On Human Interaction - part IV

I sometimes go back and read my old blogs. Usually my ideas are so 'long' that I sometimes forget where I started, but I know I need to continue a strain, or pick up a tangent, or something so that I have to do some research. What I felt was that I didn't end this series well. If you've followed it you may have felt as I did when I re-read part III- "He seems to feel that this is some big deal, but it really doesn't seem that way to me." I still think it is a big deal, but I failed to convey that convincingly. Allow me another go 'round- with a real live example.

My wife and I had a pretty major row once (well, I guess more than once, but you know…). Anyways, I threw a fit that, admittedly, was rather childish. But I was feeling extremely hurt because of how things - actions and words performed by my wife- were coming across to me. Now to protect her, I won't go into any details but let me just share what I was feeling. Generally in the midst of our 'conversations' we both end up apologizing because, let's face it, it takes two to Tango- so if there is an argument I feel there is always something that BOTH parties did that contributed. I hope we can all agree to that. (At least in theory, until the next time when you're right and someone else is wrong… right?)

Anyways, on the heels of her part of the apology came the truthful indictments of my childish behavior. Now I'm not denying them; I'm not saying that how I acted was healthy and sane- because it wasn't. But when I hear such constructive criticism in the same context as an apology- it kind of ruins the flavor of the good parts. Like trying to taste food when you have a cold- everything tastes like snot. So I tend to discount the apology somewhat because it sounds conditional. "I'm sorry,… BUT YOU yada yada yada!" I don't know about you, but that always has the effect of me feeling like I wasn't really heard and that it's all my fault, with a little apology thrown in to make it sound nicer. Have you ever felt that way?

It was frustrating me because such interactions always seem conditional. "I'll apologize only if you say you're wrong about your behavior." But here's the crux of the matter- I discovered I am just as conditional- "I'll only accept your apology as long as you don't criticize my actions." And isn't that what it's really about- the conditions? There is a multi-billion dollar industry on self-help and communication- how to talk to yourself, how to talk to others, how to express your feelings, how to set your boundaries, etc., etc. Now, I'm all for learning phrases and techniques to aid in communication. But when you reach a point where you realize that you need someone to speak to you a certain way for you to take them seriously- then you've just seen the presence of your platform. And most of the time we don't realize it because we are following the advice of all the trained psychologists and counselors who are 'experts.' They are experts- but only in a different context. They're of this world; I'm trying to get at Kingdom stuff. Their platform doesn't fit what I'm coming to understand as the 'non-platformness' of Kingdom existence.

Because your platform is your identity. And if you are needing to be spoken to in a certain way, or if you only speak to others in certain ways, then that is your platform interacting with your communication style. It is what you need to maintain your identity. So, again, what does this look like- when we're not operating from our platforms? What if our actions had nothing to do with what we need? What first needs to happen, though, partially to underscore it's overarching significance, is to raise our awareness of our 'platforms' - similar to what happened to me in the argument with my wife. I'll try to flesh this out more in future posts…

Mark Nine

So I read to my kids from the Bible every night. Tonight's reading du jour was from Mark 9 - the Transfiguration story followed by the Healing of a Demon-Possessed Boy. Reading it made me think of this painting by Raphael.

Now, I personally am more of a fan of Michelangelo and Leonardo, on whose gigantic shoulders Raphael stands. But he was no slouch either, particularly when it came to composition- arranging the elements of his paintings into a cohesive whole. One thing artists always do is lead the viewer's eye around the whole picture. So the way things line up and where they point to are little devices to leave a trail for your eye to follow. One device Raphael liked to use was a figure eight. Here the top half of the eight is the Transfiguration scene, the bottom half is the crowd having a fit about the demon-possessed boy. Now it's easy to focus on Jesus- He takes center stage and is encircled by the billowing clouds that echo the 'lines' made by Moses, Elijah, and Peter, James, and John. Below, however, the scene is more chaotic, and the 'star' of the show, the demon-possessed boy, is off to the right. But here Raphael helps us out by splitting the crowd of people in two, the black expanse between the two groups is punctured by a pointing hand that leads our eyes directly to the boy's face. More subtly is the looping of the bottom half of the eight (which, perhaps not incidentally, is an infinity symbol). If you look at the disciple in blue and yellow in the center of the painting, follow his left foot, point to the right, across the black expanse to the upraised hand, down the arm of the demon-possessed boy, along the edge of the garment that crosses the kneeling woman's back which leads to the outstretched hand of the man in the lower left corner of the painting. Follow his arm up to the man behind him, up his arm and along the back and arm of the man in red, which follows a direct path along the disciple in yellow's (where we started) bent right leg, and on up around Moses, Jesus, and Elijah, and back down and around again.

These formal devices make for a nicely constructed painting. But perhaps my favorite connection is more conceptual in nature- it has to do less with holding the picture together than it does in conveying meaning. With all the activity going on it's helpful to look at the people's eyes- what are they focused on? It's telling that the little boy, the one who's having a rough time and needs, seemingly, the most help, is the only one whose eyes are focused on Jesus.