Brief note: meaning making and the Cubism Family 

Tonight is Cubism’s tenth anniversary at Sessions, and my thoughts, oddly enough, turned to meaning making. It’s something I’ve seriously considered since the day my high school history teacher taught me about how history and interpretation were so clearly intertwined in the Tagalog word for it. This is not far from Hans Georg Gadamer and Paul Ricoeur and what they had to say about our need, or capacity, to make sense. Of course, the thrill of how this all works out may have been why my favorite course in graduate school was an elective I took in introductory biblical hermeneutics. (One professor at the theology school warned me that my original choice, an Old Testament intro course, would have actually bored me to death. How perceptive he was!)

I do hope Stomachine’s first lead singer would guess why that fascinates me. We are all capable of telling stories and understanding them. But what matters more is what we make of those stories, and how we live that sense of them in our lives. There is a connection between the continuity and discontinuity of the narrated self and the responsibility that the ethical self bears.

So how does this tie in with the anniversary of a production? I will leave it for me to think about, but I suppose you’ve seen a key word in this post that gives away the game.