Month: June 2020

Philosophy Tuesday

KannikLeave a comment

While our group classes and gatherings have been completely kaiboshed during these unusual times, I’ve continued to Kung Fu it up in my backyard (including weapons and all).  It has been a pleasantly productive time, with growth and new avenues opening to explore and with a wonderful handful of delicious insights.

But there’s an interesting thing about insights:

You never know when they will show up.

You can’t plan for them.  You can’t predict them.  And you can’t force them.  All you can do is go out, practice, practice, and practice some more.

And, of course, that means to practice with intent.  Be the force that is pulling for it.  Create the conditions for it to show up.  Lay the foundation and do the digging and look inside and be mindful and keep looking for what’s missing, what’s next, make the adjustment… and then put it into practice, practice, and practice some more.

Until, without any preamble, there it is.  Something new arises!  An insight, an epiphany, a shift, a transformation.  It might be accompanied with an “Ohhhh,” or a “That’s interesting, what’s that?” or maybe it’s so grand the skies part and the angels sing.  Whether it’s low key or a glorious emergence, it’s nevertheless unmistakable.

And it’s yours forever, to move forward into the world with that new understanding, new vision, and new ability, and to enjoy all that comes and flows freely from it.  All the while, being ready to lay the groundwork and to continue practicing, practicing, and practicing some more towards the next one.

This is the veracity of Kung Fu, as it is the veracity of any art or skill or ability, including the realms of philosophical transformation and even that of societal shifts.

It is also a counter to resignation and capitulation, taking solace in that uncertainty.  It rarely looks like somethings progressing until it moves.  And then it does.  And it’s glorious and totally worth it for the great days ahead.

Architecture Monday

KannikLeave a comment

Take one part sculpture, one part landscape, and one part building, put together, stir gently, and pour out onto an urban plaza, Voila!  You’ve got yourself a remarkably bold space for contemplation.

Rising out from a reflecting pool, there’s no missing these sloping and gem-like forms.  From afar they act as a hill or abstract rock, face, edging one side of the urban square.  Closer in, they are more like sculptural elements, with the building itself being split to fit within many of the forms, all connected via glass walkways that allow the water to flow freely.

Inside the geologic forms continue, both rising from the floor or pushing down from overhead to create a nice complex interior geometry.  It’s a balancing act, but it remains mostly in the realm of “visually engaging” without devolving into “cacophony of random stuff.”  Little bits of light and water play out continually as you travel, in a ritual fashion, from space to space.

I dig it (pun semi intended).  Something inventive and playful married with old tradition.  Very nifty.

Al Musallah Prayer Hall by CEBRA

(Who also did the Iceberg apartments in Aarhus!  See them mid-way in this post here…)

Gaming Thursday

KannikLeave a comment

I am very much excited about WotC’s announcement that they’ll be shifting how they portray (and thus limit) ‘inherently evil races’ to open up much greater latitudes in alignment, abilities, societies, and etc.  For one, the term race is confusing, since these are really whole different species.  For two, just as our species (humans) are vast and varied, so too should be and can be members of other species (whether elves, or dwarves, or kobolds, or orcs).  For three, it’s far more interesting!  Automatic evil is easy (and still available, be it through fiends or monstrosities or undead) but allowing for greater agency by the antagonists is more juicy, and the meatiest stories often deal with the ‘evil within’ (both individual character but fellow humans/etc acting in very bad ways) vs an external and ‘black box’ kind of auto-evility machine.  For four, as someone who finds attribute bonuses the least interesting way to differentiate different species, I hope this pushes more games (even if D&D itself likely won’t adopt this unless they ever do make a new edition or come out with an optional ruleset) towards more nifty species talents/stunts/feats (such as the Dwarf’s resistance to poison, or the Dragonborn’s breath weapon) that create far more interesting options, capabilities, and side uses for players.

For five, and of great importance, is this:  who we know ourselves as a person and as a collective people is/are thoroughly governed by story – the story we know about ourselves, the stories we tell about our community, the stories we speak of about the world. As such, the stories we make up and tell each other for entertainment absolutely has an impact on how we view, interact with, and treat the real world and others within it. They are not separate.  Thus to say ‘this race is all bad’ or ‘this race is always big and scary’ or ‘this race is really only good at this’ creates mental traps for us as we relate to and deal with others in our actual and lived lives.

