on the specific needs of the situation. Litigation clients can, for instance, be very perturbed by the circumstances giving rise to the litigation and call for a good deal of closeness so that I can understand the story and situation quickly. Corporate clients sometimes have a transaction that needs to be completed yesterday in which case, learning the clients objectives is key but a good amount of independence may be required to complete documentation. Others are looking for long-term growth through relationship development and partnership.
Management of the business on the other hand, is more objective and independent of the interpersonal. Unlike supervision and representation, the feedback is clearer. Tracking informational, financial, and marketing data, is detail oriented administrative work. However, common elements surface -- the ability to delegate, supervise, keep focus akin to a supervisory mandate and the element of intimacy that comes from looking at details repeatedly, to see if there is improvement in the way attention is paid to them.
If this blogpost appears dry, it's because it is. There are so many aspects to practicing law and starting a new law firm and they are not all exciting in the way we tend to think of headline cases. Creating a sustainable law practice is a commitment day in day out and requires the kind of passion necessary to attend to the details of management, supervision, and representation. This is only possible with constant focus, the creation of trust and intimacy, and a commitment to learning with eyes wide open.
Monday, February 15, 2010
The Real Value of Olympic Gold Medals
Bilodeau won Olympic Gold and I am celebrating! He is the first Canadian olympic gold winner to do so in Canada... I cannot imagine how he feels but I know that I am there with him both in pride and in joy for his accomplishment. There are two main feelings this elicits for me: 1. national pride and what I suspect is the ultimate in belongingness that he must be feeling accomplishing this feat on home ground; and 2. joy at the groundedness with which he humbly accepts his accomplishment -- attributing his success to his teammates and to his brother who suffers from cerebral palsy and who will never have the opportunity to strive physically for the kinds of challenges Alexandre can.
On the first, national pride: this is a strange one to explain for someone who considers herself fairly international. I have previously spoken of the globalization of our myriad communities into a planetary amalgam and I sense its impact on my very international identity. Yet, there is no denying the welling up of emotion at the utter triumph of any individual working their 'b...' off and getting that which is so fitting and deserved on the one hand, nor the over the top joy that he is a fellow national. Canada does feel like a tribe that has adopted me and one can feel a true debt to countries that decide to accept one after birth in a different country because they do have the choice of rejecting you when you apply for citizenship. But it is not just that. Canadians don't gloat... they don't shout their accomplishments from the rooftops because of some aspect of their cultivated nature (it appears to be a bit more ingrained that culture). Canadians tend to accept accomplishment and triumph in an understated way and let others rejoice with them without making them jealous. They are simply sophisticated and classy in that sense, for which they are of course, loved, globally. There is no country on earth that will not accept and adopt Canadians as their own because of this quality... unless of course the people are completely crazy. In fact Americans even adopt Canada and Canadians, by extending their mantle to that country everyday.
Second, perhaps even more poignant is Alexandre Bilodeau's balanced view of his accomplishment in light of a different perspective. His brother, who suffers from cerebral palsy is not necessarily less fortunate than he, but he will certainly not have the opportunity to ski and feel what his brother feels when he is out there on skis. This is not to say that he cannot feel the focus of working hard or 'zoning'. But there is so much that his brother gains today in addition to his personal feelings performing his sport. He gains the recognition of his peers, the admiration of his country and its citizens along with those of the world. Alexandre is on the top of the world in his sport and right now all eyes are upon him.
However, even as his triumph is buoyed by the energy of the world's focus upon him, he is able to remain balanced by the support provided to him by his brother, who he rightly wants to bring on this journey of triumph with him. Family is after all the other level of belonging and support without which our success would be greatly challenged. Family starts it all and sometimes specific family members -- often siblings, spouses, and certainly supportive parents can make a world of difference between success and failure in our ventures, projects, and goals, as much as we may claim to rely entirely on ourselves.
What this gold medal represents is the gamut of emotion each of us engages in our quest for something good and fantastic to our imaginations but still allowed into our dreamworlds. That treasure chest on the pirate ship, paradise island, the perfect house or car, but even more accurate, writing the perfect story, painting the vision imprinted on the heart, meeting the one meant for you alone and keeping him/her, making that elusive but magnificently huge deal, landing that big case and 'winning it', or for you sports buffs, the perfectly hit 9 or 18 holes in the perfect or 'good enough' circumstances to be perfect, never mind the perfect tennis game or set, just the perfect few ground strokes (boy, I set that bar low!)...etc. We know that each and any of these objects or goals is not attainable without a great deal of struggle, years of hard work and preparation to get there and having a chance at shooting for that dream come true. Each one of us has wanted it at one time or another. Some of us have given up along the way. Some of us have sacrificed too much to get there and realized they shot for the wrong dream. Some of us still keep trying and will never surrender.
If there is anything the Olympics and the yearning they engender for those gold medal moments stand for, it is the hope that each of us can fulfill our own spirit; that each of us can shoot for that quest for all that is good in us and triumph just as it has in Alexandre Bilodeau attaining with it that sense of family, national, and global belonging, acceptance, and recognition! Even when not all of it can be perfect, the Olympics can reassure each of us that we deserve to complete the true potential of our essence and fulfill our dreams!
