Transformation VERSUS Sustainability
& why can’t the 2 Just Get Along?
“Most enduring structures (in nature, society,
the human psyche) are resistant to fundamental
change, by which I mean change that alters
the givens of those structures themselves.
It’s almost a matter of logic: no self-contained
world can induce its own fundamental change,
because self-containment means it knows
nothing beyond its own givens. In such
cases accidents are useful indeed.”
(Lewis Hyde: The Trickster Makes the World)
Can’t be both consistent and complete.
The kind of thinking that sustains the
system can’t be the kind that changes it:
re-organizes, reconfigures, reformats,
reforms.
How can any self-conscious system
correct itself without demoralization?
No, seriously: I’m asking. How can
any self-conscious system correct
itself without demoralization?
Or maybe this is the better way
to frame it:
How can any self-conscious system
demoralize itself without
Demoralization?
Strategic planning?
Won’t strategic
planning plan to
sustain itself
rather than to
transform?
Of course. Of course it will.
How could it possible do
other wise?
xxxooo, Ray Anderson
No comments:
Post a Comment