Far Flung Civilisations

I’ve been thinking about far flung civilisations this week. Scientists think they may have detected phosphine in Venus that would be a potential sign of life. (NYT article)

Archaeologists and anthropologists have made a strong argument that humans were in the North Americas much earlier - 26,500 years ago - than previously though. Suggests humans could have done long distance travel from earlier than thought. (Smithosonian article covering the Nature paper)... "... For most of the 20th century archaeologists generally agreed that humans who had crossed the Beringia land bridge from Siberia to North America only ventured further into the continent when retreating ice sheets opened a migration corridor, about 13,000 years ago. But a few decades ago, researchers began discovering sites across the Americas that were older, pushing back the first Americans’ arrival by a few thousand years. Now, the authors of a new study at Mexico’s Chiquihuite cave suggest that human history in the Americas may be twice that long...."

 

I’m still influenced today by my few days visiting the extremely remote Wana tribe in the Indonesian jungle.
From the archive..."  Once upon a time I went to visit one of the most remote people on this planet. These people were called the Wana tribe. “ Blog here:

public.jpeg

On-line communities, light + dark

As I’ve mentioned I’m involved with several communities which live much of their life on-line. Like many human tools they can be used creatively or destructively.

The one Anoushka set up Transport Sparks for young people with transport special interests could not easily have happened in a world Pre-Facebook. It’s brought a lot of community and social value together. We may laugh or be cynical about Zuck’s assertions about the power of connections and Facebook’s mission, but I observe truth to that.

This long form William Davies (Guardian, H/T Anna Gat) looks at the dark side of WhatsApp groups. Where Transport Sparks brings together light. Davies highlights how private groups can breed hate and conspiracy.

One aspect of some successful communities is while there may be a strong on-line component and in fact the group might not survive without a sustaining online platform there is also a real world meet-up component or at least - in COVID times - a video meet up. The group doesn’t remain solely hidden and anonymous, it acts as a catalyst for real world meetups. My own Mingle was a little like that as well.

Anna Gat’s Interintellect has salons as a pivotal focus. Transport Sparks have transport meet ups. Climate Action Tech has meet-ups real world and now online as well. British American Project thrives on its conference.

That said some gaming communities are almost all on-line. The MiiVerse community was a wonderful community. Sadly, there was little money in it - only social value and it was decommissioned by Nintendo. 

On balance, I remain positive on humans. From this flows, I feel on balance positive about social media, platforms and communities and I feel positive about free speech and sharing ideas - even bad ones (thoughtful articulation of this importance by recent Paul Graham essay on conformity here) - as I think on balance we can add up to a better world despite all the challenges. Perhaps that’s one theme you can find from Thinking Bigly too.

Frequent Production equals successful internet production

I’ve managed for the last 2 years or so a fairly consistent 2x a month newsletter. It would be net better if I was 1x a week (although there’s slightly higher churn for those who don’t like quite so much email / newsletters), and I don’t advertise it and there’s almost 1,000 subscribers now - mostly friends and contacts. My blog has been at about 1x -3x per week and backs up the newsletter.

I think I’ve understood this central lesson

“... successful internet production is frequent production. …” this is what you see in Instagram and other social media.  Relevant, thoughtful and authentic helps but frequent production is the crucial component.

Tyler Cowen - who is one of the most frequent and well read economics blogs of all time - expressed that view and he applied it to what Magnus Carlssen is doing to on-line chess. Cowen himself is one of the most prolific bloggers alongside being well read.

Scott Alexander had done the same with his Star Slate Codex blog, before he took it down in a problem with the NY Times  potentially exposing him in a friendly article. 

I think it’s also part of Elon Musk’s genius.

It’s not necessarily that same for all types of production - I’m not sure live theatre is the same, but as more events move on-line, it’s something I am dwelling on.


Tyler on Chess: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2020/05/the-new-economics-of-chess.html

Scott Alexander on deleting his blog: https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/06/22/nyt-is-threatening-my-safety-by-revealing-my-real-name-so-i-am-deleting-the-blog/

OMG first used in 1917 in a letter to Winston Churchill

OMG was used in a letter in Winston Churchill in 1917. 🤯

Adjustments.jpeg

John “Jacky” Fisher was an admiral and naval innovator, who began World War I as First Sea Lord but resigned in 1915.

