Integral Politics

Hey Karlduff,

Thanks for sharing your perspective on this.  I agree with your sentiment...but, that was meant as a joke.  A little humor to brighten up the serious topic.  Sure, it could have been about any number of things, but i found that sound byte particularly funny.   

Sorry to hear that it "completely spoiled" the presentation.  I was hoping that folks would separate the worthy content from the tongue-in-check stuff at the end. If others have a similar experience, i will remove it.

Best...

Clint Fuhs
cfuhs@integrallife.com

Clint: If others have a similar experience, I will remove it.

I certainly didn't find myself reactive, but here was my experience.

The first time I didn't quite catch it for I had a baby sitting on my lap. All I heard was "moose." I knew it was a joke but since I didn't hear it I started to think of what the party animals were (as in donkey and elephant) wondering if one was a moose. But at any rate, I did sort of question that little late-Beatles-like unexpected addition at the "very, very end of the end."

Now, the second time - at the end of the next piece - I did catch it. I wholly appreciate the humor but presentationally, if you are going to include the little surprise joke, I wouldn't do it twice. To me, that did spoil the objectivity. It struck me as all this MARVELOUS (and it is marvelous) presentation about Integral and then an absolute last minute reminder "BTW we don't like Palin!" or "BTW we are biased." This is mainly because being reiterated it really seems like someone is trying to get some kind of a point across with it.

There an idea in fiction of "the intrusive author." That is, we as audience are not allowed to assume a full 3rd-person, unbiased, objective, view because the author (or director, or producer, or actor) keeps "intruding" and "commenting" and in some cases is even sure to tell us what to leave making of it all.

Amidst the rest of the presentation, even the first time, it does feel like the "intrusive author," even without interpreting anything from it but the creators, woops!, pulling a little joke. The entire presentation is absolutely wonderful and I am very, very thankful for it. Chances are, too, anyone I would send it to would be more than accepting of a Palin dig. (If it be interpreted like that.) But if you decide to remove it I would do it for this reason. You and Corey did not make any such comment during the piece, but even at the very end, it does strike as some kind of an authorial comment. (And, the comment that we leave with.) The second time I would indeed remove it for political reasons. i.e. because it implies bias which does, unfortunately - even with a single, 2 second swoop - work to undermine the value and integrity of the rest of this very important piece.

I mean, I get it. And even if I didn't express it above, I also appreciate it in various personal and creative ways. But if you want this piece to go viral to any extent outside of the already gathered and enthusiastic choir . . . I'd scratch it, at least (somehow) the second time. (Is there a third? I assume now it just simply follows the music.)

Tim