We live in map-crazy times.
Our cars communicate with satellites (GPS), as do our mobile phones. The Google Crusade is on, even into our private backyard, in the holy name of the Map. It has become very easy (for us and those who want to keep track of us) to tell the coordinates of our whereabouts.
This geographical mapping is one side of the coin. The other, non-geographical side is crazy in another way. In an empty way.
There is a lack of “maps” in many important areas. By map I mean a way to understand connections, relations, gradations, differences and similarities.
This seems to be the case with peace. I am sure that there has been brilliant books written about peace, but book brilliance is not enough. I am now concerned with more general understanding by the man and women in the street. They nowadays know exactly how to find and reach that hip bar on the other side of town, but their picture of peace and how to get there is extremely vague, if not non-existent.
So our physical orientation is matched in a weird way by our mental and philosophical non-orientation. Wouldn’t it be much better and more sound the other way around…?
Like this: Hardly anybody finds the hip bar, but everybody has a good orientation about the prerequisites of peace. And, when we finally find the bar, it will be so much more fun since we have searched for it a REALLY LONG TIME.
But if a bomb kills us meanwhile… nada, neither bar nor peace.
My own map or model of peace is a work in progress. Of course with such maps there is no standard as there is with physical maps. My map will not be the map of another peacenik or researcher.
An important point for me is that the map should be practical, not just describe peace but also create it. And since we ourselves create peace and war this is a map of ourselves, with our harmonious and disharmonious tendencies.
I will take this in small pieces, one step at a time. Let’s start with putting peace in one corner and war in the other.
WAR —————————————- PEACE
There is a large space between war and peace. Obviously peace doesn’t just suddenly erupt into war, and war doesn’t just erupt into peace (even though one could wish it would). There are intermediate stages
So what is in the middle, between the extremes? Let’s think in colors and imagine war as black and peace as white (the white dove).
What we see then is that the middle region needs to be grey, neither black nor white. A grey zone, meaning both a color and also an area of uncertain legitimacy, maybe good, maybe bad, probably a bit suspect.
WAR——————grey zone——————- PEACE
This map can be thought of as a garden. Think botany, flowers and seeds. In the outskirts of the garden we have flowers, things in bloom, while in the middle we have seeds, not yet flowers but flower embryos.
So, what we usually call war I call war in bloom. Manifest, physical, realized and not just potential war, or just”tensions”. (Tensions I see as grey and put in the middle zone.)
This can be the first part of the mapping process. To be continued. (As to the “musical map”, we will come to that.)