metaphors

For the church newsletter.

           I have been teaching a section of the senior liberal arts capstone at GFU, in which students are required to attend weekly lectures on broadly citizenship-related themes and then discuss the lectures and assigned readings in smaller discussion groups.  The students then go on to develop group projects addressing a perceived societal problem (education, immigration, gang violence… something like that).

            Last Monday’s lecture was delivered by Steve Sherwood of the religion department at Fox, and his topic was civility—or the lack thereof—in our discourse with each other.  First, he made excellent use of humorous clips to illustrate that 1) incivility is nothing new (look up “election of 1800 ads” on YouTube for a delightful [?] glimpse into what Adams’ and Jefferson’s TV ads might have looked like, based upon the printed record of that election) and 2) we really do carry this incivility to ridiculous and quite offensive ends (a revealing Jon Stewart piece on our proclivity to compare anyone we disagree with to Adolf Hitler).

            Following this insight-laced levity, however, Steve introduced an idea that hasn’t left me since.  George Lakoff and Mark Johnson have written a book titled Metaphors We Live By that Steve often uses in his preaching courses.  Lakoff and Johnson point out that the central metaphor we use to describe our discussions with each other… is war.  We are “right on target” in our arguments; we “attack,” make “indefensible” claims, utilize “strategy,” are “shot down,” and decide we have “won.”  As we discussed this idea in class the following day, one of my students noted she had been talking with Steve after the lecture when a classmate came up to Steve to compliment him, exclaiming “you killed it!”  At which point, of course, everyone stopped for a second, realized what he said, and started—uncomfortably—to laugh.

            War permeates our conversations with each other.

            Yikes.

            Steve left students (and professors!) grappling with the question of how we might change our metaphors.  What would it mean if we could remove notions of war, of fixed power relationships, from our conversations?  How could we forge a metaphor of love that could allow us to see that power isn’t necessarily zero-sum and truths may be found on both sides of a disagreement?

            Steve’s question is provocative, partly because I confess I am not sure what words to use as replacements.  Perhaps the language of diplomacy offers us some tools.  We can propose and suggest rather than attacking and parrying.  Perhaps that gets us some of the way toward a safer space for the important conversations we need to learn how to have in a pluralistic society—and a pluralistic church!

            Our stewardship focus this month is upon tending our relationships with each other.  I hope you’ll take the time to pen a thank-you note or two to somebody you’ve noticed doing something for which you’re grateful.  That person might even be somebody you disagree with on something (or many things).  Metaphors of grace and metaphors of thanksgiving—perhaps these are new paths toward a safer world for all of God’s children.