But …… not half as much as I liked Saskia Olde Wolbers. The work of Pipi slightly reminded me of Wolbers work but than: Wolbers really impressed me. Actually, she was the first videoartist I ever liked. Until I have seen her work I associated video art with a boring symbolistic artist hocus pocus. Looking for hours at an empty chair or seeing a hand trying to catch mud over and over. More a symbol of the ‘unconventional anti-bourgouis’ character of the artists than a piece you might actually want to watch. Wolders work is not at all like that. It is mesmerizing. I guess it is influenced by dance and it has like Pililottes work a psychodelic, organic aspect. But the difference is: you don’t get bored. Actually, you can’t get enough of it. The reason might be that you get a lot of story in her work. It is like ‘alineating, empty story’ . But still … story. Drame, development. If you ever get the chance to see her, please do! You could watch this YouTube example, but it doesn’t do complete credit to her work

Funny how strong the illusion of ourselves as an individual is. And to see how we boil down our ‘individual selves’ to the part of us we know best: our conscious thoughts. We feel our choices to be completely free. We feel we make our own decisions in our conscience mind. The fact is however that our choices are contextual, based on influences we do not always notice. We react to our company. Our voice adapts (without us noticing) to status: the pitch raises if we meet a ‘boss’ and lowers if we feel socially above. This is all behaviour that has been measured and proved – but we are not aware of it. How much individuality is in behaviour we are not aware of?

There is a different level where the illusion of individuality is in tension with reality. In our world achievements are important (sometimes even in the circles that are achievement-aversive,  competing in being more averse to achievement than others). We are highly trained in perceiving personal achievements as ‘individual’: something to be proud of as a person. There is nothing wrong with that, but if you look at any achievement under a looking glass, you will have to notice that there are no ‘purely’ individual achievements. I write this blog on a Mac Air. The software is developed by Blog Press. I lend all of the words from the English language, that – by chance – is the product of many language like Frisian (my origins are from “Fryslan”), French and many others. I learned the language at school. The thoughts I express are lend, if there is any originality in it is the blending of ideas. If there is any skill in language usage, I probably inherited it from my father (a preacher) and my mother (very good in telling stories). But we flourish on the idea of our own achievements. It has been proved that we get depressed if we do not indulge in a exaggerated idea about our own contribution to our successes. We need that ego-boost.

A third level. We are not that aware of how ‘others’ interact with and even ‘form’ our individual selves. I have been living for 23 years with my wife, 20 years of those with our eldest son and 17 with the second one. I live with these persons every day. I am working in a company I bought in 1998. Some of the employees I have been working with for almost 20 years, and I meet them at an almost daily basis. One of my best friends has become a brother in law 15 years ago. We have spend long hours disputing, exchanging ideas. Al of these persons have influenced in one way or another in the way I think, how I feel, how I take my decisions. What is the individual me? Where does it start? Where does it stop?

A fourth level in the ‘illusion of individuality’. Like me as one person. Or you as one. How different are you if you are with your three best friends or with your colleges? How different are you if you are in the company of superiors? If you talk to a beautiful male/female? If you enter a shop? Some of the ‘role changes’ are marked with different clothing. By wearing uniform. By changing attitude.

in the illusion of individuality. The illusion of myself as an invariant phenomenon. The illusion of me being the same as the person I have vivid memories of as a child. There is no single cell in my body that is the same as it was at the time of these memories. Psychology has proven that even these memories are not so much as ‘movies’ ‘proofs of the past’ but as a continuously retold story, changing through time without me noticing. If I look back carefully I see read threads through time, but also many changes. What we tend to see as a clear cut nucleus (our personality) is actually a cloud with not very defined shapes, to be interpreted in many, many ways and to change continiously.

And I do not think that this is a purely individual, philosophic fantasy. There are important implications to marketing and research. If we think that clients are ‘clear cut individuals with predictable choice patterns’ we might be wrong. If our marketing is based upon that conception, the marketing could be wrong.

The language Thomas uses, is actually too difficult for me. Some of his poems I don’t get at all, but when I am fascinated by them that doesn’t stop me from reading them over and over. But when I think about it: that happens to me with Dutch poets as well. The simple concept of meaning doesn’t apply to poetry. It is not possible to get the ‘full meaning’  by definition. Poetry is interesting because the meaning is not a fixed, simple thing. It changes every time you read the poem, it evolves during the time. The meaning grows and evolves. This characteristic applies to many more means of communication, but we do not always realise that. Come to think of it: everything apart from user manuals (and nobody but the writers understand those) shares this characteristic with poems, only less obvious.

