Movement splits and hatreds — a music example

Most movements consistently exhibit a destructive social psychology. The dynamic is this: a movement’s members begin with a huge amount in common — the same high talent, goals, and passions. But any difference, sometimes minor, sets them against each other ferociously and irreparably.

The dynamic crops up in many movements across history — political (e.g., the Marxists), educational (e.g., the Montessorians), architectural (e.g., Frank Lloyd Wright’s followers), philosophical (e.g., Neo-Kantians, Objectivists), psychological (e.g., Freudians), and most religious movements.

Here is the case of music in nineteenth-century Russia, from a biography of Musorgsky:

“By the end of the 1860s the warring camps of Russian music … had become so firmly entrenched in their respective positions and mutual hatreds that one tends to forget the atmosphere of sweet camaraderie that prevailed a decade earlier, when the musical profession was just getting on its feet in Russia.”*

My best understanding is that the easy tendency to nasty schism has four sources:

1. One sees the domain (music, philosophy, whatever) as a scarce resource that is subject to competition, so zero-sum turf warfare seems the proper strategy.
2. One is so deeply invested in the domain that any questioning or criticism feels like an attack upon one’s core person.
3. One’s reputation, both to oneself and to others, is tied to one’s proficiency, so a criticism by another talented member of the movement implies that one can make mistakes, but having to admit error undermines one’s reputation.
4. At the cutting edge of any domain, everything is complicated and difficult to articulate, and one feels a lack of confidence in one’s ability to explain one’s position clearly and compellingly; one’s frustration with that makes rhetorical shortcuts attractive.

All of this is another reason why character is crucial in any great endeavor. Creating value is not a zero-sum game. Questions and criticisms are part of the process by which we learn. Talented people make mistakes, and being able to admit that is a sign of strength and a commitment to truth and creative integrity. Clear communication is always hard work and frustration goes with the territory.

A top achiever is able to remember the context within which differences emerge: We share 98% of important values. We disagree about 2%. I can understand why you might think/feel differently about that 2%. But with good will and intelligent discussion, we can make progress on resolving that 2% difference. And we can continue to enjoy the 98% of goodness that we share.

The challenge is to make that one’s cognitive, attitudinal, and behavioral set.

* Note:
The warring camps of Russian music were “Rubinstein-Conservatory, Balakirev-Free Music School, the Serovian ‘opposition’.”
Richard Taruskin, Musorgsky (Princeton University, 1993), p. 96.