Re: DSM: dancing


Anne and Theo Julienne (ajulienne@bigpond.com)
Tue, 23 Jan 2001 09:31:57 +1100


Mimsy,
I can see and appreciate your sentiments on this matter.
However, when I referred to Summerhill as a Sister School, I was implicitly referring to categories of "in" and "out". I started the mistake. Derek then decided that, given such categorising, he would not accept Summerhill as "in". He essentially perpetuated my mistake, albeit by taking a different side. But it was still I who started it.
Labels are dangerous indeed. Before reading and answering this post, I sent an earlier post suggesting other labels. That would seem to further perpetuate the categorising mistake.
On the other hand, it would be nice if these similar schools could get together and agree to (perhaps informally) call each other "sister" or "brother" schools. It would help if a simple label could encapsulate the concept of mutual respect and of doing "basically the same work".
Anne
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Msadofsky@aol.com
  To: discuss-sudbury-model@aramis.sudval.org
  Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 3:27 AM
  Subject: Re: DSM: dancing

  Anne, there is no Sudbury "club".

  All this talk about who is or is not a "sister" or a "brother" to a Sudbury
  school makes my skin crawl. Windsor House and Summerhill are fabulous places
  and extremely revered and respected by all of the people who are actually in
  Sudbury schools. We don't draw a line between "us" and "them". In fact,
  there is no Sudbury school organization, and that is one of the main reasons.
   No one wants to decide who is and who is not enough like the rest of the
  group. I personally consider the people in those schools to be doing
  basically the same work that I am doing.

  Mimsy



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Mar 29 2001 - 11:16:25 EST