“…During his time as Second Sea Lord (1902-3) Fisher began putting into practice his reforms for the navy; his major achievement at this time was the Selbourne Scheme of entry and training for officers in 1902, which was a common entry and training for all naval officers, and to ensure that in the age of mechanisation all officers would have a familiarity with engines. In 1903-4 Fisher was Commander-in-Chief at Portsmouth, from which position he could superintend the establishment of the Royal Naval College at Osborne, where new Cadets received their initial naval training. He also served on the Esher Committee, whose recommendations, accepted by the Cabinet, called for a reorganisation of the War Office, and Committee of Imperial Defence.

On the 21st October 1904, at the age of 63, Fisher became First Sea Lord. His main preoccupation was to prepare for the coming of the war with Germany, and developing a more powerful fleet He was responsible for the launch of the first ‘all big gun’ fast battleship, using the new turbine engines. HMS Dreadnought was launched in Portsmouth in 1906, combining great speed with immensely increased gun power. It rendered most of the fleet obsolete at one stroke. Fisher also oversaw the developments of the submarine with its torpedo weapons. The rapidly changing face of the navy brought hostile criticism from conservative parties both within the navy and without. His greatest rival, Lord Charles Beresford, appointed Commander in Chief of the Channel Fleet, became more and more estranged with Fisher and at odds with the Admiralty. Finally, when his command was terminated in 1909, he made public his criticisms of Fisher and his reforms. Fisher remained in office until January 1910 but was succeeded by Sir Arthur Wilson, who was sympathetic to his reforms. During his period in office, he was awarded with the Order of Merit in 1904, appointed Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO) in 1908 and in 1909, was raised to the peerage with the title of Baron Fisher of Kilverstone, a Norfolk estate.

In 1912 he became chairman of the Royal Commission on Oil Fuel. This had been another of his interests during his term in office and resulted in the adoption of using oil fuel in all new ships being constructed. In October 1914, he returned to the Admiralty as First Sea Lord, in which time he was involved in ship construction. He became at odds with the First Lord of the Admiralty, Winston Churchill over the proposed Dardenelles campaign. Fisher believed that the persistence in attacking the Dardanelles would jeopardise the success of the major naval strategy of the war, but was forced to concede and allow the campaign to take place. As the campaign unfolded and became clear that it was a hopeless one, he became more and more discontented and resigned his office in 1915. …”

OpenSpace as applied to Theatre and Climate

Guest Blog: A report on using Open Space to talk about Climate by Nina Klose

  • Open Space really works!

  • Participatory format unlocks and empowers

  • Final session led to actionable next steps

At the suggestion of my friend Ben Yeoh, I recently attended Improbable Theatre Company’s 15th annual weekend workshop on the future of theatre.  “Devoted and Disgruntled” had nothing to do with Climate Change. But the experience of being part of D&D15 allowed me to try out first-hand what it’s like to use Open Space facilitation.  

Harrison Owen developed Open Space (also called “OST”) in the 1980s as a way to get a large group of people to explore complex topics in creative ways that lead to actionable takeaways.

According to openspaceworld.org, “All of the issues that are MOST important to the participants will be raised.  All of the issues raised will be addressed by those participants most qualified and capable of getting something done on each of them.  In a time as short as one or two days, all of the most important ideas, discussion, data, recommendations, conclusions, questions for further study, and plans for immediate action will be documented and in the hands of participants when they leave.”  

Really, you have to try it yourself to understand how it can possibly work--but I’ll try to convey what it was like going to “Devoted and Disgruntled.”

“Prepare to be surprised,” warned a sign hanging overhead as I entered the Grand Hall of  Battersea’s former town hall, graced with vaulted ceilings, exposed brick walls, and an air of ruined grandeur.  Three hundred-and-some chairs stood in three concentric circles, leaving a large empty space in the middle. People were filing in, sitting in the circle, or catching up with friends in small groups around the hall.  By roughly 11 am--the scheduled start time--most of the chairs had been taken.

