2013 just may be remembered as a watershed year for Pagans and the media. Currently (quite early in the year) we can see several projects that might bring America's large and diverse Pagan population into the unblinking eye of the media, especially television. It is possible that this year could see Pagans finally make a break through with public perception and overcome at least a few negative stereotypes. It is also possible that this year could see Pagans even more vilified and marginalized because of this interaction with media. Some segments of the Pagan community are ready to move (or already have moved) away from an Occult philosophy (staying hidden from view) and reach out to the greater community in America. Other segments of our community are either waiting to see how things will progress or are simply unprepared for us to be seen by this double-edged medium. It is just possible that 2013 will be the year it happens, ready or not.
The first part of the Pagans and television launched at the start of the year. Pagan Living TV has now competed their 4th weekly episode of their new Pagan-oriented news magazine called "The Pagan Voice". It is a professionally-produced television similar to 60 Minutes. The show seeks to look at current events from a Pagan persective. This show is clearly in its infancy and has a long way to grow, but already in just 4 episodes the show has gained greater depth and increased maturity. The purpose of the show seems (to me) to not only be an opportunity to inform, but also to begin discussions on many different topics. Often it is the discussion that stems from the stories that provides the greatest benefit in our homes and communities. I am definitely a supporter of Pagan Living TV and hope that we see it grow and blossom in the coming years. For a long time, many in our community have toiled to create wonderful podcasts and on-line broadcasts shows for Pagans. Pagan Living TV has taken the leap from the web to the production standards of broadcast television.
In a very different vein, at least two different west coast Pagan communities have been approached by a Hollywood production company that is interested in creating a reality television show. Leaders in both communities have met with representatives from the production company but the project is still far from being certain. As you can imagine, the communities being approached have to balance generations of villification at the hands of popular media against the potential gains of showing the greater community the true nature of Paganism in many of its varied forms. The general consensus seems to have been that if the producers are fair in their treatment that this would be an unequaled opportunity to educate. Naturally, everyone is extraordinarily concerned about the potential for abuse or explotation of our communities. The foremost thought in the minds of most is to protect our community first and educate second. If the community feels unsafe, the show would lose all realism as the vast majority of the community would withdraw from public view.
I fear that therein lies a danger. Let us try to imagine the realistic outcome of this situation. The cameras might be focused on a growing Pagan community finding its way to intercommunication and participation with their non-Pagan neighbors. The cameras might focus on a large, well-established Pagan community in a sprawling metropolitian area. At either extreme, the impacts of non-participation could be just as harmful as the worst case scenario if the community DID participate. Imagine that the leadership from every Pagan organization in the area banded together and decided that cameras were not welcome and the community would not participate. How long would it be before camera "hogs" would move in and fill the void? Can you imagine if anyone who wanted 10 seconds of fame could just claim to be a crazy Pagan and appear on camera? What would people's perceptions be of Pagans then?
I should also point out that the production company also has to be interested in going forward. The community leaders with whom I have spoken have all been openly skeptical and have approached the situation cautiously. If this concerns the production company they might not go any further. There are 100 other factors that might cause the production company to scrap the idea totally unrelated to any decisions that we might make. I think that's fine. I have faith in the universe and if the show is canned I will thank the Powers for answering the question for us.
Personally, I am one who is prone to gamble but ONLY when the odds look good. I don't want to suggest that any community should bow to pressure from Hollywood to do something they don't support. At the same time I also think that (especially for those of us who are out of the "broom closet") those of us who can help to promote a positive image of the Pagan community owe it to those who must remain in the shadows to try to reach out. Building bridges with our neighbors is a key to the future of our community. If we can build bridges with broadcast television then I am all for it. However, perhaps it is time for us to also consider how to respond if we see that the cameras in our communities are causing more harm than good. Or perhaps even if they are causing any harm at all
Welcome aboard television. Remember that many of us are keeping our eyes on you.
Sunday, January 27, 2013
Sunday, January 20, 2013
On Being A Pagan Leader
I have been privileged and cursed to have served in leadership roles a number of times in my adult life. Whether for personal or professional life, many people are called on from time to time. Being called to become a leader, sadly, does not equate to knowing how to be one. If there is one common trait I have found in good leaders, it is their lack of desire to take on the role and their dedication to complete it successfully (in spite of the lack of desire). The one most common trait I have found among bad leaders is the desire to lead being greater than the desire to serve those who follow.
