Why are there so many metaphors about mediators In our
recent readings and discussions about conflict resolution? What purposes are being served by using
metaphors to explain conflict resolution and/or mediation? Some of these metaphors are active images,
some are passive, and some are in direct conflict with the rest. How helpful are metaphors as a means of
understanding ADR practices, and why do so many people in the field seem to
turn to metaphor as a way to explain what they do?
Below I have gathered a sample
of some of the metaphors found in our recent readings. For example, Menkel-Meadow in her chapter,
“Mediation: Concepts and Models,” suggests that the mediator performs the role
of host and chair, guide and educator, referee, master communicator, and
translator. As if this weren’t enough, the
metaphors begin falling even faster as Menkel-Meadow somewhat breathlessly adds
that the mediator-translator is really a sort of alchemist, but one who
functions as an agent of reality and also as a watchdog. [Woof!]
Meanwhile, among other creative
displays of mediator metaphors, Jennifer Schulz announces that in films about
food, many of the cooks are actually mediators in disguise who “resolve
disputes by preparing and offering food” (Schulz, 2007, p. 455). Mediators,
meditates Schulz, are like the “slow food movement … [that] slows down,
ruminates, chews things over, and allows for silence” (p. 458). I’ll mention only a few more of the other
metaphors dotting the pages of our reading. In Stories Mediators Tell, we saw mediators as bridge builders (Crumpton,
“Rosa and Gordon”) and therapists (Hoffman, “The Whistle-Blower”); also, mediators
who serve as gatekeepers (Liebman, “Mediation as Parallel Seminars”); and
mediators as river guides or sometimes even the river itself (Love,
“Conversational Shifts”). If you are
feeling somewhat dizzy at this array, recall that after watching No Man’s Land, our professor suggested
that in some situations that appear to
be irresolvable, mediators are like mine experts who can’t defuse the mine. At
any rate, you get the idea -- mediator
metaphors In the literature on mediation are as prolific as dandelions on a
summer lawn. But beyond serving as
catchy images to decorate writerly prose, do metaphors about ADR practice serve
any other purpose? Do they hold the
possibility of advancing our thinking about mediation and conflict resolution
in any meaningful way? Or do they perhaps provide insight into the ways that
mediators and ADR professionals understand themselves?
First of all, it seems that the
wide range of metaphors used by professionals in the field highlights the
difficulty experienced in defining exactly what it is they do. This comes as no surprise, since even the
theorists of conflict resolution are divided over how to define mediation, in
particular. In a recent article
discussing the difficulty of arriving at a consensual understanding of
mediation, Brenda Daly and Noelle Higgins distinguish three separate strands of
argument about mediation; first, mediation as facilitation; second, mediation
as formulation; and third; mediation as manipulation (Frenkel, 2011, p. 99). So
no wonder that such a continuum of metaphors exists among practitioners in the
field.
But beyond illustrating the identity problem
faced by mediation and conflict resolution studies, do metaphors have any other
use? Some would argue that understanding
the way metaphors function and employing them to build conflict narratives in culturally
coherent ways may actually change the way people think. Such mind-changing
metaphors can reframe the conflict and offer new perspectives and even new language
for the discipline. In a recent op ed in the New York Times, one cognitive scientist opined that the
problem-solving system in our brains critically depends on alternating phases
of attention and daydreaming. In this alternating cycle of attention, it is
during the daydreaming phase that our great flashes of creativity are triggered,
because that is when we are able to make “connections among disparate ideas and
thoughts.” The process of connecting
ideas with vastly different images is an accurate description of the function
of metaphor.
If metaphors hold the power to
make new connections that illuminate problems and offer solutions, then how do
you view the process of conflict resolution and mediation? Which metaphors of the process of mediation or
conflict resolution make sense to you?
I agree with you that there has been excessive use of metaphors in most of our readings especially in regard to mediation. Metaphors sometimes explain the situation better, therefore, I tend to like them. A good is in the book, Stories Mediators tell, the author uses this metaphor to describe exactly what a mediator does " ...a mediator is a like a miner who is searching in streams for nuggets of gold. Find those little nuggets of gold along the way, put then in your metaphorical pocket, and choose the right time to trade those nuggets for something much more valuable--peace." P 49
ReplyDeleteLia, first of all, I want to start out by saying how much I enjoyed reading your blog entry. I also agree with Stephen when he writes that metaphors explain situations better. I think that beyond the fact that humans like metaphors because it artistically puts something into a form they can relate to, they might be used so often when discussing mediation because the public knows so little about what they do, and how to use them. I want to still be mindful, though, of a very important fact: mediators are not just metaphors, but human, skin and bones, and still make mistakes. Metaphors can bring so much understanding, but I want to remember to not put mediators on a pedestal because of them, but instead, realize that they need acceptance not just for their accomplishments, but also their hardships.
ReplyDelete