Wow. I find it a mindboggling proposal. It sounds almost like a
conservatory for already proven masters. There was some interesting talk in the Dec 2 New Yorker about Group Think. I quote Malcolm Gladwell:
He goes on to briefly discuss the various masters who have inspired one another, but it would be too much to quote here.
We are inclined to think that genuis innovators are loners, that they do not need the social reinforcement the rest of us crave. But that's not how it works, whether it's televisoin comedy or, for that matter, the more exalted realms of art and politics and ideas. In his book "The Sociology of Philosphies," Randall Collins finds in all of known history only three major thinkers who appeared on the scene by themselves: the first-century Taoist meta-physician Wang Ch'ung, the fourteenth century Zen mystic Bassui Tokusho, and the fourteenth-century Arabic philosopher Ibn Khaldun. Everyone else who mattered was part of a movement, a school, a band of followers and disciples and mentors and rivals and friends who saw each other all the time and had long arguments over coffee and slept with one another's spouses."
Can trying to artificially structure such a group work just as well as those that come together of their own social accord? It seems like a big exciting gamble, sure to produce something of interest even if it fails it's loftiest ambitions.
I'm dying to be in NYC to see the spinoffs!
After the earlier worries about White Oaks termination, this is even better than preserving history....
Languishing in rural domesticity,