problematic moments (theory)

As James and I have discussed and theorized the role of time in group interaction, I think a PM might come down to the incursion of a diachronic element into the synchronic. As long as the ritual elements of an essentially linear unfoldment of moment-after-moment occurs as expected (familiar) then synchronicity secures enough stability and predictability that one can exercise various forms of control (over self, over an interaction, over a process, perhaps even over an outcome). When the synchronic is disrupted by the diachronic, however, unpredictability and instability emerge, threatening the established order. [I’m not sure “order” here must necessarily invoke power; it could just be regularity, routine.]
Hmmmmm, it could be that diachronic emergences at the individual level are able to be subsumed into ‘the routine’ – even if they are disruptive to the group – and thus don’t constitute a problematic moment at the level of the group’s operational constitution. But if there is a synchronicity of diachrony among several members then it becomes a group-level event, which necessarily evokes the power structure and calls it into question?
There might be some equation between the scale of perceived threat and the intensity of backlash….

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *