After a weekend of 50th anniversary’s (President
Kennedy’s assassination and the first episode of Dr Who) I recall in detail my
own experience of 22 November 1963. My mum and dad had gone out to the cinema and
left me and my twin brother and my older sister to get ourselves to bed as they
would be late. My sister was 17 and was
very organised getting me and my brother in our pyjamas good and early. When we
saw the announcement about President Kennedys’ assassination on our grainy
black and white TV we didn’t know what to say or do. Eventually we wrote a
brief note for mum and dad ‘Kennedy Assassinated’ on a scrap of paper and got
on with watching what I believe was a comedy tv programme – Harry Worth ( He did
a weird reflection routine in a shop window in the titles). Laughing just
seemed wrong. It seemed we had lost a relative not just a politician.
We went up to bed a little late and I was startled and
apparently very tearful and dozey when mum and dad came in from the cinema and woke
us all up when they saw the note. They had not yet heard the news! That could
not happen today with mobiles and the internet!
This story reminds me how important exchanging memories and
meaning are in resolution processes. Memories often do cluster around
significant events but can remain dormant until the event is recalled. It is
these memories that give the event meaning. For mediators it is all about
exploring narrative and exchanging meaning. Mediators will encounter at least
two different versions of the same events. They do not need to decide which is
true but unlock each narrative and get the parties to exchange meaning. What
has happened in the conflict scenario becomes less important as what it means
grows in significance.
With shared / common events a listener can get distracted by
internally comparing his / her version with the speaker. This is where clean
sheet listening comes in handy with each party to mediation in separate party
sessions - putting aside your own experience, suspending judgement and using
open questions to build narrative and understand what is important to the
speaker.
With the parties together you may need a prolonged period of
structured sharing and open exploration of what each party believes has
happened and what it means. Resist and challenge requests to validate one
version above the other. Eventually people may need to agree to differ about
what significance the events have. The mediator’s role here is to move beyond
the past and create a new understanding between the parties which will create a
new future without disrespecting the events of the past.
By the way, although the moment may have passed please let
us know what you were doing on the 21 or 22 November 1965? Sharing memories is
great.
John Crawley
