Post 5

I thought our discussion on symbols was interesting. What I found interesting was that we never talked about what happens when symbols don't exist. I did a NODA internship this past summer at Montclair State University in New Jersey. One of the problems they had was that there were no symbols. They had a really hard time answering the question "what does it mean to be a Montclair student?" Students there weren't entirely invested in the school. Many students wore sweatshirts from other institutions. There was a feeling of "I didn't get into Rutgers, so I'm here". There were no established symbols or traditions that students could buy into. Working in Orientation, we tried to instill a sense of pride, but my sense was that it was mostly superficial. It makes me wonder how one creates symbols and traditions. My sense is that it's not an easy thing to do. I feel like it has to be an organic process. But, if a symbol is to be embraced by the community, it must be something in which everyone can feel a sense of ownership.

Not related to this topic, per say, but something that I'm learning over the course of this class.... I hate the word "follower" and I'm hesitant to use the word "leader". So much of what we are reading emphasizes shared leadership, and how important it is for everyone to be involved in the leadership process. It makes me wonder about the nature of leadership, and whether the terms "leader" and "follower" would exist in an ideal organization. Perhaps the term co-creater would be a better term. I actually called up my brother today to ask him about anarchism. True anarchy is not total chaos, rather it is a system of truly shared power in which each person is considerd to be a "leader". I guess it's a concept I'm still struggling with, and I don't know that I'll ever work it out. But I'm okay with that.