| || |
If you have seen Matt Damon and Emily Blunt in "The Adjustment Bureau" you'll remember this speech well, and the scene just prior where Damon meets Blunt for the first time. If you haven't seen the movie, don't watch the clips just yet, it's a great story. The critics gave it an average of about 6.6 out of 10. I reckon it's worth about an 8 or 9.
I love this movie for a bunch of reasons (got my 'Dear Bill' glasses on). The main reason I was hooked from the beginning was this speech where Damon's character David Norris gives his fans a look inside the political games of appearing like an 'authentic' guy. Well I'm quite aware of the rules of this game too, and tomorrow I have to give a speech.
So, my dilemma, do I let the public in on the fact that we know why our program really works? We know very well that it's about authenticity actually, it's not about the university education that either of the facilitators received (although I suppose that trudging through some of that might have taught us that if you play the academic game you can get through some doors that would otherwise remain locked. Should I also tell the punters that the process of getting my university degree taught me how to present data so that the data can say almost anything you want it to?) It's not really that complicated what we do, but it seems that people often want it to be...
Having said that it's simple, it's not always that easy. We do know what we are doing, and usually it's very hard work, and, we love it because it's fast moving and very effective.
So where's the problem? Well there really isn't much of a problem as long as we stick to the rules of the game. That is, you can't always say straight out what it is you think you are doing. Once again the Zen Master rescues me; "Don't seek the truth. Just cease to cherish opinions". So when I let go of the opinion that I must give the punters a 'warts and all truth' of our process, it's fine. I run with a few Watson type 'Weasel Words' and everyone's happy - even me because I really am saying a lot of what needs to be said.
Meanwhile, back with the Politician and Elise (a very talented dancer). I found the whole story very believable in that it's impossible for any one person to ever see the full story at any given moment, and some of the factors that may be beyond an individuals control. Or, the choices that made sense in light of information that was only available to some of the characters involved. Which leads me back to my musings about 'knowing' a couple of days ago.
I'm hoping that when you pause and ask your own knowing for some direction or a review, that what you get is real, authentic knowing. It may never be able to be shared. And only you can know at that moment how to act (or not act) in connection to your knowing, and I guess hope is the pivotal concept, because you never know how a particular choice is going to effect the characters and the choices made in response (or inevitable chain reactions that have to flow from some decisions), including you as a character in the evolving story...
Duck looks forward to the day when he will lift his wings a little higher and freak, or thrill, the audience with some more colour
the Duck is a self confessed addict to introspection, and keen to chew the fat with anyone else with similar habits. Like Petrea said, "Sometimes we don't know what we think till we hear what we say..."