Convergent Model of Renewal: A Sketchnote Companion and Discussion Guide (Complete)

Last night we finished up a six-week discussion at Camas Friends Church on my book. You can purchase “A Convergent Model of Renewal: Remixing the Quaker Tradition in a Participatory Culture” through my publisher Wipf and Stock or on Amazon (it’s more expensive there): “A Convergent Model of Renewal.”

I want to share the complete “Sketchnote Companion and Discussion Guide” for the book here. This is helpful for either small group or personal use.

Feel free to share and dispense however that makes sense as usual things are shared here under the creative commons 4.0 “share and share alike” designation.

Download Complete Guides

Download: Complete Discussion Guide for A Convergent Model of Renewal

Download: A Sketchnote Companion for A Convergent Model of Renewal

Convergent Model of Renewal: Discussion Guide and Sketchnotes (Chp. 2)

Daniels_AConvergentModelofRenewal_01193_copyWe are doing a discussion at Camas Friends Church on my book, “A Convergent Model of Renewal.” I am posting the sketchnotes and  discussion questions here each week for anyone who would like to download them and use them. Feel free to share and dispense however that makes sense as usual things are shared here under the creative commons 4.0 “share and share alike” designation.

Resource Guide

Download: Sketchnotes: Chapter 2 Sketchnotes.

Download: Discussion Guide Intro, Chapter 1 and Chapter 2.

Download: Chapter One Resources

What Makes for a Good Remix?

IMG_20150416_121524.030

What makes for a good remix? This is a question that comes up a lot when I present on themes related to my book, “A Convergent Model of Renewal: Remixing the Quaker Tradition in a Participatory Culture.” When we talk about how tradition can be revitalized and “remixed” within new cultures people ask how do we know that it is still a part of the same tradition?

Here are some basic thoughts on it.

  1. The original piece of art, sample, text, etc. is recognizable. The connection or reference to what the remix is drawing on is accessible those within that particular community.

  2. There is genuinely something new about the remix. It is clear that it is original in some way. And this originality often leverages the past, while shedding new light or a new perspective on the old in a truly innovative way.

  3. It works. Everything fits together in a new seamless production. There is a big difference between Lee Major in the “Six Million Dollar Man” and Frankenstein. The keys match, the beats line up. Whatever contradictions may have previously existed they are resolved within the new piece of art.

  4. It is participatory: it moves people on the dance floor. Another way to say this is that it is affirmed, as well as created, through a consensus process within the community that is directly affected by the remix. The community is invested in the outcome of what is created.

  5. It remains open to more remixes and modifications. It would be both tragic and ironic if a remix became proprietary, dogmatic and restricted under copyright. What is created through an open-ended process must seek to affirm further developments, remixes and new ways of sampling.

Download this sketchnote as a .pdf

 

Write the Vision: Quakers, Zines and Participatory Culture

Flickr credit: cibergaita

This is a synchroblog written for Quaker Voluntary Service, of which I am a board member. The theme is “Quakers and new media.” (Twitter Link #qvssynchroblog)

“Write the vision; make it plain on tablets, so that a runner may read it. For there is still a vision for the appointed time; it speaks of the end, and does not lie. If it seems to tarry, wait for it; it will surely come, it will not delay.” (Habakkuk 2:2–3 NRSV)

Early Publishers of Truth

Early Quakers called themselves, among other things, “Publishers of Truth.” They published truth with a missionary fervor, writing in order that a new world would be given forth from their written, as well as spoken, words. As I read early Friends, I see their publishing being very much related to how they understood the mission of the church to be, at its heart, participatory. As we think about who and what are the publishers of truth today – and if there is even such a thing left – I can’t help but suggest that any form of publishing that is not at its core participatory, inclusive and prophetic in nature is not rooted in the identity of these “Publishers of Truth.”

Just by way of background, these Publishers of Truth were an almost unstoppable force. Consider what Quaker historian, Elbert Russell, says in his “The History of Quakerism” (1979),

In spite of some arrests for owning, circulating or selling Quaker publications, and in a few cases the seizure of destruction of offending presses, there was a large output of printed matter. In the seven decades after 1653 there were 440 Quaker writers, who published 2,678 separate publications, varying from a single page tract to folios of nearly a thousand pages (79).

Russell goes on to explain how censorship worked back then, first oversight was given by George Fox, then it moved to a designated meeting of elders. The nature of the writing was often publicly articulating their beliefs, writing epistles to other meetings, creating pamphlets and responding to attacks from their detractors (80). There are others who can track the history of publication far better than me, but for much of Quaker history Friends have kept a steady hand on the printing press and they left us something to learn from and build on today. It was an essential thread to who the early Friends were. Continue reading Write the Vision: Quakers, Zines and Participatory Culture