patterns of dialogue according to number
Even in such sayings as "two's company but three's a crowd," we find some instinctive sense of the importance of number. At the same time, if only two people interact then there is no relief, no chance to pause, observe and reflect; so three might be an advantage.
Have you ever gone off by yourself and just talked to the trees and grass? A single person talking can discover important things. Or, have you ever been in a meeting of several people in which, by some miracle, everyone was actively involved in the conversation? Was it not a very rich experience, full of meaning?
N-logue is a way of holding conversations in patterns of 1, 2, 3, 4 etc. numbers of people. As the number (N) increases so the situations become more and more complex and unstable. The meanings we can engage in are affected by the number N. Just imagine what it owuld be like to have the distinct contributions of many people brought into one whole, instead of splintering apart into factions, or some of the people not contributing at all.
The root logue comes from logos, or 'meaning.' In a true dialogue, David Bohm says, "We go the way of meaning," and do not try to score points or to win.
The patterns of N-logue can emerge spontaneously within a dialogue involving many people. It is also possible to prectice them deliberately. Some people find this difficult to handle and it is not for all.
 |
1-logue or monalogue (not 'monologue') is one person speaking, but not in a vacuum. There is an audience, whose role is to listen actively with presence, in an attitude of complete assent. The challenge is to say what you mean. Nothing you say will be denied. Everything you say will be heard. This can be more powerful than a meditation, or it can provide an avenue of creative thinking. If there is a 'rule' in monalogue, it is that you do not stop talking but go with the flow.
 |
2-logue or dyalogue (not 'dialogue') is two people talking. This can take many forms, according to the logic of inclusiveness, exclusiveness and sameness. In inclusion, the mode of speech is calld YES-AND: everything the one person says is supported and enhanced by the other. In exclusion, what one person says is denied by the other, who seeks a radically different alternative. THis mode of speech is called NO-BUT and is similar to the classical form of the 'dialectic.' In sameness, when one person stops talking, the other continues as if with the same voice. These three modes are practised as distinct 'arts' ('art' is the root that appears in the word 'artificial') allowing for endless variation in combination with each other.
 |
3-logue or trialogue is very different. Since the usual mode of communication is between two people (or one to many as in a lecture), having three people is a radical step. The third person is able to act as witness, to be impartial, to see connections the other two may not have had a chance to see. Any of the three can take this on. Since the people (A, B, C) have to speak in sequence, and not all at once, a set order is imposed: A - B - C - A, etc. To preserve the sense of three, there is a rule that no two people are allowed to engage in any 'back-and-forth' discussion. This is hard for many of us, because we want to make our point clear and not be misunderstood! To give form to the proceedings, the three speakers take on different roles. It has been found that the most useful is if: A asks a question, B states an answer, and C provides comments. Different people find one or another of these roles most congenial, but the pratice is that everyone takes a turn at all three roles. Different people intrepret the role of C in different ways. There is no set method, the only criteria being (a) that what C says is relevant to what A and B have said, and (b) he or she enhances the meaning. When trialogue gels, a current of conversation develops that generates its own insights.
 |
4-logue or tetralogue is conversation between four people. Sometimes known as the 'circulation of ideas,' tetralogue is a coordination of argument. A four-fold situation can be understood as a combination of opposites. Out of several possibilities, the floowing structure for the roles of A, B, C, and D seems to work best. "A" expresses some view on the topic. "B" then expresses a contrary, alternative view (cf. dyalogue). In turn, "C" expresses and enhanced, supportive version of "B's" view. "D" then expresses a contrary view to "C", and "A" must then express a view supportive of "D"! And so on. Of course, what is said by any one of the people is affected not only by the person who spoke before but by all the others as well. The net result is akin to a 'rotation' around an idea or theme, which is een from different perspectives--as a piece of sculpture viewed from various sides. It's not as hard as it sounds.
Higher N-logues have not been developed as yet. As you might imagine, they would be most challenging!
Any group taking on these patterns needs to develp its own etiquette. However, a few basic points may be helpful.
N-logue has been developed by Anthony Blake with the help of some friends from the work of Bennett on systematics and the work of Bohm on dialogue. It is discussed at some length in Anthony's book Structures of Meaning. It is recommended for small groups who are engaged in enquiry.
Check out Anthony Judge's writings on 'dialogue by number' at the UIA site.