Showing posts with label Movement. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Movement. Show all posts
Re: Seven questions for leaders
The following is my email response to Seth Godin's blog post: Seven questions for leaders which he posted today. Seth is a world-famous marketing professional and business owner, who has appeared on TED Talks several times.
Hi Seth,
I've been an avid follower of your blog for about a year now, since I saw one of your TED talks. I follow it because I believe it provides crucial information to what I do, ie. organizing the Energy Art Movement. Your last blog entry I felt spoke to me directly, clutching my conscience and dragging it in front of a mirror. So I felt that I must write you, because though you say there are no textbook answers, I kind of feel there should be moral solutions to these riddles. I'd like to ask for further clarification from you, as to what your opinion is on the "right" moral answers.
At the same time, it also felt like being tagged, so here are my replies (I'm an INTJ, Myers-Briggs):
> "Do you let the facts get in the way of a good story?"
I'm not sure if I understand this question. I don't embellish stories, I always try to give the precise facts. I usually don't resurrect negative events, and leave them out of stories, unless they significantly affected the rest of the story. They can be very harmful to group motivation.
> "What do you do with people who disagree with you... do you call them names in order to shut them down?"
Depends. I have had members of the Movement disagree with me, and then I discussed it further with them. I did have to shut down ~3 people in the past (we have just over 100 members, and were founded in 2008). All three happened because they undermined the interests of the group - they caused significant trouble - not merely disagree. But as a consequence, that also meant they disagreed with me, since I always try to look at the interests of the group as a whole.
> "Are you open to multiple points of view or you demand compliance and uniformity? [Bonus: Are you willing to walk away from a project or customer or employee who has values that don't match yours?]"
I'm open to multiple points of view, but as it usually happens, I have already considered other viewpoints and discarded them, even before others have raised them. I tend to look at things from various angles when I'm planning something.
As to the bonus question: it depends on the magnitude of the dissonance. Sometimes dissonance can work beautifully (Beethoven), often it's annoying and must be turned off. In general, I mostly put values/principles first.
> "Is it okay if someone else gets the credit?"
No, always the correct person(s) should get the credit. For instance, media has tended to mention me as the founder of the Movement, even though there were five. I try to set it straight the best I can, but you know the media...
> "How often are you able to change your position?"
You mean whether I ever allow myself to be convinced? I'm open to other ideas, but I only change my position if the other idea is the correct or better one, and then I definitely change it.
> "Do you have a goal that can be reached in multiple ways?"
All my plans or goals are like that. I only keep the destination in view, and have a couple of vague routes in mind to get there, which crystallize as I get closer.
> "If someone else can get us there faster, are you willing to let them?"
Yes! As long as it doesn't mean trampling over the group's values and other interests.
Thanks for writing your blog!
Giorgio
I've written him the above as an email, looking for his opinion, though I was aware the questions were meant to be rhetorical. In any case, his reply was: "it was rhetorical, you're on your own". Thanks man, that helps!
Hi Seth,
I've been an avid follower of your blog for about a year now, since I saw one of your TED talks. I follow it because I believe it provides crucial information to what I do, ie. organizing the Energy Art Movement. Your last blog entry I felt spoke to me directly, clutching my conscience and dragging it in front of a mirror. So I felt that I must write you, because though you say there are no textbook answers, I kind of feel there should be moral solutions to these riddles. I'd like to ask for further clarification from you, as to what your opinion is on the "right" moral answers.
At the same time, it also felt like being tagged, so here are my replies (I'm an INTJ, Myers-Briggs):
> "Do you let the facts get in the way of a good story?"
I'm not sure if I understand this question. I don't embellish stories, I always try to give the precise facts. I usually don't resurrect negative events, and leave them out of stories, unless they significantly affected the rest of the story. They can be very harmful to group motivation.
> "What do you do with people who disagree with you... do you call them names in order to shut them down?"
Depends. I have had members of the Movement disagree with me, and then I discussed it further with them. I did have to shut down ~3 people in the past (we have just over 100 members, and were founded in 2008). All three happened because they undermined the interests of the group - they caused significant trouble - not merely disagree. But as a consequence, that also meant they disagreed with me, since I always try to look at the interests of the group as a whole.
> "Are you open to multiple points of view or you demand compliance and uniformity? [Bonus: Are you willing to walk away from a project or customer or employee who has values that don't match yours?]"
I'm open to multiple points of view, but as it usually happens, I have already considered other viewpoints and discarded them, even before others have raised them. I tend to look at things from various angles when I'm planning something.
