Many Become One Through a Process of Coalescence
Systemically, an orchestra consists of a whole greater than the sum of its parts. Through loving collaboration—the characteristic feature of “synergy”—each musician contributes to a complex of sounds beyond the capability of his or her competence with an instrument, even beyond the full realization of their individual potential. In this image I observe the interplay of the many and the one. At a performance it appears that the musicians are playing the notes on the page, so much so the conductor may appear to be superfluous.
The conductor doesn’t just synchronize the players according to the score, he coalesces them into a whole that presents his or her interpretation of the composer’s intent. Having played third saxophone in my high school orchestra, I experienced the significance of the conductor firsthand. Our teacher, Mr. Bushley, provided the vision and shaped our diverse abilities and instruments into unique and hopefully stirring performances. As interpretations, no two performances are exactly alike.
Certainly, the score could be played without a conductor. Indeed, the musical composition would occur, but it would not “sing.” It would not express a singular vision, not even that of the composer. Although Mozart wrote the score for each instrument, it was the manner of his interpretation and conducting that gave the notes tonalities and rhythms, a vitality and richness that had been fixed on the page.
In system’s parlance, notes on a page are simply “data.” So strictly speaking, the performance is not the score. Like a recipe for stew, the sound attains quality through a process of combining the right ingredients at the right time and in a certain way. A conductor might say “Louder here, softer there; here with gusto, there not so much; let the woodwinds carry this phrase.” In that way, each performance is unique. That’s why an orchestra can have only one conductor, one interpreter. Otherwise, there would be breakdowns and chaos.
Whatever the collaborative field—movies, business, media, government or military—outstanding performances more often come from systems where individual members perform under the guidance of one person who has a vision of the outcome and is authorized to manifest it. Certain popular novels written by two authors fall flat compared to the those written by the “name” author. In the case of screenplays, those written by committee aren’t as compelling as those written by one person, especially when the writer is also the producer and director, a singular visionary. This also applies to sports where competition is institutionalized. From experience, coaches need to have the vision of a winning team and hopefully the motivational skills needed to coalesce the players into a functioning whole. It’s the task of ship captains, religious leaders, small business owners, publishers, museum directors, CEO’s and the President of the United States.
Collaboration under the direction of a single individual can be a daunting challenge, in part just to convince the participants to value and respect the vision in the first place, and then trust that the visionary can deliver it, enough that the members will surrender to it, ideally to wholeheartedly embrace it. And here’s a crucial point across the board. In the example of an orchestra, it can appear that the musicians organize themselves for the good of the whole—the performance. In system’s theory however, the principal is reversed— “the whole organizes the parts.”
It’s the love of music, that brings musicians together. Because thought always precedes action, the challenge of leaders is to communicate what they envision clearly and with passion so they will attract the best “players.” And the challenge of those aspiring to be leaders is to find leaders within their field and learn from them, noticing in particular how they are uniting the many into one.
In my Lifestyles and Workplaces in Television and Film classes, I observed that employers in creative fields hire the best players, the most competent and responsible people, they can find. They must do that to insure the realization of their goal or vision. Rather than look for jobs (a contract exchanging time and energy for money), I recommended that students understand their special gifts, what they have to offer, and consider instead looking for work (time and energy directed toward fulfillment as well as money). And while growing in knowledge, building skills and researching prospective employers, immediately demonstrate competence and responsibility by doing what they say they will do.
I also pointed out to students that most of their grandparents didn’t have the luxury of pursuing work that was fulfilling. Of necessity, their choices were limited to earning a living through jobs however they could, wherever there was an opportunity. It’s important for young people to appreciate and not take for granted the family, social and political circumstances that allow them the freedom and opportunity to fulfill their dreams as well as earn a paycheck.
Individual success depends on environments that trigger the fulfillment of our genetic potential. Environments that motivate through fear literally shut down the potential for growth. Those that motivate through vision, open us up to express unforeseen possibilities.
Bruce Lipton, Biologist
Author, The Biology of Belief: Unleashing the Power of Consciousness, Matter & Miracles
________________________
Contemplative Photography 