Another interesting phenomenon about poems is the hybrid between form and meaning. You can’t separate them. The medium is the message. The words are the message. Especially with Dylan Thomas, who sort of moulds the words by reusing them throughout the poem in slightly different ways. Every time you read the word again in a new context, the meaning of the previous one is echoed, and in this way the words catch more meaning during the poem. But you would never be able to tell how. It is not an obvious meaning that you could define in a dictionary. It is more like the meaning of music. You can’t tell it, you just have to read it. As an experiment I will give you the last couplet of a poem that sort of keeps me busy the last days:

Flower, flower the peoples fusion.
Oh light in zenith, the coupled bud,
And the flame in the flesh’s vision.
Out of the sea, the drive of oil,
Socket and grave, the brassy blood,
Flower, flower, all all and all.

Probably if you read this, you won’t be completely off the world at all, because the words have not yet been ‘moulded’ for you. You haven’t yet had the previous four times ‘flesh’ was used, or the three times of ‘ all and all’  (not to mention the other times the word ‘all’  is used single) or the opening couplet, linking ‘oil’ to both lave and ice. And this as only the linking through words. There is echo in meaning as well.

So try to read the whole poem, and see what happens!

However, I just was guided to a wonderful website of chris jordan, an artist who uses photographs to give us an idea about ‘numbers’ in waste: 32.000 barbie dolls to signify the number of breast enlargements every month in the USA. 320.000 light bulbs, signifying the amount of kilowatthours wasted every minute in the USA s as a consequence of ineffeciency. Wonderful how he brings into life enormous numbers, and a society based on overspending. And beautiful photography!

A rich source was the White tiger from Aravind Adiga that I wrote about a few days ago. Check out this part of a phrase (page 11 in the paperback edetion (Atlantic books London):

(…) all these ideas, half formed and half digested and half correct, mix up with other half-cooked ideas in your head, and I guess these half formed ideas bugger one another, and make more half formed ideas, and this is what you act on and live with.

I don’t think I ever read a more adequate description of how human gather knowledge and form ideas about the world. I particulary like the evolutionary aspect about it (the ideas in our head bugger each other and create new species). But the most striking blow in the head of any rationalist approach to societal affairs is the concluding: ‘this is what you act on and live with’.

I am in favour of mixing the Nobel prize for fiction with sociology.

Again, a masterpiece. One big letter from ‘an entrepeneur’ to the chinese premier Wen JiaBao. I would like to mention it for one reason: it illustrates brilliantly the concept of ambiguity. The main character is a poor man. He hasn’t even got a name. You sympasize with him. However Adiga cleverly plays with the archetype of the ‘poor and honest’. This book is definitively not a new Uncle Tom. As a reader you are drawn into his life, but that is not exactly made easy. You sort of experience the ambiguity of motives and intent.

The book gives you some insight in the Indian world, but in a part of it that is not only strange to us, but strange to the writer as well as shown in the video from the Booker site.

Maybe this book should be added to a list of marketers reading list, since I notice that often in marketing the concept of ambiguity is not very developted: the one and clear motive is more easy to understand and to act upon, whereas in reality often our motives are a mix of different, often even conflicting motives.

I have seen it, and must say I was impressed. It is exuburant, extravagant and outrageous. I think the beauty of it lies in the multiplicy of meanings it evokes at the same time: memento mori, vanitas, bling bling, craftmenship, money.  It is at the same time conceptual art (which I hate) and not conceptual at all. It is often said that art is able to express  the spirit of a time and it can be seen as ‘weak signal’ for future developments. How coïncidal is it that this piece of art has been issued just before the crisis we encounter? I think the piece fits perfectly well in the environment of the Rijksmuseum with its 17th centrury  art.

Very worthwile is the part of the website that allows visitors to express their opinion.

Early this year I had the opportunity to do a narrative project for the orchestra. As it appeared, the orchestra is part of an extremely strong narrative. It is deeply rooted in the Amsterdam collective consciousness. This is a story of succes through constant innovation. The project lead to interesting insights for the management, and contributed to the thinking that underlies the new website. Of course it did so only partly. David Bazen as the ‘manager of all business affairs’ strongly advocates new media as a tool for innovation. I guess the new website certainly reflects this, it is worth looking at their homepage.

Check out the the new possibility of downloading complete symphonies as a gift of the 120 year young orchestra. Because of the coöperation with the dutch radio site the interface is partly in Dutch, but it should be possible to fill in even if you don’t understand the language.

(this item was first published on www.cognitive-edge.com/blogs/guests)