Hi Jan and others,
I am always feeling strange when we talk about CT as the child of
Chris. Or some other work the child of someone other.
Who would than be the mother? (And what, if the child is already
grown up and does what it wants to do anyway, regardless of whom
fathered it or nursed it in the beginnings?)
I believe it is a sloppy shortcut and distorts the facts.
I would rather want to say, Chris is the caretaker, he once put it
into the world, because he had to, because it wanted to be born, like
many developements in the world, Einstein`s theories for example...
So even if he would want to pull the plug on it, (Chris, do not take
this personal) it might very well move on to exist- with a different
name, a changed audience maybe...
What I want to share is this: a forum that has about 500 members,
some 20 maybe more or less active, should not be looked at as a child
of anybody but rather more as an expression of our time, that wanted
to be expressed. Luckily the one to express it was Chris. But Chris,
maybe the child is grown up enough by now to take on some true
fights, even fowl words and beatings.
Back to the beginnings of this series for me: I pledge to let it move
with a minimum of intervention.
And Barbara, I was very taken by what you wrote about the chaos, I
find it most important!
"To create real community we need to allow the expression of
difference and even hostility, to be willing to abandon our
identification with what we know and feel easy with, and even to
welcome the expression of conflict. Open to the air the chaos created
by such an allowing can often become the harbinger of growth and
creativity; stifled it goes subterranean and festers like a swamp.
Stripped of the illusion of 'togetherness and sweetness' we make
ourselves vulnerable and it is this vulnerability and the commitment
to the hard work of dialogue that opens the heart and moves us closer
to each other. So community can be formed."
Sincerely, Sneh
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]