Q I go into detail about what I'm asking for below. For those wishing to charge ahead without reading through that (which, remember, is like doing the work without listening in class!), this week I ask that you discuss two things in your initial post (to appear by Thursday/Friday): 1) your level of comfort and/or discomfort with Week Five's Discussion exercise. What was your initial response upon reading the instructions? Did that feeling change? How? Were you able to rest? And, did L.A. help or did it add to the challenge? 2) some aspect of life in Los Angeles (big or small) that requires Angelenos to trust, or, suspend their disbelief. What might be considered a Los Angeles "trust exercise"? I offer examples, below. Then, as always, come on back before the week closes and post a thoughtful response to a colleague's post. In the above video, author Lawrence Weschler discusses artist Robert Irwin's installation, Scrim Veil-Black Rectangle-Natural Light. I hope you'll spend the 2 minutes watching this as you consider what you'll share in this week's discussion. Notice the emphasis Weschler places on experiencing the art and consider how often we forget to consider experience as the end product of an endeavor. Then, marvel at how focusing on experience removes dichotomous thinking, the kind we embrace when we are seeking the right (versus wrong) answer. Why this matters: dichotomous thinking is antithetical to strong critical analysis (there are always more than two sides to every story, if there weren't we would have no need to theorize, no need for thesis statements, no need for critical essays). When focusing on experience we are able to un-center the knee-jerk reach for a "right" answer, opening up the realm of possibility and theory. This week, part one of our discussion is focusing on last week's discussion. For last week's discussion, we napped, or pretended to nap, or in some other way achieved a moment of rest. At least, that was my hope. For some of you, this may have been easily accomplished. You trusted me when I said that no discussion posts were required. For others, I understand, it was much harder to "suspend disbelief," or, to put it another way, to trust me and the design of the course enough to at least follow the directions about not posting anything. Especially as this is a Scholars course, I suspect that more than a few of those in the room have a harder time not "performing" in an obvious way. I am guessing that for some, this idea feels pretty... squirmy. We have to trust what we are being told, and, we have to trust that who we are does not depend on what we do. In the case of Week Five's Discussion that meant trusting in me and the community we are building here. How did that feel? In the case of Los Angeles (there it is, you knew I was getting here), we are asked to suspend our disbelief, to trust, at every turn. Despite the many reasons to believe we should not trust (each other, the process, the city), we have to continue on writing our story of and in Los Angeles. We must believe that someone will take pity on our blinker and we'll get over to the next lane. We must believe we'll find that next apartment or job. We must believe the water will continue to flow from the taps. We must believe that our name will be called by whomever it is we are wishing to call our name. Because we live in community (such as it is) we are performing small trust exercises throughout our days. For part two of this week's discussion, I'm asking what you consider to be an L.A. trust exercise? I look forward to reading your posts! Keep the faith, Writers!