Groups and Networks; Fraternities and Deadheads

Consider this a brain dump of a post.  I don’t know exactly where I’m going to go with it; I only know I’ve been unsuccessfully trying to carve out time to write this week and want to get my thoughts down.  In all likelihood I’ll expand on elements of this later.

In the context of the discussions on groups and networks I have had several epiphanies I’d like to explore regarding my personal experiences interacting in these entities/structures.  This can be succinctly summarised by saying, in my experience groups are like fraternities, networks are like Deadheads.

Fraternities

Strangely enough I was involved in a fraternity during uni – for all of a single semester as I recall.  What began as a quest to meet people and make some friends quickly ended with me realising I was completely out of phase with the expectations and requirements of the group and had no desire to change to suit someone else’s vision of what an acceptable group member should be.  After a single semester I vanished, was subsequently kicked out, and have had nothing to do with the organization ever since.

To be fair though, for some people they’re great ways to become part of something and experience a unique aspect of university life; for me though, it’s become a caveat that I generally avoid thinking about.  Those of you who know me will understand why.

In my experience, pretty much every stereotype you may have heard about fraternities proved true.  There were the rules, the hierarchy, the expectations, the us-and-them attitude, the conditions of membership; the pseudo-mysterious secrets and rites established to reinforce the division between brother and non-brother; the handshakes and passwords, the in-jokes; and of course the labels and identifying symbols and marks; the list goes on.

Ironically too were the sub-niches within the fraternity.  Most pronounced were between pledge and initiated member.  For members, pledges were the lowest of the low.  For pledges your pledge class was your anchor; your means of coping with the flack you copped from the existing members; whom you rallied with in (relatively) friendly retaliation; and whom you were expected to develop very strong ties with.

Yet even within pledge classes you began to see hierarchies and power laws develop.  Organisations of this nature seem prone to them; as if it is an unavoidable consequence or output of participation.  This is something I never understood; and one of the large wedges that ultimately drove me to split off and leave.

As an example, on several occasions I was criticised for the length of my hair.  Not stopping at that, some of the members actually began talking about trying to force me to cut it.  Others were awestruck by this and came to my defense, even asking me why I didn’t tell them to buzz off.  What they didn’t know is by this stage I’d lost all interest in remaining part of the organisation and didn’t really care what anyone thought.

My situation was not unique though.  It seemed that others experienced similar sorts of ostracizing within the group – and perhaps not surprisingly they were the unique ones as well.  The individuals who didn’t fit the mold, nor tried to.  Interestingly they were also the ones I was drawn towards.  Some people aren’t made for this sort of organisation – and I’m one of them.

Deadheads

Arguably the opposite end of the spectrum – at least in my view – are hippies and Deadheads.  As the saying goes “There’s nothing like a Grateful Dead concert.”  In the dozens and dozens of shows and concerts I’ve been to in my life, covering a wide variety of musical genres, that statement still holds true.  It is a truly unique experience.

Hippies are a unique breed really.  Yes they hold many shared values – peace, love, and non-violence for example – but ultimately personal freedom, and respect therefore, seems to top them all.  Walking through a car park/parking lot outside a Dead show is testimony to this.  Each small group blends into the next and yet still maintains a sense of self, or individuality, amongst it all.  Interaction is genuine (mostly) and highly inclusive.   Share and share alike is common; conversations are wild and exuberant; and yet disagreements are very hard to find.  Live and let live; take it easy; you do your thing and I’ll do mine, and that’s ok.  Rules are disobeyed; authority is questioned.  Instead consensus is reached organically through a very connective process.  In many ways hippies are antithesis to the fraternity mentality.

This is a community that on many ocassions welcomed the Hells Angels into their fold.  The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test talks about this in depth.  Things didn’t always go smoothly of course; but that’s not the point.  The point is that hippies frequently look outside of their boundaries to connect with others – indeed there is no real boundary to be found.

Parting Thoughts

There is much I still want to explore in terms of Groups and Networks, but this at least gives an indication of my perspective on things.  Groups seek to delineate and divide; govern and define; organise and constrain. Networks seek to expand and include; empower and explore; diversify and connect.

All that being said though, the question of “which is better” is another matter entirely.  This, I suspect, will depend on context.  However that’s a post for another day, I think.