Dear colleague, Ralph asked what or who is "violated" by the use of a table in the center. I am facilitating an open space in a large Berlin church the next two days. The church is "just" the meeting place, the client is the "Round table for sustainable development in Berlin and Brandenburg". We went to see the space and to talk with the church people about logistics and stuff. We explained about the circle and pointed out that the center of the room which has an inlaid small spiral ornament would be the place where people would go to to write down their issues. And that we would put a blanket or a rug there. They asked us not to cover the centre with the spiral but to put the rug right next to it. When I talked more with them they answered Ralphs question (I had not seen his response yet) with the statement: Well, it is the center, we dont cover the center. Granted, this is a special situation. But it got me to thinking. And it confirmed my feeling about the meaning the centre has to me. I am sure the "violation" is first of all my thing. So to give an answer to Ralphs question on what or who is "violated" : The centre is "violated" (obscured ?) and my sense of the space is "violated". By the way, participants have occasionally suggested that a table be placed in the center to help with the writing. Others have even objected to having flowers at the center. I agree with Ralph that we need to be tolerant of experimentation and multiple approaches. What I also observed is that I need to be closely in touch with my own feelings about the space and at the same time not to make a "rule" about how open space should be facilitated or how the space is to be held. hugs to all of you michael
Michael M Pannwitz Draisweg 1 12209 Berlin Germany Tel.: 49 30 772 8000 Fax: 49 30 773 92 464