As to the bonus question: it depends on the magnitude of the dissonance. Sometimes dissonance can work beautifully (Beethoven), often it's annoying and must be turned off. In general, I mostly put values/principles first.
> "Is it okay if someone else gets the credit?"
No, always the correct person(s) should get the credit. For instance, media has tended to mention me as the founder of the Movement, even though there were five. I try to set it straight the best I can, but you know the media...
> "How often are you able to change your position?"
You mean whether I ever allow myself to be convinced? I'm open to other ideas, but I only change my position if the other idea is the correct or better one, and then I definitely change it.
> "Do you have a goal that can be reached in multiple ways?"
All my plans or goals are like that. I only keep the destination in view, and have a couple of vague routes in mind to get there, which crystallize as I get closer.
> "If someone else can get us there faster, are you willing to let them?"
Yes! As long as it doesn't mean trampling over the group's values and other interests.
Thanks for writing your blog!
Giorgio
I've written him the above as an email, looking for his opinion, though I was aware the questions were meant to be rhetorical. In any case, his reply was: "it was rhetorical, you're on your own". Thanks man, that helps!
Energizing Radiance 2010
Giorgio Vaselli at Energizing Radiance 2010 - Gallery 56, Memphis, USA, originally uploaded by Giorgio Vaselli at 30 Jul '10, 2.37am EDT PST.
View photos and artworks from the exhibit at the Energy Art Movement's Facebook fanpage »
Interview about the Energy Art Movement
Thank you to artist Peggy Mintun for the excellent questions, the professional design, and the opportunity to speak about the Movement. Appeared in issue 4 of the online magazine Sublime Rush, on pages 192-203. Please click the image below for a full-screen view.
Energy Art Salon 2010
The Energy Art Salon 2010 is the first annual exhibition of the Energy Art Movement, showcasing the finest energetic art today on the international scene.
The We Are Connected theme shall permeate the event, celebrating our inherent unity as a global human race. Artworks will revolve around this fundamental theme, taking a stance against the feeling of separation coming from many channels today.
2009 competition finalists will also be showing their works, who submitted top-ranking art from various countries.
Murphy Hill Gallery
Address: 3rd Flr, 3333 W Arthington St, Chicago, USA
Exhibition duration: Jan. 15 - Feb. 25, 2010
Reception: Jan. 16, noon - 11 pm
Movement Organizers and some members will be attending the reception.
RSVP on Facebook
The We Are Connected theme shall permeate the event, celebrating our inherent unity as a global human race. Artworks will revolve around this fundamental theme, taking a stance against the feeling of separation coming from many channels today.
2009 competition finalists will also be showing their works, who submitted top-ranking art from various countries.
Murphy Hill Gallery
Address: 3rd Flr, 3333 W Arthington St, Chicago, USA
Exhibition duration: Jan. 15 - Feb. 25, 2010
Reception: Jan. 16, noon - 11 pm
Movement Organizers and some members will be attending the reception.
RSVP on Facebook
We Are Connected
Lately I have been thinking a lot about all the issues of the world and realized that one factor significantly contributes to all problems: our inner feeling of separation from others. Whether by "others" one means individuals or groups, it holds true. So if we were to realize some fundamental connections we share with every other human being, then it may change our fields of perception towards leading a better life. The Energy Art Movement which I organize has undertaken a project by this theme.
To learn more about our fundamental connections, please visit the project page.
Please do come out for our show in Chicago with opening ceremonies lasting Jan 15-17, 2010 (Fri-Sun).
Murphy Hill Gallery
Third Floor - Historic Sears & Roebuck Bldg.
3333 W Arthington St. Chicago, Illinois 60624, USA
Exhibition duration: Jan. 15 - Feb. 25, 2010
To learn more about our fundamental connections, please visit the project page.
Please do come out for our show in Chicago with opening ceremonies lasting Jan 15-17, 2010 (Fri-Sun).
Murphy Hill Gallery
Third Floor - Historic Sears & Roebuck Bldg.
3333 W Arthington St. Chicago, Illinois 60624, USA
Exhibition duration: Jan. 15 - Feb. 25, 2010
Energy Art Competition
This competition is an excellent opportunity for artists around the world to bring their art into the light for a worldwide audience. Our jury is composed of high-caliber internationally well-known artists. With their acute artistic sense, they ensure that purely by your talent, you will be recognized for your unique artwork.
An opportunity shall be granted to winners and finalists, to exhibit their entry artwork free of charge, at the Murphy Hill Gallery in Chicago (USA) during the month of January 2010. The exhibition is going to be titled the Energy Art Salon 2010.