-- GDK
On the first, national pride: this is a strange one to explain for someone who considers herself fairly international. I have previously spoken of the globalization of our myriad communities into a planetary amalgam and I sense its impact on my very international identity. Yet, there is no denying the welling up of emotion at the utter triumph of any individual working their 'b...' off and getting that which is so fitting and deserved on the one hand, nor the over the top joy that he is a fellow national. Canada does feel like a tribe that has adopted me and one can feel a true debt to countries that decide to accept one after birth in a different country because they do have the choice of rejecting you when you apply for citizenship. But it is not just that. Canadians don't gloat... they don't shout their accomplishments from the rooftops because of some aspect of their cultivated nature (it appears to be a bit more ingrained that culture). Canadians tend to accept accomplishment and triumph in an understated way and let others rejoice with them without making them jealous. They are simply sophisticated and classy in that sense, for which they are of course, loved, globally. There is no country on earth that will not accept and adopt Canadians as their own because of this quality... unless of course the people are completely crazy. In fact Americans even adopt Canada and Canadians, by extending their mantle to that country everyday.
Second, perhaps even more poignant is Alexandre Bilodeau's balanced view of his accomplishment in light of a different perspective. His brother, who suffers from cerebral palsy is not necessarily less fortunate than he, but he will certainly not have the opportunity to ski and feel what his brother feels when he is out there on skis. This is not to say that he cannot feel the focus of working hard or 'zoning'. But there is so much that his brother gains today in addition to his personal feelings performing his sport. He gains the recognition of his peers, the admiration of his country and its citizens along with those of the world. Alexandre is on the top of the world in his sport and right now all eyes are upon him.
However, even as his triumph is buoyed by the energy of the world's focus upon him, he is able to remain balanced by the support provided to him by his brother, who he rightly wants to bring on this journey of triumph with him. Family is after all the other level of belonging and support without which our success would be greatly challenged. Family starts it all and sometimes specific family members -- often siblings, spouses, and certainly supportive parents can make a world of difference between success and failure in our ventures, projects, and goals, as much as we may claim to rely entirely on ourselves.
What this gold medal represents is the gamut of emotion each of us engages in our quest for something good and fantastic to our imaginations but still allowed into our dreamworlds. That treasure chest on the pirate ship, paradise island, the perfect house or car, but even more accurate, writing the perfect story, painting the vision imprinted on the heart, meeting the one meant for you alone and keeping him/her, making that elusive but magnificently huge deal, landing that big case and 'winning it', or for you sports buffs, the perfectly hit 9 or 18 holes in the perfect or 'good enough' circumstances to be perfect, never mind the perfect tennis game or set, just the perfect few ground strokes (boy, I set that bar low!)...etc. We know that each and any of these objects or goals is not attainable without a great deal of struggle, years of hard work and preparation to get there and having a chance at shooting for that dream come true. Each one of us has wanted it at one time or another. Some of us have given up along the way. Some of us have sacrificed too much to get there and realized they shot for the wrong dream. Some of us still keep trying and will never surrender.
If there is anything the Olympics and the yearning they engender for those gold medal moments stand for, it is the hope that each of us can fulfill our own spirit; that each of us can shoot for that quest for all that is good in us and triumph just as it has in Alexandre Bilodeau attaining with it that sense of family, national, and global belonging, acceptance, and recognition! Even when not all of it can be perfect, the Olympics can reassure each of us that we deserve to complete the true potential of our essence and fulfill our dreams!
-- GDK
Monday, January 18, 2010
A day to make strides - January 18
Today we celebrate the confluence of spiritual and legal rhetoric in the service of human rights. Martin Luther King Jr. (picking up where Mohandas Gandhi left off) is honored for striding for one's beliefs -- using passive resistance not taking up arms against our enemies and oppressors. Mandela too deployed this powerful tool in the service of his people against the South African government. Understanding the underbelly of humanity, they lead the way against colonial and racial oppression by their example of non-violence.
As great orators and politicians in their own right, these leaders mobilized large groups of people at a time when twitter, facebook, email, blackberry and smart phones did not exist. Pioneers of the grass roots movements, they had to convince through cogency, urgency, and the sustenance of defeat that they would not surrender. Initially only those closest to them would hear them out, and then slowly others began to realize the powerful meaning behind their actions of resistance. It was this example not of glorious battle and purple hearts, but their adherence to the principles cradling humanity in compassion, equality of opportunity and consideration, that they were worth following. Much like 'cool hand Luke' they took one punch after another, till they earned their stripes and the respect of the people they sought to lead, almost inadvertantly realizing the stature being bestowed upon them.
It is interesting too to understand that our current forte in marketing to the masses misses that grass roots appeal that can only come from doing not saying. What was this doing they did? These leaders realized that they had to take the punches and make themselves vulnerable in a way that frightened the people they sought to free from bondage. People could actually look at these leaders as the experimental but lived fantasy of a life first resisting the idea of oppression and then living a life free of it. Not unlike the experimental fantasy of flying finally lived by the Wright brothers, success involved a lot of hard knocks, literally. For as they lead others, they encountered the hand and club of the oppressor. Many of their followers died in that march for freedom, whether it was against the oppression of foreign colonization, or of racial segregation. Mandela actually fought both at the same time in its most ingrained form -- apartheid, and gave up twenty-five years of his life to imprisonment at the hands of his oppressors.
Where law and politics meet humanity, we must leave the classroom. We can bring the books with us to guide us, but we must count on our hearts to tell us the truth. It is a dark road through the brush that no one has dared to hack. To make way for a different consideration of the situation and to bring people along, the fight must be real and it must affect many. There are real fights in this world. There are situations that are being taken as normal but they are not normal. There are situations that many people know are not right, but because they provide comfort to some people with power, influence and money, others will not speak. Today these struggles are being taken up in many fora - personally in the home, politically in various agendas for change and reform, and legally as some of us fight for truth and justice. Today is a day to celebrate all such struggle and to support it if you have a chance!
As great orators and politicians in their own right, these leaders mobilized large groups of people at a time when twitter, facebook, email, blackberry and smart phones did not exist. Pioneers of the grass roots movements, they had to convince through cogency, urgency, and the sustenance of defeat that they would not surrender. Initially only those closest to them would hear them out, and then slowly others began to realize the powerful meaning behind their actions of resistance. It was this example not of glorious battle and purple hearts, but their adherence to the principles cradling humanity in compassion, equality of opportunity and consideration, that they were worth following. Much like 'cool hand Luke' they took one punch after another, till they earned their stripes and the respect of the people they sought to lead, almost inadvertantly realizing the stature being bestowed upon them.
It is interesting too to understand that our current forte in marketing to the masses misses that grass roots appeal that can only come from doing not saying. What was this doing they did? These leaders realized that they had to take the punches and make themselves vulnerable in a way that frightened the people they sought to free from bondage. People could actually look at these leaders as the experimental but lived fantasy of a life first resisting the idea of oppression and then living a life free of it. Not unlike the experimental fantasy of flying finally lived by the Wright brothers, success involved a lot of hard knocks, literally. For as they lead others, they encountered the hand and club of the oppressor. Many of their followers died in that march for freedom, whether it was against the oppression of foreign colonization, or of racial segregation. Mandela actually fought both at the same time in its most ingrained form -- apartheid, and gave up twenty-five years of his life to imprisonment at the hands of his oppressors.
Where law and politics meet humanity, we must leave the classroom. We can bring the books with us to guide us, but we must count on our hearts to tell us the truth. It is a dark road through the brush that no one has dared to hack. To make way for a different consideration of the situation and to bring people along, the fight must be real and it must affect many. There are real fights in this world. There are situations that are being taken as normal but they are not normal. There are situations that many people know are not right, but because they provide comfort to some people with power, influence and money, others will not speak. Today these struggles are being taken up in many fora - personally in the home, politically in various agendas for change and reform, and legally as some of us fight for truth and justice. Today is a day to celebrate all such struggle and to support it if you have a chance!
Monday, January 4, 2010
Google gets it right today - Happy New Year! Dream A little.
It is another January 4th, a day to celebrate the birth of Sir Isaac Newton, and to dream as we begin another year. Typically we are also back to work after the celebrations. As you Google, an apple falls down to remind you where you are -- on this earth where gravity can be perceived. You are not on the moon or the outer heavens, where your dreams may reside, but here among the trees, mountains, lakes, and cities of this planet. Newton brings you back down to earth just as that apple served the same purpose for him as he was dreaming away under an apple tree. More of us more often should find ourselves under a tree (maybe not a coconut tree), we are liable to hit upon a good idea.
As we embark on a new year, we can take note of the fact that we must both dream and keep our feet on the ground in order to correctly implement the ideas we originate. Dreaming is important because it connects us to our hearts. Unless our hearts have been terminally or fatally wounded, we can connect with ourselves deeply and create both the food and the thought that can light at least a generation to do good and serve humanity. But this is not enough, we must also locate ourselves on the ground and find ways to implement our ideas. There is no better way to put our ideas into practice than to practice them ourselves if at all we can. There is also little getting away from the fact that we will each of us make mistakes in doing so. But with some diligence and time, we will be able to break new ground with each new year as it renews our hope in life's changes and in our capacity for growth.
Just as an apple, fruit of a tree nourished by the love of the earth, and the dreams of the sun and clouds poured upon it, falls from the branches to be enjoyed by others below, our ideas can be enjoyed only when they have a practical use and nourish or serve others or the earth itself, now that this planet appears to need our help. This metaphor can ripple on infinitely of course, for we too are both like the apple -- as our ideas are made real through application, and its seeds bearing trees of their own -- sometimes sprouting an entire industry with one idea.
Shiny red and juicy, we ourselves are bound up with all the possibilities of a gift wrapped tight and surrounded by a hundred bows and ribbons beckoning each other's anticipation at what lies beneath. But consider for a moment that each of us is a very special package that itself changes depending on how it is touched, considered, taken in, respected, abused, maligned, or depended upon, relied upon and simply, made to feel. This brings in a highly important aspect of our ability to do anything, to dream, to create, to perform, to be good to one another, to be responsible etc. As much as we would love to take for granted that we could create apples like the apple tree, we are forced to deal with human dynamics and acknowledge we do not live in social vacuums of our own making.
This great complex of human relationships can exact a heavy toll on the creative possibility of each of us. How shiny is our package after all, how vulnerable is it to the acid rain others may pour on us? How much respect do we each and all of us need to be our best selves? There are about seven billion of us on this planet; every genius who has ever existed in human history is on the planet now, my older brother tells me. We know this because the total number of earth's human inhabitants totals as many humans as have lived throughout human history. How do we allow the genius in each of us to shine through? Without hurting other geniuses? Yes we have rules, regulations, and legal systems to protect and enable. But at the basic level, we must count on each other. So much happens in the private realm that is not regulated and cannot be regulated and requires each of us to grow and mature so that we can "see" each other a la 'Avatar' (yes I saw it over the holidays).
With this new year, as each of us tries to do our best to dream and fashion the change we want to develop in our lives, perhaps we need to be mindful of the change we can enable in those of others. Perhaps our dreams are not diminished as others are allowed to explore and implement theirs.
As we embark on a new year, we can take note of the fact that we must both dream and keep our feet on the ground in order to correctly implement the ideas we originate. Dreaming is important because it connects us to our hearts. Unless our hearts have been terminally or fatally wounded, we can connect with ourselves deeply and create both the food and the thought that can light at least a generation to do good and serve humanity. But this is not enough, we must also locate ourselves on the ground and find ways to implement our ideas. There is no better way to put our ideas into practice than to practice them ourselves if at all we can. There is also little getting away from the fact that we will each of us make mistakes in doing so. But with some diligence and time, we will be able to break new ground with each new year as it renews our hope in life's changes and in our capacity for growth.
Just as an apple, fruit of a tree nourished by the love of the earth, and the dreams of the sun and clouds poured upon it, falls from the branches to be enjoyed by others below, our ideas can be enjoyed only when they have a practical use and nourish or serve others or the earth itself, now that this planet appears to need our help. This metaphor can ripple on infinitely of course, for we too are both like the apple -- as our ideas are made real through application, and its seeds bearing trees of their own -- sometimes sprouting an entire industry with one idea.
Shiny red and juicy, we ourselves are bound up with all the possibilities of a gift wrapped tight and surrounded by a hundred bows and ribbons beckoning each other's anticipation at what lies beneath. But consider for a moment that each of us is a very special package that itself changes depending on how it is touched, considered, taken in, respected, abused, maligned, or depended upon, relied upon and simply, made to feel. This brings in a highly important aspect of our ability to do anything, to dream, to create, to perform, to be good to one another, to be responsible etc. As much as we would love to take for granted that we could create apples like the apple tree, we are forced to deal with human dynamics and acknowledge we do not live in social vacuums of our own making.
This great complex of human relationships can exact a heavy toll on the creative possibility of each of us. How shiny is our package after all, how vulnerable is it to the acid rain others may pour on us? How much respect do we each and all of us need to be our best selves? There are about seven billion of us on this planet; every genius who has ever existed in human history is on the planet now, my older brother tells me. We know this because the total number of earth's human inhabitants totals as many humans as have lived throughout human history. How do we allow the genius in each of us to shine through? Without hurting other geniuses? Yes we have rules, regulations, and legal systems to protect and enable. But at the basic level, we must count on each other. So much happens in the private realm that is not regulated and cannot be regulated and requires each of us to grow and mature so that we can "see" each other a la 'Avatar' (yes I saw it over the holidays).
With this new year, as each of us tries to do our best to dream and fashion the change we want to develop in our lives, perhaps we need to be mindful of the change we can enable in those of others. Perhaps our dreams are not diminished as others are allowed to explore and implement theirs.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Philosophy, Logic and Imperfection
Someone I respected a great deal once told me that I am not a 'philosopher.' And they were right. I am not, at least not in the western sense of the word. Maybe also not in that sense of the word that says that I must speak to your mind only according to a certain logic, without which I cannot make 'philosophical' sense. If it means 'the love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means by moral self-discipline and observation of lived reality,' then that is the kind of philosopher I would be happy to be. As for logic, some of the people I admire most have also told me 'you have your own logic.' They meant it in the best sense, because when you use tools you have learned as just building blocks, and then integrate them into yourself, you create something different from what exists. If it is a regurgitation, you may be good... but you have not made it a part of yourself, and no mastery exists.
I grew up in a very smart home (no, not the kind with all the monitoring technology), brilliant brothers and mother, all more logical than I, but wonderful teachers. My father was/is a mathematician. And a certain rigor was commanded by the learning of that subject in our home. Along with this went much philosophizing about almost everything, a cultural necessity in a Kashmiri Brahmin home -- the relation of what we would read in the 'Gita' to daily life lived in a setting so far from all that was familiar and known: family, environment, our 'habitat' I want to call it.
Math was formative as was its logic. My father is very fond of the history of numbers and we grew up with these stories. The stories of discovery and pursuit of mathematical truths were as important as the discovery itself. Much like the admiration a disciple may have for his martial arts master, we were taught to revere the pursuit of learning, and in the case of math, the discovery. And so I remember the fibonacci sequence and other answers discovered that could not be contained. I think this aspect of mathematics fascinated me the most; that math was able to admit its own limitations in a sense, when it was overcome by nature, and nature's patterns. The most amazing numbers are those with no end!
This is what is amazing about life too. The decisions we take, the choices we make when they are made according to nature's plan... that is, from our own natural strength, albeit aware, still innocent and full of hope. It is in these moments that fascinating discovery can and does take place. It is in this place that limitations cease and infinity begins. It is where the heart, mind and muscles sense each other quickening with the pursuit of something necessary to the spirit, to the simple but full living of one's own life.
Infinity also is a place of so called 'imperfection.' The pattern of petals on a flower, or leaf arrangements on a branch, or even the ratio of parts of a human body known as the 'golden ratio.' It is infinity we really strive for, and yet in our drive for patterns we also conform. For humanity as a group must have a certain order also. Someone else must study these patterns to find the golden ratios in conformist behavior and human groupings. Why can we, human communities and patterns of conformity, not be like the petals on a flower or a leaf arrangement, after all?
Therein lies the tension: we strive for patterned order while seeking to breach the limitations of the stability and structure created. It is this story that we both repeat and love to tell in what we term the 'progress narrative.' What would be the point in telling the story if we did not feel that we had 'evolved' or gone beyond where we had previously been. Some say that after a war or invasion, it is the victors who write 'history.' And so whoever tells the story, also must make themselves look good, as having created something better than those who lost the battle. It is a bit of 'rubbing it in' to be sure, but that is not how our children will necessarily read it, we think. The ones who come immediately after us, for whom we have created the world we bring them into, and who benefit from our counsel as they grow up, will only embellish our story. If we are smart, we worry about 10 generations later for the real judgment when the 'revisionist' version is written.
Much of the law and legal structure come out of these stories of push and pull. The law is written and then rewritten, sometimes because there is a real need for order, sometimes because there is a real need to show that those who govern really can and do command the order we seek, or represent a 'new' order. An important part of law then is publicizing it, telling the story of it, even writing it out and plastering it in the village square so everyone can read it and know what the order of the day or year is, and who the governors may be.
Currently, it is a change in regime also, from republican to democrat. An ideological difference but one that is difficult to demarcate by simply changing laws and increased regulation. Where the content and substance changes, it is easy to see that a change has occurred. In the case of a simple increase in regulation over the same terrain it is more difficult to tell that change will mean a difference in the order or patterns of behavior created. For the latter, we really require implementation and enforcement. With enforcement of laws, the governing order incentivizes and penalizes a certain conformity in behavior, creating beautiful or ugly patterns. Where disorder reigns, we tend to be aesthetically offended: as in the financial crisis, and the rampant criminal behavior unlimited by regulation or by its enforcement.
It is these patterns I study and rely on in my paper on a new International Financial Tribunal because even as I and others seek to respond, it is important to be aware that we are pieces of a puzzle, hopefully ones that fit into the sweet albeit far from neat pattern of infinity breeding ideas of goodness and 'gold' (in the best sense of that word).
I grew up in a very smart home (no, not the kind with all the monitoring technology), brilliant brothers and mother, all more logical than I, but wonderful teachers. My father was/is a mathematician. And a certain rigor was commanded by the learning of that subject in our home. Along with this went much philosophizing about almost everything, a cultural necessity in a Kashmiri Brahmin home -- the relation of what we would read in the 'Gita' to daily life lived in a setting so far from all that was familiar and known: family, environment, our 'habitat' I want to call it.
Math was formative as was its logic. My father is very fond of the history of numbers and we grew up with these stories. The stories of discovery and pursuit of mathematical truths were as important as the discovery itself. Much like the admiration a disciple may have for his martial arts master, we were taught to revere the pursuit of learning, and in the case of math, the discovery. And so I remember the fibonacci sequence and other answers discovered that could not be contained. I think this aspect of mathematics fascinated me the most; that math was able to admit its own limitations in a sense, when it was overcome by nature, and nature's patterns. The most amazing numbers are those with no end!
This is what is amazing about life too. The decisions we take, the choices we make when they are made according to nature's plan... that is, from our own natural strength, albeit aware, still innocent and full of hope. It is in these moments that fascinating discovery can and does take place. It is in this place that limitations cease and infinity begins. It is where the heart, mind and muscles sense each other quickening with the pursuit of something necessary to the spirit, to the simple but full living of one's own life.
Infinity also is a place of so called 'imperfection.' The pattern of petals on a flower, or leaf arrangements on a branch, or even the ratio of parts of a human body known as the 'golden ratio.' It is infinity we really strive for, and yet in our drive for patterns we also conform. For humanity as a group must have a certain order also. Someone else must study these patterns to find the golden ratios in conformist behavior and human groupings. Why can we, human communities and patterns of conformity, not be like the petals on a flower or a leaf arrangement, after all?
Therein lies the tension: we strive for patterned order while seeking to breach the limitations of the stability and structure created. It is this story that we both repeat and love to tell in what we term the 'progress narrative.' What would be the point in telling the story if we did not feel that we had 'evolved' or gone beyond where we had previously been. Some say that after a war or invasion, it is the victors who write 'history.' And so whoever tells the story, also must make themselves look good, as having created something better than those who lost the battle. It is a bit of 'rubbing it in' to be sure, but that is not how our children will necessarily read it, we think. The ones who come immediately after us, for whom we have created the world we bring them into, and who benefit from our counsel as they grow up, will only embellish our story. If we are smart, we worry about 10 generations later for the real judgment when the 'revisionist' version is written.
Much of the law and legal structure come out of these stories of push and pull. The law is written and then rewritten, sometimes because there is a real need for order, sometimes because there is a real need to show that those who govern really can and do command the order we seek, or represent a 'new' order. An important part of law then is publicizing it, telling the story of it, even writing it out and plastering it in the village square so everyone can read it and know what the order of the day or year is, and who the governors may be.
Currently, it is a change in regime also, from republican to democrat. An ideological difference but one that is difficult to demarcate by simply changing laws and increased regulation. Where the content and substance changes, it is easy to see that a change has occurred. In the case of a simple increase in regulation over the same terrain it is more difficult to tell that change will mean a difference in the order or patterns of behavior created. For the latter, we really require implementation and enforcement. With enforcement of laws, the governing order incentivizes and penalizes a certain conformity in behavior, creating beautiful or ugly patterns. Where disorder reigns, we tend to be aesthetically offended: as in the financial crisis, and the rampant criminal behavior unlimited by regulation or by its enforcement.
It is these patterns I study and rely on in my paper on a new International Financial Tribunal because even as I and others seek to respond, it is important to be aware that we are pieces of a puzzle, hopefully ones that fit into the sweet albeit far from neat pattern of infinity breeding ideas of goodness and 'gold' (in the best sense of that word).
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Of Womanhood, Strengths and Challenges
This past week I was invited to speak at the Hague about my proposal for a new international finance court as a response to the enormous changes in the global financial system. The resulting complexity for transnational claimants has made litigating within national parameters increasingly difficult and limited. More than once other speakers remarked to me that the debate over the making of international law in this domain of finance would shift simply because the person making the contribution, namely myself, was different from the others. One fellow participant at the conference said, "You are a woman of diversity... India, Canada, the U.S. from a very different background. This will alter the discourse." I think there is some truth to this.
The definition of gender roles at this critical point in human history is important for law and human relationships and culture. There are cultures that are reactively calling us back to strict adherence to such roles, as in Islam. There are more secular cultures that assert the equal right of women to all experience and authority, and also accept gay and lesbian relationships at par with heterosexual ones although the members of such unions may be avidly religious. In most part, there exists some increased understanding and acceptance of women as different in their own right. I will come back to what I mean by this last statement.
Differences between men and women have been debated throughout time, as various agendas for labor distribution, location of power, misunderstandings and scholarly curiousity have played out. Carol Gilligan's and others' ground-breaking work on the difference in thinking between little boys and girls, has spilled out into a recognition perhaps that women contribute differently in both form and content. Little boys it was claimed in that small study are more outwardly focused and aggressive, where little girls are more empathic approaching each problem set from a place of understanding and inclusion as opposed to adversarial attack and separation. Clearly much can be gained by allowing both men and women to approach each problem to devolve a more holistic solution. Although to the contrary, segregating the sexes based on what are already seen as strengths and weaknesses of each gender may dampen competition between the sexes, given that predominantly men and women mate and make homes together. It makes things easier to have different roles, no?
However, if women approach problems differently, they change the dynamic of the subject, and the manner in which the subject itself may be handled. That is the problems that we have to solve themselves may be different if women contributed to their formation. Do we really need more problems? Some formed by women and some formed by men? No. The point is men have determined the parameters of content and form of problems todate. The combined effort may make for fewer and different problems, maybe easier problems?
This also directly impacts women's self-definition. I want to say that women themselves have a difficult time with self-definition. If the only way they have known themselves is by mainstream definitions provided from a male point of view, then all they can be is different from men. A quick example from my children's early life. They used to share a room, two bunk beds, between the ages of 2 and 4 and 7 and 9. We had to move because they were driving me crazy; they wouldn't stop fighting. (We lived in a 2 bedroom apartment.) Mostly they were fighting about self-definition because they shared this room for too long. They had adopted roles, only one of them could be good at any particular thing. If my son was smart in school, my daughter had decided she had to be stupid. If my son was good at the piano, then she could not be and so on. Now none of this made any sense... she was brilliant in math, and she had an avid interest in music, and got a rousing ovation playing the piano at 3 years of age... so clearly something she could have kept doing but she would not. Within a semester of our move, I was able to see the difference. Not only did the fighting abate, but they could inhabit the same interests again. Not all would overlap, but now I could be reassured that it had more to do with their own strengths and interests and less with asserting difference from the sibling.
There is danger then in heeding too strongly Gilligan's thesis of difference. One wonders if it is not overly deterministic by and of difference between the sexes. Certainly, there are ways in which men and women are similar in their thinking too. We are human after all. We have occupied different roles through much of history because of convenience and culture perhaps? Misogyny or misunderstanding? The physical power differential? The occupation of different roles in the distribution of labor for so long that it forms us as different? The biological differences etching a different emotional and empathic sensibility? All these are possible origins.
But a different viewpoint from the mainstream can originate from other minorities also. Of course, women are not a minority. They mostly form a majority of the population in most nation-states and globally. Yet they are construed as minority because they do not determine the mainstream. This brings us to the other question: which men, if it is men, get to determine the mainstream viewpoint? Those that own the educational system, media, money (we are back to that), governing bodies, financial institutions? Does it stand to reason that the longer you have held power over governing bodies and finance, and the economic system (sustenance for the world's people) the more power you may have over how that power should be relegated between men and women, or between men of a certain race, creed, religion, or class over other men and women of other races, creeds, classes, religions?
Maybe. I can only ask the questions. The answers as someone else has said more eloquently 'are blowing in the wind.' Maybe the answers don't really matter. Maybe the making of harmony from difference is more important. Being a second child, I would opt for the latter. A firm believer in the integrative thesis (no surprise to anyone) let's go back to what difference I or other women can make to international legal discourse. First, we do tend to see the problem differently from men. For instance, whereas my colleagues see the need for international arbitration for the financial services industry specifically and only from the viewpoint of standardized master agreements crafted by ISDA that will require interpretation in a transnational setting, they miss completely the extent to which global finance has transcended borders and affected people, not just the institutional parties to ISDA agreements, but the world at large that has been invoked as investor, backer, client in multiple jurisdictions by legitimate and scamming financial institutions alike. Maybe it is not about building a tower, but about seeing the interweaving web created by the global financial system. We live on a globe, a sphere, and money like a neural synaptic connector has come to affect us all, a spark that is lighting a contagion of branches through the net. I cannot see the response as an assembly line tower, but view it as a comprehensive, culturally adjusted and systemically integrative institution.
I am also responding from my point of view as lawyer for investors in various international financial frauds, in international transactions at large, and of course, fraud investigators. So both the problems I define from my observations, and the responses to them, are apt to be contextually based. And most significantly, they will be contextualized within the experience set of my own herstory of life as an Indian, Canadian and new American immigrant.
There are deeper issues about constructions of property as determinative of gender hierarchy which I will not go into here. These issues are directly related to the ways in which legal systems may have perpetrated the subjugation of women and minorities generally. The main point I want to make is not so much that there is a purpose in what I am doing and contributing but that we are at a critical time in our history that enables more participation in legal discourse generally, from lawyers, scholars, and lay people alike. Diversity of all kinds is necessary to achieve solutions going forward that will assist humanity deal with the kinds of social, biological, and financial strife that are bound to increase with the burden of sustaining billions on the planet for the first time, the ravages of global warming (whether it is of our creation or natural), and increased health risks.
Since I am a woman, I can say that it is an unprecedented time after a long silence for women in my family to contribute 'publicly.' However, it is also a time of some challenge. There is stigma attached to divorce in the Hindu family, especially in a Kashmiri Brahmin family. Single parenting by women and men,is known of course, even in situations where the parents are together formally. The leap from married to officially single, however, has been lived with difficulty by others in the west and fewer in the east, unless forced by circumstances. Yet I note that there is bias in favor of seeing couples even here in the west, whether the couple is talking to each other or not, or whether the couple is married or not. So stigma prevails even in the west.
Both men and women appear to have difficulty determining their roles in this transitional space in which new culture is being written and the synchretism of such different cultural underpinnings takes place in the global flow. Just as we see bowls of curry apple squash soup, we see Caribbean, Indian, Finnish American families at the table for Diwali, Christmas, and Hunnukah. We are melding into each other like a thousand tributaries of the same vibrant river heading into the large ocean that created us. Whether the 'wisdom' uttered comes of woman, man, child, dark, light, freckled, rich, poor, middle class,of whatever cultural affiliation, let's hope we make it possible to hear it, recognize it, and heed it!
The definition of gender roles at this critical point in human history is important for law and human relationships and culture. There are cultures that are reactively calling us back to strict adherence to such roles, as in Islam. There are more secular cultures that assert the equal right of women to all experience and authority, and also accept gay and lesbian relationships at par with heterosexual ones although the members of such unions may be avidly religious. In most part, there exists some increased understanding and acceptance of women as different in their own right. I will come back to what I mean by this last statement.
Differences between men and women have been debated throughout time, as various agendas for labor distribution, location of power, misunderstandings and scholarly curiousity have played out. Carol Gilligan's and others' ground-breaking work on the difference in thinking between little boys and girls, has spilled out into a recognition perhaps that women contribute differently in both form and content. Little boys it was claimed in that small study are more outwardly focused and aggressive, where little girls are more empathic approaching each problem set from a place of understanding and inclusion as opposed to adversarial attack and separation. Clearly much can be gained by allowing both men and women to approach each problem to devolve a more holistic solution. Although to the contrary, segregating the sexes based on what are already seen as strengths and weaknesses of each gender may dampen competition between the sexes, given that predominantly men and women mate and make homes together. It makes things easier to have different roles, no?
However, if women approach problems differently, they change the dynamic of the subject, and the manner in which the subject itself may be handled. That is the problems that we have to solve themselves may be different if women contributed to their formation. Do we really need more problems? Some formed by women and some formed by men? No. The point is men have determined the parameters of content and form of problems todate. The combined effort may make for fewer and different problems, maybe easier problems?
