Moving a Movement

So I went to a vigil today. At least, that's what it called itself. It wasn't really a vigil. It was a rally. No biggie.

It was commemorating the death of a young boy who took his own life a year ago, apparently because of bullying and/or pressure to join a gang. It was a good thing. But it could have been so much better.

I have been to numerous rallies/vigils/events in this particular park, and I usually come away feeling like, with a little attention to certain details, they could have been so much more effective.

So I offer here, some advice to those planning events that are aimed at getting people to coalesce into a movement.

First of all, it is, obviously, important to think about your goals, what you want to say, and who you want to have say it. But it is equally important to consider the perspective of the audience. Just because you succeed in saying what you want to say does not mean the event has been a success. People may have heard you (or they may have half-heard you). But at an event aimed at creating a movement, people need to be moved. They need to experience something, not just hear about something.

One of the challenges of the space in our park where rallies are frequently held is the lay-out. There is a stage, where usually, organizers think to put chairs for the speakers. And then there is a large space in front of the stage, with a short brick wall around the edges. The distance from wall to wall is probably 50 yards. (I'm totally making that up, as I am not good at estimating distances.) The point is that it's pretty far across.

The intention, I believe, of the structure is that people are supposed to bring lawn chairs to come hear a concert or some such. But for something like this, that is not going to happen. There are a few sections of bleachers on the ground beyond the short wall. Some people sat there. More people sat on the short wall. Which meant that the folks attending the rally were all really far apart and far away from the stage.

This is not good. This is detrimental to experiencing the birth of a movement.

Ideally, chairs would have been placed in a few short rows, close to the stage. A section of the bleachers could possibly have been moved down there. At the very least, if I'd been opening the event, I would have cajoled people to congregate on their feet down in front, together.

If people do not feel close together with others, they go home feeling like they were the only one there. There were enough people at this event that, if we'd all stood together in a mass, it would have felt like something. But we didn't. So it felt scattered, ineffective, impotent.

I think sometimes, when people are stepping out to try something new, and they don't have a huge crowd (which is generally true when you're starting something new), they are just so grateful that anyone showed up that they don't want to risk offending their small, precious crowd, so they hesitate to tell them what to do.

I would argue that the converse is what is needed. When people show up for something like this, it's because they're looking for someone to tell them how to get involved. Even if the only directions, initially, are to get closer together and feel your neighbors' presence, they will be open to that. There is, inevitably, a little grousing about having to move, but once they do, they realize there was a good reason.

There were a few older people there, so I might have had everyone move over to where those folks were sitting on the wall and be together there, rather than making everyone stand. But it could have been done, and it would have helped.

Secondly, I, personally, do not think you should use the word "vigil" to describe any event that does not include prayer and candles and singing. If what you have is a line-up of speakers, that is a rally, which is a perfectly respectable thing to have. But a vigil, with candles and prayer (or at least directed meditation and silence) and SINGING, is a much more powerful experience. (I'm fairly certain this was called a vigil because it was commemorating a death. Which is also a reason it should have had prayer and candles and singing.)

Why? Because then the audience is involved. They are participating; they have become part of what is happening. They are moving with the movement. Action breeds commitment. How do you get people to give money to Habitat for Humanity? You give them a day on the work site. They come away committed.

Giving people a candle to hold, a child's candle to keep an eye on, a neighbor's candle to help light, these things get people involved.

Singing. A proverb tells us that "When the people sing, the spirit comes down." There are all sorts of truths about breath and the way we use it and the power it has when used in unison that apply to these situations. People are anxious about singing. They are hesitant and need much encouragement. But if you pick a simple song, with only a few words that you line out very clearly, they will try. If you have a leader who is not afraid to be the one singing, but who makes very clear that the point is to sing along, people will catch on. And the breath will move within them, and they will be moving the movement.

Candles are a little tricky. It was daylight, so in this particular situation, they weren't going to be as powerful as they sometimes can be. Also, breeziness sometimes makes candles more of a distraction than a help. But how the crowd is standing makes a huge difference here. If people stand close enough together, they create a wind break that makes candlelight possible. There is a rich metaphor there. And an important truth.

As I'm writing this, I'm sitting here wondering how it is that I think I have the expertise to tell anyone how to stage a rally or vigil. I think it's just experience. When you've been to enough events, you learn what makes things work and you notice when those things aren't happening.

It was interesting to me to realize how my reflections felt like political or public relations techniques. The main guy who organized this rally spoke last, and he immediately struck me as someone who would eventually be running for office. IF he can get a campaign manager who gets this stuff. I think the thing that makes a campaign or movement effective is taking the step beyond your own perspective -- what you want to say -- to considering how to make sure it's heard and experienced. Once you get tuned into that level, you start thinking about a whole host of details you might not have otherwise.

I'm pretty sure my understanding of these issues doesn't just come from attending rallies and vigils. These are things preachers have to deal with all the time. A huge part of effective preaching is, once you've figured out what you need to say, spending time discovering how best to say it so that it's heard. The perspective of the congregation must be part of the equation or you might as well be talking to yourself. Preachers, or more broadly, worship leaders, also must be tuned into the power of music, the power of space and how people are arranged in it, and the power of silence and ritual.

There is a reason that the church was such a huge part of the success of the Civil Rights Movement. The church knows how to move people. If you're going to build a movement, you have to move people, not just your own mouth.