Entries must be energetic either in composition or in subject matter. Participants may enter one picture only, either into the primary (above 22) or junior (under 22) category. Both 2D and 3D, traditional and digital mediums are accepted.
Call for entries: [ link ]
Submission: [ link ]
Deadline: Sep. 15, 2009
Please let your friends know too.
An opportunity shall be granted to winners and finalists, to exhibit their entry artwork free of charge, at the Murphy Hill Gallery in Chicago (USA) during the month of January 2010. The exhibition is going to be titled the Energy Art Salon 2010.
Entries must be energetic either in composition or in subject matter. Participants may enter one picture only, either into the primary (above 22) or junior (under 22) category. Both 2D and 3D, traditional and digital mediums are accepted.
Call for entries: [ link ]
Submission: [ link ]
Deadline: Sep. 15, 2009
Please let your friends know too.
Drug Use in the Artistic Creative Process
written on March 31, 2009
I have been asked to clarify my viewpoints on this issue on various occasions while organizing the Energy Art Movement. In this essay, I would like to summarize and extend my opinions further. I hope that the reader will ponder its points, and find both the truths and flaws either in my ideas or their own.
I am certainly not the movement, and my opinions are not necessarily its principles. The principles of the movement include a neutrality clause which clarifies our collective standpoint over psychedelic substances, such as LSD. This means that their use cannot be promoted on behalf of the movement, nor can it be discouraged. Even outside the movement, I think it should be a private matter for everyone. I personally don't consider the promotion of drug use a good idea, as it can harm the artist's reputation and that of any group they are associated with. These drugs are currently illegal in most countries. Furthermore, it is unfortunate that in visionary art - on behalf of which drug use is often promoted - only a small percentage of artists use drugs for creation, but the overall impression of the outside world is that visionary art is a subset of psychedelic art, when in fact it is the other way around.
The neutrality clause is also meant to leave the movement open to rigorous scientific results of the future. These results might have an effect on some of these drugs' legality. Research may also shed light on the science behind the psychedelic spiritual experience. It is quite possible that in the future, psychedelic substances will become a part of main religions' spiritual practices, once science enlightens us on the precise nature of their effects, and provide us with proper safety precautions. While they can induce wonderful spiritual experiences, and assist us in our inner psychological enlightment, they can also take us to the depths of hell, without us signing up for the "bad trip".
Besides the legal, scientific, and spiritual viewpoints, we must also look at the issue from an ethical viewpoint. There is a fine line of distinction between two ways artists currently use psychedelic substances related to their creative processes. I personally don't consider either to be fully ethical, but I find the first somewhat acceptable. The first method is when an artist takes some psychedelic substance, trips for a while in either their inner or higher realms, and once fully back in reality, intends to share their visions with others in the artworks they create (visual, music, or else). Since interdimensional cameras have not yet been invented, these artists choose to act as photographers of their visions, which I think is ethically acceptable. The second way artists use psychedelic substances, is when they create their works while on smaller doses of drugs, less interested in visiting higher planes, and more in boosting the muscles of their imagination. This is no different than using steroids to boost one's performance in sports, the artists' muscles being their imagination. This second method is clearly unethical, and should be distinguished from the first.
In relation to the above, another point is worth making. Just as in sports, if one has a less-developed musculature, the steroids will only help them boost their performance to a certain extent. They may still be easily surpassed by other sportsmen with much more developed musculature, and not making use of steroids. So a lightweight boxer on steroids might be a match for a middleweight one, but not for one in the heavyweight class. So essentially, if one doesn't strive to develop their muscles through natural means, they will eventually be surpassed. Drugs are an imagined crutch, which may prevent the artist from self-development through natural means, and entering the arena in full vigour. Note that while many like to think that the Fine Arts is not a sports event, you are not likely to succeed if you don't strive to excel in your craft, often with the intention of furthering and surpassing what you have seen before.
I consider the best way to develop one's imaginative muscles to be through meditation and subsequent picturing of realistic/surreal/abstract scenes in one's mind. Meditation results in a crystal clear empty mind, a white canvas for painting one's evolving ideas over it. While in this ideal state, one can try various color schemes and compositions in their mind, and attempt to find the best one for the concept. If one prefers improvising instead, starting with a meditational session will also help them in the flow of ideas as their improvisation evolves on the paper/canvas/screen.
