7. Catharsis in the Wake of Creative Innovation

Communication is key but does fault lie at the feet of the messenger when communication is cold -shouldered? Surely missing double figure chat notifications, would instigate checking a traffic jam of content?  In a project where hierarchical structure is intentionnally replaced with a collective approach, perhaps this only works with those capable of self-clarification of role, requirements, and responsibility. Endeavouring at every stage to write the messages paramountly clear with repeated simplification and returned confirmations, is this not enough?

Significant parallels in vision of the body as artful tool, connected the practices of Caitlyn and I in mutual benefice. An early unification in ethos and creative direction of ergonomy, apparently mirrored in agreement with the group. The role of any designer in group context – to work independently producing multiple visual options for collective discussion. To sign-off successes and sign-post amendments, an impossible task with an absence of shared process, discussion, explanation, or even imagery. Just told “it takes time”. The level questions were asked, ‘‘Is this too ambitious?” “Are you sure this can be achieved?” The response “it takes time”. Multiple iterations of concept reinforcement, a clear visual conveyance of aesthetic styling, confirmed in meet after meet, discussion after discussion. Why, after repetitious alliance requests to colour scheme, do colours clash and jar, or made invisible in monochrome?

Independent professional projects induced trusted competences – was I naïve? A fallacy of patronising assurances issued, a verbal pat on the head ‘”don’t worry”, “trust me” and again – “it takes time”. Responses elevating apprehension, mistrust and frankly, fear of incompetence. Unsure of other pathways I could have navigated to prevent such conflict in narrative, would this same confusion occur with a salaried initiative? Supplant the group in a commercial context of monetary dynamics; the interior designers – in receipt of warnings, potentially dismissed to leave.

Or what if gender of creative directorship were switched? Great efforts were made in careful language selection ensuring egos were unscoured with petulance. Yet the persistent, demanding, contradictory messages and implications of mistrust – compromised and internally self-questioned Caitlyn and I. In clarity of our word choices of communication, seeking assurances from the periphery of competence in leading.

Is it the leader’s role to babysit those that feel inadequately represented despite having the majority of colourless content in the presentation? The emperor’s new clothes were all I had to present. Post formative heated justifications seemed to fall on deaf ears, incomprehensible back stories assigning unprofessional blame. We should not be manipulated and bear this level of upset. Should it really take emotive action of tears and raised dominance of voice from Caitlyn and I for a male mind to listen to a female voice? To jolt action and connectedness?   A communication gap or words being banged against a wall of dismissive ignorance – a willful failure to listen and exchange?

Formative feedback issued shame and acknowledgement of failings, my own included with hindsightful incomprehension of iassigning myself presentation responsibility – when group weighting is loaded with graphic design. “Where’s the branding, where’s the colour, where’s that good idea gone?” Disdainfully nodding my head in agreement to his commentary a recognition, affirmation and reiteration of our recurrent struggled requests.

Why does it take a male voice to back up the female led concept? The impetus here, feels lit by gas.

Signs of Gaslighting at Work: Workplace Gaslighting Examples (psycom.net)