Tuesday, 13 January 2009

Brilliant I and other conversations

"Sharing our brilliance to unlock the brilliance of others- Discuss," said Ray Shaw, chief facilitator and agitator to one of the groups at last nights
Gurteen Knowledge Cafe.

I recognised the concept of this immediately, having been fortunate to meet, work for, with or alongside some truly brilliant, inspiring, empowering, uplifting people during my life and career. Some people with this magical brilliance are instantly recognisable, they captivate, engage, motivate, facilitate, inspire and nurture people around them. Their brilliance shines through and captivates, draws people in, sows the seeds for creativity.

How? What is the special ingredient? What makes their brilliance shine through?

Their ability to tell a great story. To lead conversation along a path that is rich in content, depth and debate. But conversation cannot be a one way process? Conversation requires active listening and participation, brilliant people do not preach, they do not focus on their own brilliance, they unlock the brilliance of others through their skills but also their humanity, recognition that every person has brilliance, but not every person has necessarily had the opportunity to convey this brilliance nor perhaps had their brilliance recognised and for want of a better word, confirmed.

  • So are we all brilliant?
  • Do we all have brilliance?
  • How do we say we are brilliant?
  • Are we allowed to say we are brilliant?
If the circumstances are right, then yes. If the context is right then yes. If the message is genuine and contributes to a conversation then yes.

Is brilliance always positive? Well no, some people are brilliant at being destructive, at using their skills to be subversive, belittle, block, dominate deconstruct or destroy. They may be brilliant storytellers, they may be brilliant speakers, but when it comes to conversation, their Ego dominates all and doesn't allow for opinion, debate or conversation.

The group debate I actually chose to join looked at
whether it is possible to have depth and quality of conversation on the web?

Sure you can using VOIP, seeing the person, being able to converse with a person visually adds depth and meaning to the words and content. On reflection, the key element face to face communication allows is spontaneity and flow.

How often do the truly memorable conversations we have head off at several tangents and conclude having been on a journey that has lead to a place we didn't expect to visit?

I'm not sure the vast majority of web2.0 applications facilitate these facets. The 140 character limit of twitter may be great for copywriters and those skilled in media and advertising, but how are other twitterers able to discover if the person is truly brilliant, or just out to self promote for their own gain?

Something struck me last night as truly odd. The term "followers" as used by twitter. I have 190 "followers". What does that mean? I can't help but think of Monty Python

I am not the messiah; I am not Brian, so would you all just please leave me alone.....

Facebook, Myspace, Bebo et al are great for finding people, keeping in touch, sharing photos, but conversations that inspire and lead to greater things? I think not.

Wikis? Maybe, the beauty of wikis to me is that the background & creation of an idea, a project, an aim is clearly there to see. You can see the context, follow how it grows, people can actively contribute and comment.

Is it possible to convey your brilliance on the web in the same way you can in person?

I don't know.

I kind of wish this particular post was on a wiki, I want to explore this with as many people as possible but how?

Your brilliant comments and debate would be appreciated :-)

(smiley emoticon to convey my warmth and genuiness)

No comments:

Post a Comment