Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram as a generative metaphor

Psychosocial Implications of Stellar Evolution? (Part #3)

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]

---

A good point of departure is the famed Hertzsprung-Russell Diagram, pioneered independently by Elnar Hertzsprung (1911) and Henry Norris Russell (1913). It is recognized as one of the greatest observational syntheses in astronomy and astrophysics. The diagram plots the luminosity of stars as a function of their temperature. The luminosity, or absolute magnitude, increases upwards on the vertical axis; the temperature (or some temperature-dependent characteristic such as spectral class or color) decreases to the right on the horizontal axis. From this it is readily apparent that stars preferentially fall into certain regions of the diagram along a curving diagonal line called the "main sequence", although there are other regions where other types of stars (red giants, supergiants, white dwarfs, super novae, pulsars, flare stars) also fall [more].

The suggestion is that conceptually gated communities (and various kinds of social group) emerge and live out their lives in a way that could be represented on an analogous diagram. In public relations terms, there is already a familiarity with the visibility of a group (its "luminosity") and a sense of whether it is "hot" or "cool". The analogue to temperature may be more meaningfully understood as degree of communication interactivity amongst members of the community -- especially since temperature is associated with interactivity between atoms. Following from work of B W Tuckman (Developmental Sequence in Small Groups, 1963) the stages of Forming / Storming / Norming / Performing (see also R B Lacoursiere. The Life Cycle of Groups: Group Developmental Stage Theory, 1980; Stan Davis, The Life Cycle of Organizations, 1990). A sense of the knowledge exchange processes is usefully explored by Martha G. Russell and Kaisa Still (Engines Driving Knowledge-based Technology Transfer in Business Incubators and Their Companies, 1999).

In the case of religious groups, the life cycle has for example been characterized by David Moberg (The Church as Social Institution, 1984) in phases:

1. Energy, charisma, community, fluidity, no tradition and few rules;
2. Comes as the pioneers are dying out or moving on, accompanied by appeals from the second generation ("help us preserve the past"; "write things down"; "train us to do what you have done"; "let us build in some structures to make sure nothing changes");
3. Good or bad, with renewal or fossilization. Either the spirit of the original movement wins or the rules and the structure win. Either the life is renewed and flows through the structures, or the structures stifle the life. [more]

Seemingly analogous to the H-R diagram, Lawrence Cada et al. (Shaping the Coming Age of Religious Life, 1979), identified a "vitality curve" in the light of a historical study of the life cycle of religious institutions. As discussed by Mary V. Maher (Between Imagination and Doubt: Religious Life in Postmodern Culture, 2003), Cada distinguishes five separate stages of a religious movement's history:

1. Founding: usually by a strong and visionary leader who has been forced out or has chosen to leave a comfortable mainline institution.
2. Expansion: how far and how fast depends on the culture and the historical situation. This phase usually has two ingredients: a passionate sense of the vision of the founder; and endless energy to communicate that vision.
3. Stabilization or settled-downness: the movement becomes affirmed by society and is legitimatized as mainstream.
4. Breakdown of the structures and systems that the founder had brought forth and that had worked during the expansion phase: This is a time of fervent activity to "fix" the problem, through new structures, systems, and regulations. It is a time of increased polarization between those who want to return literally to the founder's words and policies and those who want to translate them into new realities. Bureaucratic survival of agencies and their leaders means that more financial demands are placed on individual members and congregations, but standards of belief and behavior are lessened. Hence, a loss of attachment to the institution and loss of a sense of connectedness. Most important of all, there is a loss of identity and loss of a sense of a future. Change becomes unbearable for many.
5. Crisis: this has two possible paths: continued decline, paralysis, and eventual demise; or re-founding through transformation. Change and transformation are not the same. Change is reaction to cultural realities and happens at a point in time. Transformation happens intentionally over time. Change comes from broken functions and structures. Transformation begins at the center of a movement's collective soul. Mere change can be only directionless motion and energy. Transformation re-forms. [more]

---

[Parts: First | Prev | Last | All] [Links: To-K | From-K | From-Kx | Refs ]