Phelim McDermott, co-founder of the Improbable Theatre Company, opened the space.  “Hello everybody, and welcome to ‘Devoted & Disgruntled 15: What are we going to do about Theatre and the Performing Arts?’ After fifteen years, the title ‘Devoted and disgruntled’ still gets laughs.” The weekend would be a chance for anyone to propose ideas for discussion, to meet like-minded people, and to come away with steps forward.  For starters, we would all contribute to creating the agenda.

Phelim gestured to the far end of the hall, where empty bulletin boards awaited topics any of us could suggest.  Saturday - Sessions 1, 2 and 3 were all empty; Sunday’s sessions, too, were a blank slate. “If you have a burning question, an idea or an issue, please! Come up here and write it down as a succinct, catchy title or a question.”

I had certainly come with questions: What is ‘Open Space’?  Can today’s event actually address my focus issue, Climate Change?

Phelim explained the key principles of OST: in this first phase, called “opening,” anyone could come up and suggest a topic or question, then schedule it for a break-out session at the end of the hall.  After that, discussion groups would form on all the topics, and the delegates would get down to business. All we needed to know for this to happen were the four principles of Open Space: Whoever comes are the right people.  Whenever it starts is the right time. Whatever happens is the only thing that could have happened. When it’s over, it’s over. And to make it all work, there is the “Law of Two Feet/Mobility”. The Law means that you can move anywhere at any point during the conference.  If you feel bored with the conversation you’re having, walk away. Join a different group, get a cup of coffee, chat to a friend. Break into song! Do a dance. The only limit is your own imagination.

While Phelim was talking, I was strategising.  I had paid my choose-your-own entry fee of £45, and I wanted to get my money’s worth, even though my focus issue is Climate, not Theatre.  And given I wanted to be home for dinner, I’d better make sure I got a slot in Session 1.  

I was the second person to volunteer a topic.

“Hi, I’m Nina.  I’d like to talk about Theatre + Climate Crisis.”

Dozens of other people got up after me.  Each of them wrote out a subject or question, read it out on the mic, and posted it under a session time on the agenda board.  There was space in the hall for 18 separate discussions during each 1.5-hour period, with a total of 7 different sessions scheduled over the two weekend days.  Topics varied widely:

“Where are the emerging non-commercial producer training programmes/networks?” Ben M.

“Theatre of the Supernatural (Ghosts welcome).” Patrick.

“National Library of Things - A New Production Model.” Ethan.

“Theatre & Racism - Stop Talking, Start Challenging/Changing.”  Shankuo.

“How? Theatre building a base to defeat the Tories.” Danny.

“How will I know when it’s time to start my group?” I asked a facilitator nervously.

“Don’t worry--you’ll know!  It will be time once everyone has finished suggesting topics.  They’ll move the chairs into circles. It will be obvious.”

Soon I noticed people moving the three concentric circles of chairs into a number of smaller circles, each marked by a flag fixed on a bamboo pole.  I walked over to the break-out circle I had chosen, and wrote out “THEATRE + CLIMATE CRISIS” on flipchart paper. A few people sat down, then a few more.  I suggested we go around the circle, introduce ourselves, and say something about our interest in Theatre and Climate. As more and more people joined, I kept having to break off for new arrivals to introduce themselves.  It was a varied group--but not that varied: mainly Londoners. Nearly all White, middle-class, ranging in age from 20s to 70s. Most, but not all, had some connection to theatre.

I jotted down notes as people gave their introductions: Jasmine - Sustainability charity. Rhiannon - Royal Ballet. Andrea - designer/activist.  Gregor - from Edinboro, actor. Barra - run 2 theatre companies, one aimed at families, the other at adults. Dan - performance & ecology. Ethan - production manager, doing a degree in mechanical engineering.

I worried that what typically happens in meetings would happen here: someone would hog all the attention and not let anyone else get a word in edgewise.  But the conversation flowed freely and easily. Most people added something to the discussion, though some mainly listened. Four or five people had more to say, building off each other’s ideas.

Two main topics began to emerge from the conversation: sustainability and story.  That is, how to produce theatre more sustainably? And how to tell stories of Climate Crisis, stories that raise awareness, inspire action, lead to change?

