I am indebted to Udi Ipalawatte who inspired this conversation.
Transformation (all too often erroneously colloquialized as "change")
isn't the same as change. More than simply not being the same,
"transformation" and "change" live in different domains.
Transformation as a pointed expression, is
"recontextualization"
(I
love
that
word)
which lives in an ontological domain. And as for change
(which lives in an
epistemological
domain), "plus ça change, plus c'est la même
chose" - the more things change, the more they stay the same,
yes?
When I
observe
"I can't transform what I make wrong", I don't mean I can't
change what I make wrong. Neither do I mean I can't
try to change that which I make wrong. And isn't that
exactly what we do? We try to change that which we make wrong - not the
least of which we do by talking about it, then by criticizing it.
Especially in the court of public opinion, we agree with this person,
we disagree with that person, this is right in our opinion, that's
wrong in our opinion etc. If I can change (or at least if I can try to
change) that which I make wrong, what am I implying when I assert I
can't transform what I make wrong?
"I can't transform what I make wrong" is actually a warning light, an
alarm (if you will), a
litmus test
confirming whether I've transitioned away from being transformed, or
not. Another way of saying "... whether I've transitioned away from
being transformed ..." is "... whether I'm no longer authentically
being who I really am ...". If I'm to transform anything, if
I'm to
recontextualize
it, I have to give it the space to be the way it is (and the way it
isn't), all within
the context
of who I really am. And if I'm making it wrong, I'm not giving it the
space to be the way it is (and the way it isn't) ie I'm no longer being
who I really am. Transformation isn't change. Rather, it's bringing who
I really am to bear on the situation at hand, whatever it may be. And
if I'm making the situation at hand wrong, I can't transform it.
Now: please don't just accept that on face value. In particular, don't
believe it just because I said it. Take it out for
a drive
on the track. Put it to the test. In the court of public opinion, pick
a polarizing figure, someone you quietly make wrong, someone you'd like
to change. Then, in the court of public opinion, make them wrong
vociferously, try to change them - and while you're doing that, pay
careful
attention
to ie
observe
whether or not you can be transformed at the same time and in the same
space as making them wrong. The result of this simple test is obvious
and incontrovertible: you can't. That's not merely an opinion. It's the
bedrock
experience.
Does this mean that something else is called for ie that something else
is required? No. In fact
this doesn't mean anything
at all.
This isn't a remedy or a cure or a
fix
for anything. Rather it's just a simple
observation.
It's a distinction. I can't transform what I make wrong. It's one of
those signs along
the road
of
transformed
conversations:
making someone or something wrong can't live in the same space as
bringing transformation to bear on them. It just can't. It doesn't work
that way.