Thank you for this visual reflection, Brie. The sketch of the pillars got me thinking along other metaphorical lines: pillars are key for support, but they are also rigid and inflexible. Maybe that tracks—maybe pillars like listening need to be unmovable in the face of constantly shifting terrain. Or, maybe something with more flexibility is required? My mind can take it in either way, and I’m curious to know more about how you think about this question of support.
Brie, I really liked that at the bottom you wrote about the downsides of care. That’s part of my struggle when I try to have a set definition for care. The more I think about the term, the more I keep changing my mind. As Katina pointed out, I’m also curious about the columns. Maybe I’m overthinking, but is it because you consider them to be outdated architecture? Is it ironic to think about pillars and listening at the same time? Maybe in order to listen and care effectively we need structures that are less rigid and outdated. Not sure if this makes sense! But these are my thoughts for now.
Its so interesting, because the article highlights how listening is a pillar of care. However, pillars make me think about domination, about imperialism, about Greek, Roman columns, of Empires. Care has been weaponized, has been positioned as empathy when it may actually be apathy, and its interesting to explore where else has Domination, Supremacy, existed under the “guise” of “care,”. The Institution is not capable of care, like I believe D mentioned in their post, or one of their posts. To explore the dark side or wrong side of care is equally important to the “What is Care” conversation as the self loving angle.
Comments are closed.
Need help with the Commons?
Email us at commonshelpsite@gmail.com so we can respond to your questions and requests. Please email from your CUNY email address if possible. Or visit our help site for more information:
Thank you for this visual reflection, Brie. The sketch of the pillars got me thinking along other metaphorical lines: pillars are key for support, but they are also rigid and inflexible. Maybe that tracks—maybe pillars like listening need to be unmovable in the face of constantly shifting terrain. Or, maybe something with more flexibility is required? My mind can take it in either way, and I’m curious to know more about how you think about this question of support.
Brie, I really liked that at the bottom you wrote about the downsides of care. That’s part of my struggle when I try to have a set definition for care. The more I think about the term, the more I keep changing my mind. As Katina pointed out, I’m also curious about the columns. Maybe I’m overthinking, but is it because you consider them to be outdated architecture? Is it ironic to think about pillars and listening at the same time? Maybe in order to listen and care effectively we need structures that are less rigid and outdated. Not sure if this makes sense! But these are my thoughts for now.
Its so interesting, because the article highlights how listening is a pillar of care. However, pillars make me think about domination, about imperialism, about Greek, Roman columns, of Empires. Care has been weaponized, has been positioned as empathy when it may actually be apathy, and its interesting to explore where else has Domination, Supremacy, existed under the “guise” of “care,”. The Institution is not capable of care, like I believe D mentioned in their post, or one of their posts. To explore the dark side or wrong side of care is equally important to the “What is Care” conversation as the self loving angle.