Never be confused about this. "Leader" is a misleading term in at least one sense. The best leaders are concerned first and foremost with their followers. They don't let their own egos, their desires for revenge, or their need to control others drive them as leaders. A good leader might find herself in a position where she has to work with someone she would rather not even speak to. A good leader might find himself faced with a situation created by someone else and he steps in to fix it anyway, for the good of his group. A good leader knows when to step aside for the best interest of the rest - and a great leader is usually eager to do so. Most good leaders would prefer to be followers, but they are filling a need until someone else picks up the mantle. Good leaders worry about "us".
Bad leaders are most often motivated by ego in one form or another. The worst leaders are motivated by nothing other than money. A bad leader will use the power of her position to punish those she feel have personally wronged her. A bad leader will use that role in the community to force other individuals or groups to do things "his way" or face retribution. Bad leaders worry about "I" and are rarely concerned with "we".
That having been said, I don't think that all bad leaders are beyond redemption. If one is a cult leader, only interested in building a personal following and then using the power of that following to fulfill petty personal desires, then that leader is most likely beyond redemption. Leaders who are obsessed with controlling things themselves are not necessarily beyond redemption. Sometimes it's a matter of showing them the path.
Being a leader is a serious responsibility. Those who relish in leadership are difficult to trust. Every great leader, and nearly every good leader, I've ever known did not want to lead. Instead, they pick up the mantle of leadership because it has to be done. Sometimes others ask them to lead, other times they simply begin working and others join in. These defacto leaders often give tirelessly of themselves with little notice or thanks. However, bad leaders can still meet this criteria. Sometimes people are bad leaders because they are inexperienced. Sometimes people are bad leaders because they do not realize what they are doing is harming others. Sometimes people are bad leaders because they don't have an understanding of diplomacy or they have poor communication skills. Many of those leaders can grow and learn over time and become great leaders. It doesn't mean that they will, but the potential is there.
That's why I'm not willing to completely shut to the door on the bad leaders of today. I may not support them with networking, but I am always willing to help them grow on the path to good leadership if they ask. I would never foist my opinions on them unbidden, but if they sought help I would consider it. This is also one reason to keep an eye on the bad leaders in your community. If they change for the better, it is important to support that change. If they do not change, then it is important that your community be aware of their activities.
As a perfect case in point, I encountered a pair of bad leaders last week, but I believe that they meant well. They fell into that "inexperienced" category (I hope). When I approached them about a topic of great importance to our community (I had asked if I could bring a non-Pagan to this meeting so that people could ask him question about his plan to do a TV program on our community), they reacted in a very childish manner and accused me attempting to ambush their gathering with cameras. I was being a courteous person and asking if I could bring him, and they flew into a vulgarity-laced fury about how horrible I was. OK, I'm an author. I've had my work torn to shreds in reviews so I've developed a fairly thick skin. I would have been prepared to write the situation off to inexperience except for what happened next. This pair of self-proclaimed leaders told me that if I did not do exactly what they told me to do (follow the "rules" - their word - they set out) that they would disband their public discussion group and reconstitute it in private and I would not be invited to attend.
Um, what?
For a leader to be willing to actually disband a public group and attempt to convert it to a secret group harms the community they originally set out to serve. It hurts the members of that group to lose their meeting time and place and have to keep in the loop on the new, secret information. The group's meetings can no longer be included in community calendars. All networking is lost. Many people in need might never find this group as a result. And why? Because a pair of novice leaders thought someone else was going to take away 1% of their control over their meeting. They harmed the group (by denying them the chance to meet this person), they harmed the community (both with their threats and by limiting how many people knew about a situation that would have a major impact on our community), and they harmed the integrity of their group by acting so immaturely.
They lost attendees by their behavior and that is really sad in a young, growing community. They also harmed themselves by destroying their credibility with the so many other community leaders. That credibility might never be regained with some and that's unfortunate. Perhaps one day, given time and the desire to learn, these two will become wonderful leaders who put their community ahead of themselves. Until then, I will watch them. Although I can't in good conscience attend their meetings ever again, I shall hope for them to blossom. However, I will keep an eye out in case they rot instead.
