Tina’s Thoughts on Engaged Listening
(This fabulous post is by Corps Member Tina Wexler)
A large component of activism and social engagement is engaged listening, and conversation, with those we agree AND disagree with.
I know it sounds obvious, but in my time down here and at my work at Resurrection After Exoneration, I’ve come to realize that this seemingly obvious ideal is hard to live by on a day to day basis.
"The Talmud, the body of text on which most of modern Jewish laws and values are based, is a record of rabbinic discussions and arguments"
For example, I pore over case files at work displaying blatant miscarriages of justice on the part of District attorneys and police detectives. I listen to extremely eloquent, wise and traumatized men tell me stories of such. So on some days, I find myself leaning towards a general distrust of the criminal justice system, and those who work within it on “the other side”. This is reinforced when I discuss the lessons I learn with those on “the other side” and they assume my entire work consists of putting criminals back on the streets of New Orleans, and Louisiana. As my housemates and I continue to witness and discuss the massive flaws in the social systems we must work within, as we see them abuse and misuse our clients that we have all come to care deeply about, it’s hard not to become more polar, to feel antagonistic to this “system”, to hate it in its entirety.
But then, I speak to my friend who is a police officer, who reminds me in his person and his attitudes that many cops (though he also acknowledges the flaws in many) simply seek to protect and serve justice. What of the district attorney who sees his mission of social justice as protecting society from criminals that harm innocents? What about the exoneree who, after being wrongly imprisoned for 18 years for the murder of his wife, still believes we have one of the best justice systems in the world?
I remember discussing with one or two of my housemates our sheer frustration with people who cling fastidiously to polarizing ideals and seek to turn everything into a dichotomy. And I notice (and am guilty of it myself) that this is much more noticeable in people who disagree with me. Fewer people notice this quality in those they agree with.
A couple of months ago now, Rabbi Ethan Linden of Shir Chadash synagogue led a text study at our house which turned into a heated debate about how to deal with challenging Jewish texts- do we engage with them, seek out what good their may be in them, adhere to them blindly, or disregard them because they do not reflect our modern moral and social sensibilities. It got quite ugly at times, but everyone was engaged, active, and said incredibly insightful and eloquent things. And during that whole thing, I realized that a large reason I am so proud to be a Jew is because it’s a religion largely based and rooted in discussions, arguments, debates and conversation. In fact, the Talmud, the body of text on which most of modern Jewish laws and values are based, is a record of rabbinic discussions and arguments. Looking at a page of Talmud emphasizes that very fact.
Where is the definitive list of rules to follow? What is this mish mosh of layers upon layers of margin notes and different opinions? Why are all these different opinions codified? Why didn’t the rabbis just vote and write down the “best” answer?
Playing devil’s advocate in circles where everyone is in agreement, and coming to the table with those people, systems, and ideas fosters intellectual discussion and engagement, and colors in the faces of those black and white characters and things we despise. It makes the world more complicated, and it makes answers harder to find- and sometimes we need answers and solutions more than we need to constantly debate. But review is necessary always, openness to the idea that answers may be wrong is crucial to justice in the world. We need to be able to come up with answers, but always be open to the idea that answers, like us, are always fallible in some way. We need to recognize the good in people and solutions, and be open to change in our ideals and outlooks. I am realizing more and more that this consistent willingness for engaged listening, conversation and debate needs to be a crucial part of who I become as a person, a Jew and a professional.
Entries (RSS)
Christine Ewy said:
I thoroughly enjoyed your post and applaud your thinking as well as the work you do for our city. The \we\ vs. \they\ thinking you caution against is blatant in members of our Congress, and perhaps if we could affect it at the local level, there would be no support for it there either. Thank you very much for the many ways you are serving our area.
Christine Ewy
Author, Why People Live in New Orleans