This also directly impacts women's self-definition. I want to say that women themselves have a difficult time with self-definition. If the only way they have known themselves is by mainstream definitions provided from a male point of view, then all they can be is different from men. A quick example from my children's early life. They used to share a room, two bunk beds, between the ages of 2 and 4 and 7 and 9. We had to move because they were driving me crazy; they wouldn't stop fighting. (We lived in a 2 bedroom apartment.) Mostly they were fighting about self-definition because they shared this room for too long. They had adopted roles, only one of them could be good at any particular thing. If my son was smart in school, my daughter had decided she had to be stupid. If my son was good at the piano, then she could not be and so on. Now none of this made any sense... she was brilliant in math, and she had an avid interest in music, and got a rousing ovation playing the piano at 3 years of age... so clearly something she could have kept doing but she would not. Within a semester of our move, I was able to see the difference. Not only did the fighting abate, but they could inhabit the same interests again. Not all would overlap, but now I could be reassured that it had more to do with their own strengths and interests and less with asserting difference from the sibling.
There is danger then in heeding too strongly Gilligan's thesis of difference. One wonders if it is not overly deterministic by and of difference between the sexes. Certainly, there are ways in which men and women are similar in their thinking too. We are human after all. We have occupied different roles through much of history because of convenience and culture perhaps? Misogyny or misunderstanding? The physical power differential? The occupation of different roles in the distribution of labor for so long that it forms us as different? The biological differences etching a different emotional and empathic sensibility? All these are possible origins.
But a different viewpoint from the mainstream can originate from other minorities also. Of course, women are not a minority. They mostly form a majority of the population in most nation-states and globally. Yet they are construed as minority because they do not determine the mainstream. This brings us to the other question: which men, if it is men, get to determine the mainstream viewpoint? Those that own the educational system, media, money (we are back to that), governing bodies, financial institutions? Does it stand to reason that the longer you have held power over governing bodies and finance, and the economic system (sustenance for the world's people) the more power you may have over how that power should be relegated between men and women, or between men of a certain race, creed, religion, or class over other men and women of other races, creeds, classes, religions?
Maybe. I can only ask the questions. The answers as someone else has said more eloquently 'are blowing in the wind.' Maybe the answers don't really matter. Maybe the making of harmony from difference is more important. Being a second child, I would opt for the latter. A firm believer in the integrative thesis (no surprise to anyone) let's go back to what difference I or other women can make to international legal discourse. First, we do tend to see the problem differently from men. For instance, whereas my colleagues see the need for international arbitration for the financial services industry specifically and only from the viewpoint of standardized master agreements crafted by ISDA that will require interpretation in a transnational setting, they miss completely the extent to which global finance has transcended borders and affected people, not just the institutional parties to ISDA agreements, but the world at large that has been invoked as investor, backer, client in multiple jurisdictions by legitimate and scamming financial institutions alike. Maybe it is not about building a tower, but about seeing the interweaving web created by the global financial system. We live on a globe, a sphere, and money like a neural synaptic connector has come to affect us all, a spark that is lighting a contagion of branches through the net. I cannot see the response as an assembly line tower, but view it as a comprehensive, culturally adjusted and systemically integrative institution.
I am also responding from my point of view as lawyer for investors in various international financial frauds, in international transactions at large, and of course, fraud investigators. So both the problems I define from my observations, and the responses to them, are apt to be contextually based. And most significantly, they will be contextualized within the experience set of my own herstory of life as an Indian, Canadian and new American immigrant.
There are deeper issues about constructions of property as determinative of gender hierarchy which I will not go into here. These issues are directly related to the ways in which legal systems may have perpetrated the subjugation of women and minorities generally. The main point I want to make is not so much that there is a purpose in what I am doing and contributing but that we are at a critical time in our history that enables more participation in legal discourse generally, from lawyers, scholars, and lay people alike. Diversity of all kinds is necessary to achieve solutions going forward that will assist humanity deal with the kinds of social, biological, and financial strife that are bound to increase with the burden of sustaining billions on the planet for the first time, the ravages of global warming (whether it is of our creation or natural), and increased health risks.
Since I am a woman, I can say that it is an unprecedented time after a long silence for women in my family to contribute 'publicly.' However, it is also a time of some challenge. There is stigma attached to divorce in the Hindu family, especially in a Kashmiri Brahmin family. Single parenting by women and men,is known of course, even in situations where the parents are together formally. The leap from married to officially single, however, has been lived with difficulty by others in the west and fewer in the east, unless forced by circumstances. Yet I note that there is bias in favor of seeing couples even here in the west, whether the couple is talking to each other or not, or whether the couple is married or not. So stigma prevails even in the west.
Both men and women appear to have difficulty determining their roles in this transitional space in which new culture is being written and the synchretism of such different cultural underpinnings takes place in the global flow. Just as we see bowls of curry apple squash soup, we see Caribbean, Indian, Finnish American families at the table for Diwali, Christmas, and Hunnukah. We are melding into each other like a thousand tributaries of the same vibrant river heading into the large ocean that created us. Whether the 'wisdom' uttered comes of woman, man, child, dark, light, freckled, rich, poor, middle class,of whatever cultural affiliation, let's hope we make it possible to hear it, recognize it, and heed it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)