So yeah.  Doing away with the more rigid stereotypes and tropes and that present a gameworld view that one’s place, role, competencies, and expected outcomes in the world are governed primarily (and almost entirely) by factors of their species and instead moving towards the item(s) that often draws us to our favourite fiction: culture, style, worldview, way of life, way of building things, and ways of dealing with things. In short: towards character.

Because character and characters are what an RPG is all about.

Philosophy Tuesday

Kannik1 Comment

There are a lot of important conversations to be held right now.*  And you, we, may find ourselves getting into a lot of them, which is great!  With this question to keep in mind:  Is this indeed a conversation, a discussion, or even an argument?  Or, instead, is it a debate?

For there is a distinction here.

A debate is a particular and specific thing.  It is something that occurs between a few people (often two), on a stage (or otherwise in front of an audience) with the intent of making a case that then persuades an audience.

And that there is the big thing about a debate:  it’s a performance.  It’s an act designed to play to and then convince those watching.  In many ways, it could even be said that debate is theater.

Which is fine!  _IF_ that’s what our intent is in engaging with someone about a topic.  And if we have an audience.  Because without that audience, a debate is pretty much futile and a waste of time.

A debate is all about the outside.  About that outward play.  There’s no engagement.  No communication happening between those involved.  It’s not about consideration or growth or challenging or imagination or learning or refining or exploring or deepening or anything of the sort.  It’s not contemplative at all.  At best, it’s only about how do you destroy the other person’s argument.  At worst (and maybe common), it’s about how do you destroy the other person. So out come all the rhetorical devices.  Out come fallacies by the truck load.  Out come traps and gotyas and buckets of dismissiveness.  Ad hominems are deployed en masse.

Debates are something that are waged.

And for those participating in the debate, there’s no change.  It’s a statis.  The very thing to do in a debate, the very premise, is to reject, immediately and categorically, everything but your own view.  Hunker down, put up sandbags, and deploy all weapons at anything and anyone that approaches.

Which is why getting into a debate with someone when there is no audience (and when the intent isn’t to play for the audience**) is such a worthless endeavour.  We can lance at each other all night and it will be all for naught.

To truly affect the other, to bring forward contemplation and possibilities, to open up empathy and humanity, to bring clarity and awareness, to move the needle forward in so many areas needs great conversation and discussion.  Even heated discussion!  But discussion grounded in exchange, with a willingness for examination and consideration and reflection and thinking.

And when things veer towards debate, all that goes out the window.  At that point, continuing – or even starting – is folly.  Either work to bring things back towards discussion, or step away.

The same applies whether in person, over the phone, online, social media, whatever.  If our authentic intent is to engage, then remaining watchful for thing sliding towards a debate (whether instigated by them or by ourselves) is important.

And if there’s no willingness to remain within the realm of contemplation, then we can save everyone’s time, energy, and passion by ignoring or walking away, and giving our time, energy, and passion to those who are willing and whom we can reach.

 

* And a lot of important listening…

** This is important to remember on a social media platform.  We may think “haha, I’m debating this person for the masses!” but are we, really?  Is this really an effective debate venue?  Are those watching more apt to become part of the debate (and thus bunker down) rather than contemplate and engage?

Architecture Monday

KannikLeave a comment

Another wonderful schoolhouse and mini-library tonight, harnessing design to create something vital and beautiful!

Designed in the aftermath of, and thus to withstand, a cyclone, it’s no bunker of a design.  Full of air and light, built by community hands, and using the robust structure to its fullest to create a great and interesting space within.

The bit about the library is doubly interesting, for this school is in Vanuatu, an island country where humidity levels are often around 99%.  And so the library is nestled up a ladder under the ridge of a black roof, using the sun to heat the air, thus increasing its moisture capacity while also causing convection which is used to continually pull the moisture out of the building.  It’s a small thing, but it helps the books last longer, while also creating a great reading nook.

Great design is never out of place, and should never be considered, nor need to be, a luxury.  Sweet work here.

Ranwas School by CAUKIN Studio

Philosophy Tuesday

Kannik2 Comments

I’ve spoken a number of times before about the amazing power in apologies (including and especially in relation to a particular movie that I hold in great regard).  And apologies do indeed hold great potential for healing and to create wonderous new possibilities.