To get back to the issue of drug use promotion among artists, we must not forget the responsibility we have towards budding artists. I find it unfortunate if a well-known visionary artist openly promotes drugs, not only psychedelic ones but others as well, such as ecstasy or marijuana. This is sad because young artists may get the impression that in order to create as accomplished works as their respected idol, they must also reach to drugs. This is certainly false. They may even surpass their idols eventually, using only their natural abilities - as discussed in the fourth paragraph - so young artists must realize and keep this mindset instead. This is the right path towards their personal development, and thus the collective evolution of the Fine Arts to a higher level.
As for why psychedelic art is often energetic, I think the reason is that imagination in its freest form is necessarily dynamic / energetic. In any case, drugs can surely free you up, but I suggest, try to be your own drug instead. As Salvador Dalí said: "I don't do drugs. I am drugs."
I am certainly not the movement, and my opinions are not necessarily its principles. The principles of the movement include a neutrality clause which clarifies our collective standpoint over psychedelic substances, such as LSD. This means that their use cannot be promoted on behalf of the movement, nor can it be discouraged. Even outside the movement, I think it should be a private matter for everyone. I personally don't consider the promotion of drug use a good idea, as it can harm the artist's reputation and that of any group they are associated with. These drugs are currently illegal in most countries. Furthermore, it is unfortunate that in visionary art - on behalf of which drug use is often promoted - only a small percentage of artists use drugs for creation, but the overall impression of the outside world is that visionary art is a subset of psychedelic art, when in fact it is the other way around.
The neutrality clause is also meant to leave the movement open to rigorous scientific results of the future. These results might have an effect on some of these drugs' legality. Research may also shed light on the science behind the psychedelic spiritual experience. It is quite possible that in the future, psychedelic substances will become a part of main religions' spiritual practices, once science enlightens us on the precise nature of their effects, and provide us with proper safety precautions. While they can induce wonderful spiritual experiences, and assist us in our inner psychological enlightment, they can also take us to the depths of hell, without us signing up for the "bad trip".
Besides the legal, scientific, and spiritual viewpoints, we must also look at the issue from an ethical viewpoint. There is a fine line of distinction between two ways artists currently use psychedelic substances related to their creative processes. I personally don't consider either to be fully ethical, but I find the first somewhat acceptable. The first method is when an artist takes some psychedelic substance, trips for a while in either their inner or higher realms, and once fully back in reality, intends to share their visions with others in the artworks they create (visual, music, or else). Since interdimensional cameras have not yet been invented, these artists choose to act as photographers of their visions, which I think is ethically acceptable. The second way artists use psychedelic substances, is when they create their works while on smaller doses of drugs, less interested in visiting higher planes, and more in boosting the muscles of their imagination. This is no different than using steroids to boost one's performance in sports, the artists' muscles being their imagination. This second method is clearly unethical, and should be distinguished from the first.
In relation to the above, another point is worth making. Just as in sports, if one has a less-developed musculature, the steroids will only help them boost their performance to a certain extent. They may still be easily surpassed by other sportsmen with much more developed musculature, and not making use of steroids. So a lightweight boxer on steroids might be a match for a middleweight one, but not for one in the heavyweight class. So essentially, if one doesn't strive to develop their muscles through natural means, they will eventually be surpassed. Drugs are an imagined crutch, which may prevent the artist from self-development through natural means, and entering the arena in full vigour. Note that while many like to think that the Fine Arts is not a sports event, you are not likely to succeed if you don't strive to excel in your craft, often with the intention of furthering and surpassing what you have seen before.
I consider the best way to develop one's imaginative muscles to be through meditation and subsequent picturing of realistic/surreal/abstract scenes in one's mind. Meditation results in a crystal clear empty mind, a white canvas for painting one's evolving ideas over it. While in this ideal state, one can try various color schemes and compositions in their mind, and attempt to find the best one for the concept. If one prefers improvising instead, starting with a meditational session will also help them in the flow of ideas as their improvisation evolves on the paper/canvas/screen.
To get back to the issue of drug use promotion among artists, we must not forget the responsibility we have towards budding artists. I find it unfortunate if a well-known visionary artist openly promotes drugs, not only psychedelic ones but others as well, such as ecstasy or marijuana. This is sad because young artists may get the impression that in order to create as accomplished works as their respected idol, they must also reach to drugs. This is certainly false. They may even surpass their idols eventually, using only their natural abilities - as discussed in the fourth paragraph - so young artists must realize and keep this mindset instead. This is the right path towards their personal development, and thus the collective evolution of the Fine Arts to a higher level.
As for why psychedelic art is often energetic, I think the reason is that imagination in its freest form is necessarily dynamic / energetic. In any case, drugs can surely free you up, but I suggest, try to be your own drug instead. As Salvador Dalí said: "I don't do drugs. I am drugs."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