Never be confused about this. "Leader" is a misleading term in at least one sense. The best leaders are concerned first and foremost with their followers. They don't let their own egos, their desires for revenge, or their need to control others drive them as leaders. A good leader might find herself in a position where she has to work with someone she would rather not even speak to. A good leader might find himself faced with a situation created by someone else and he steps in to fix it anyway, for the good of his group. A good leader knows when to step aside for the best interest of the rest - and a great leader is usually eager to do so. Most good leaders would prefer to be followers, but they are filling a need until someone else picks up the mantle. Good leaders worry about "us".
Bad leaders are most often motivated by ego in one form or another. The worst leaders are motivated by nothing other than money. A bad leader will use the power of her position to punish those she feel have personally wronged her. A bad leader will use that role in the community to force other individuals or groups to do things "his way" or face retribution. Bad leaders worry about "I" and are rarely concerned with "we".
That having been said, I don't think that all bad leaders are beyond redemption. If one is a cult leader, only interested in building a personal following and then using the power of that following to fulfill petty personal desires, then that leader is most likely beyond redemption. Leaders who are obsessed with controlling things themselves are not necessarily beyond redemption. Sometimes it's a matter of showing them the path.
Being a leader is a serious responsibility. Those who relish in leadership are difficult to trust. Every great leader, and nearly every good leader, I've ever known did not want to lead. Instead, they pick up the mantle of leadership because it has to be done. Sometimes others ask them to lead, other times they simply begin working and others join in. These defacto leaders often give tirelessly of themselves with little notice or thanks. However, bad leaders can still meet this criteria. Sometimes people are bad leaders because they are inexperienced. Sometimes people are bad leaders because they do not realize what they are doing is harming others. Sometimes people are bad leaders because they don't have an understanding of diplomacy or they have poor communication skills. Many of those leaders can grow and learn over time and become great leaders. It doesn't mean that they will, but the potential is there.
That's why I'm not willing to completely shut to the door on the bad leaders of today. I may not support them with networking, but I am always willing to help them grow on the path to good leadership if they ask. I would never foist my opinions on them unbidden, but if they sought help I would consider it. This is also one reason to keep an eye on the bad leaders in your community. If they change for the better, it is important to support that change. If they do not change, then it is important that your community be aware of their activities.
As a perfect case in point, I encountered a pair of bad leaders last week, but I believe that they meant well. They fell into that "inexperienced" category (I hope). When I approached them about a topic of great importance to our community (I had asked if I could bring a non-Pagan to this meeting so that people could ask him question about his plan to do a TV program on our community), they reacted in a very childish manner and accused me attempting to ambush their gathering with cameras. I was being a courteous person and asking if I could bring him, and they flew into a vulgarity-laced fury about how horrible I was. OK, I'm an author. I've had my work torn to shreds in reviews so I've developed a fairly thick skin. I would have been prepared to write the situation off to inexperience except for what happened next. This pair of self-proclaimed leaders told me that if I did not do exactly what they told me to do (follow the "rules" - their word - they set out) that they would disband their public discussion group and reconstitute it in private and I would not be invited to attend.
Um, what?
For a leader to be willing to actually disband a public group and attempt to convert it to a secret group harms the community they originally set out to serve. It hurts the members of that group to lose their meeting time and place and have to keep in the loop on the new, secret information. The group's meetings can no longer be included in community calendars. All networking is lost. Many people in need might never find this group as a result. And why? Because a pair of novice leaders thought someone else was going to take away 1% of their control over their meeting. They harmed the group (by denying them the chance to meet this person), they harmed the community (both with their threats and by limiting how many people knew about a situation that would have a major impact on our community), and they harmed the integrity of their group by acting so immaturely.
They lost attendees by their behavior and that is really sad in a young, growing community. They also harmed themselves by destroying their credibility with the so many other community leaders. That credibility might never be regained with some and that's unfortunate. Perhaps one day, given time and the desire to learn, these two will become wonderful leaders who put their community ahead of themselves. Until then, I will watch them. Although I can't in good conscience attend their meetings ever again, I shall hope for them to blossom. However, I will keep an eye out in case they rot instead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)