As long as they are actual, true, authentic, apologies.

So there are good reasons to examine the flip side:  the disingenuous and bad faith apology.  Or, as I like to call them, non-apology apologies.*  Because they’re kind of everywhere right now showing up in all sorts of places – media personalities, well-published authors, supreme court justice nominees, CEOs, presidents of certain countries, and police union spokespeople.  And they tend to follow this particular pattern and strategy, known by its acronym of DARVO:  Deny (or Deflect), Attack, and Reverse Victim & Offender.

It’s pretty much what it says on the tin.  Whatever comes in, deny it happened in all sorts of colourful terms, or, as an alternate, deflect it onto something else (the common “whattaboutism” fallacy).  Then attack, either the person, their credibility, or just something else entirely.  Make up false stats and statements, have people question their own sanity, call the kettle black, and etc.

But the last one is the one that really stands out, where the polarity of things is attempted to be reversed.  Suddenly the injured party is the one at fault, and the offender is now the victim of everyone’s mean words.**  Never mind what the issue – and let’s not forget, the harm – is, no, the real thing we should be talking about is how terrible it is for me.  That’s the strategy.  It’s all a smokescreen to distract from the harmful actions, results, and culpability, all while attempting to gain sympathy by making everyone else the bad guy or gal.

This is the very opposite of an apology, to be sure.  Often it is quite blatant (or at least becomes blatant once we’ve armed ourselves with this DARVO distinction so we can be mindful and see it when it’s being employed) and other times it is more subtle, slipped in between an “I apologize” type statement that, when considered in full, is doing anything but.***

Apologies (and forgiveness) are sacred and beautiful things, the mark of a truly powerful, strong, generous, and self-assured person.  DARVOing is the poisonous opposite, that furthers harm, stokes conflict, and erodes trust.  Being mindful of this tactic, we can avoid falling for it and not let slide what shouldn’t.

 

* And if I can just single out the one type I find most egregious in this non-apology apology trend is the “I apologize if anyone was actually offended” and its close variation “I apologize if I hurt someone.”  This is such absolute caca!  Neither of them takes ownership or responsibility or show any remorse, or even semblance of conception that their behaviour (and therefore them) is the or at issue.  It’s all foisted upon everyone else.  Especially in that first one, which effectively says “I think you’re all lying or wrong, and fk you all, I am perfect, and I’m the real victim here because you all suck.”  It’s DARVO par extreme.  Ugh!

** Which is another tactic that grinds my gears.  “That’s not the right way to express it…” tactic to divert attention from the actions/behaviour/world view/etc that caused harm – or is ongoingly causing harm – and instead turn the conversation about how it is expressed and oh how unfair it is that you are so mean to me.  Even worse when the person refuses to articulate what the appropriate means might be… but it’s all diversionary BS to avoid the real conversation about the very real harm.

*** Some of the recent examples of this can be kind of funny especially when you take the transcript or the statement and do word counts to see how often they mention themselves instead of others, how often they say sorry instead of unfair or cancel or my life has been hell, and the like.  No surprise, it’s more about how terrible it is for them than anything about being present to the impact their actions had or are having.

Architecture Monday

KannikLeave a comment

With my brain being a bit on the fritz, a good book is what the hypothetical doctor ordered.  And this wonderful library in Muyinga, Burundi fits the bill for a lovely place to grab and read a book.

There’s a lot of from local culture and the conditions of the site that went into this building, used in a great way that are both functional and fanciful.  Right from the start you can see it in the locally-fabricated compressed earth block masonry which allows the building to match rich colour of the surrounding earth and tree trunks.  There is a rhythm to the high-buttressed walls, each perforated to allow for light and cross-ventilation, and that further extends into the generous covered walkway.  At night, the whole assemblage glows like a lantern.

Inside, it just gets downright sweeter.  It’s lofty and inviting, with a great connection to the outdoors and steps that become bookshelves.  But the piece de resistance is the hammock suspended overhead… what a great reading nook!

I love it.  A great example of learning from the vernacular, using and building skills in the community, and creating a wonderful space through straightforward good design and a few touches of whimsy.  Great stuff.

The Library of Muyinga by BC Architects