As I listened to people’s contributions, I suddenly realised where my own energy lay: how could we be using theatre to awaken people to the urgency of the Climate Crisis?  

The discussion led to ideas to share with each other and a wider audience: websites to visit, nonprofits that do sustainable theatre.  Check out Kris de Meyer’s TedX talk about polarised thinking. A book by Mary Robinson, Climate Justice Is a Manmade Problem with a Feminist Solution.  This coming Friday, come along to a session at the V&A on Theatre and Sustainability, someone announced. 

“How can we use Theatre to facilitate change?  Audiences already know it’s a crisis. But how do we activate them?”

“How about ‘audience after-care’ - offer ideas of small steps people can take after they leave the theatre.”

The time flew by surprisingly quickly.  

“Thanks for facilitating! It went great,” somebody said.  People added their names to an email list I suggested we start, then wandered off to get some lunch.  I used one of the laptops set up at the back of the hall to write up notes on the session. I felt energised: people had come to my session, and exchanged lots of ideas.  So this is how Open Space works! But what about the action plans?

Thanks to the Law of Mobility, and Phelim’s open invitation to “come and go as you please,” I stayed home on Sunday to spend time with the family.  But on Monday morning I decided to trek back to Battersea for the closing half-day, from 10:30 to 2:30.

I debated volunteering another topic when agenda-setting began on Monday.  But something held me back. I didn’t feel a burning desire to bring up any specific subject.  Maybe someone else would call a group that could use my energy. Several topics looked good, but I decided to start with Arne’s “Future-Forward Collective: what should it be?”  

I was the first person to arrive. Another woman, Loren, came over, and we all chatted for a minute, then started our discussion.

“What do you think Future Forward could/should mean?” Arne asked, in a very nice, open way. “Nina, you can go first, because you got here first.”

“When I heard you say Future Forward I thought Great!  That could be a theatre that does Climate actions. I’ve been thinking about whether Climate activism could really use more theatre in it.  Maybe street theatre. Maybe somewhere free. Outdoors. Maybe go and make theatre with audiences…”

Arne was taking notes.  “And what do you think, Loren?”

“It needs to include hope + imagination.  Rapid response, and more sustained response--making the shows of the future.  Throwing out idea-generation to the audience. And what about you, Arne? What do you think?  We can be scribes so you can talk, if you like,” Loren offered.

“I’m a director,” Arne said.  “And I’m really into Life Coaching these days.  One of the exercises we do is, you imagine a goal.  For instance, for me, it’s to put on a production at the Globe.  So what I do is I imagine myself directing a show at the Globe. I imagine it really clearly:  I’m there already. It’s happening. It’s in the future. And then I look back, and imagine what steps I needed to take to get to that place.”

“That’s it!”  I said. “I really like that idea.  It would be really good to imagine a positive outcome of the climate crisis.”

“Some of the sessions I went to yesterday,” Arne said, “talked about Climate.  One of them talked about the possibility of a happy outcome, a good future in 2050.  We could still get there.”

“Yes!  Let’s have our event picture a positive 2050, or a positive climate future.”

By the end of 45 minutes we had come up with 6 specific, actionable takeaways, including:

Arne: discuss with Ben, director of Devoted & Disgruntled, about using their space/imprimatur to launch /host an adjunct OST D&D event.  Talk with Tarek, director of Battersea Arts Centre, about venues/space

Nina: propose to Oxford Climate School (which I’m currently attending) to add an additional 9th session to the lecture series, offer to facilitate using Open Space, to discuss next steps amongst all the attendees at the Climate School.  Try to convince local XR group to use Open Space at some upcoming meetings/events, because People’s Assembly, and the standard whoever talks loudest gets the last word feel not creative enough

“#bornatdnd” Arne wrote in big letters at the bottom of the flipchart page.

A few days after the event, Arne and I were discussing where to go with some plans we came up with on the weekend.

“It’s so great you had all those ideas,” Arne said to me.

“Me?  I thought they were your ideas,” I said  “It seemed like they just happened by themselves…”


We are planning a Climate UnConference for 1 May in London. Contact me to find out more (form on site or via social media).