Rumbling on performativity_Frits Simon

from his environment and capable of having a detached perspective on matters. This
disentanglement is explained by a lack of striving for power (Firth and Leigh, 1998) or a
lack of strong links in the networks and thus not fully participating in the real game
(Csermely, 2009). The jester’s realism is grounded in a sceptical empirical orientation
on reality, “… not that he lacks confidence, only that he holds his own knowledge to be
suspect.” (Taleb, 2008: 191). And thus he also holds the knowledge of others suspect
out of a rather ironical and demystifying attitude, or maybe benevolent innocence
(Otto, 2001). Finally a jester acts in different networks of connections in which he
never is the key figure but acts as the weak link between them. He is often asked for
advice and has a greater chance of being rewarded in different ways (Christakis and
Fowler, 2010).
From a complexity perspective the jester is to describe as the weak link - or chaperone
(Korcsmáros et al., 2007) - who in non-linear circumstances (Mackenzie, 1998) or in
instable situations in all kinds of networks advances some sort of (temporal and
‘workable’) stability (Csermely, 2009). This advancement is only possible because in
general the jester is not really needed in normal circumstances. Paradoxically the
jester himself is not striving for stability. Metaphorically in his sceptical empiricism he
lives near the place where our representations or models meet reality and where
randomness and instability infiltrate experience (Taleb, 2008). In his sceptical empiricism
the jester is more or less a vibrant cynic who “... is able to quit the idea of the
Good as the ultimate goal and to surrender oneself to what already is there ... and
through which the turning up of always further lying goals becomes superfluous.”
(Sloterdijk, 1983: 367).
What’s in it for me?
Analysing and reflecting upon the drafting of the performance agreements for me it
becomes clearer that approaching what happens from a complex responsive process
perspective, implies that a different perspective on what I am is emerging. First of all it
was surprising to be questioned on what kind of position I hold and if this maybe could
be some sort of jestership (chapter 4). Second it is surprising that to reflect upon what
I am doing can be couched by reading on literature about the history and role of a
jester. By re-reading the German philosopher Sloterdijk the jestership even becomes
connected to an earlier time in my life, where amongst others I read Sloterdijk’s work
on cynicism.
Looking back I realize that with reflecting on the phenomenon of jestership that even
before I considered of being a jester I was spurred by a connectionist orientation
which comes close to what I now understand as a jestership. My first big project as an
adviser of the board was to organize a process through which our institutional strategy
could become a matter of wisdom of a large crowd (Li and Bernoff, 2008; Surowiecki,
2004; Wierdsma, 2005). In chapter 3 it was introduced as the wiki-project. To
connect meant connecting many perspectives in giving them a chance to express
them. And although in the drafting of the performance agreements there was little
5. Drafting performance agreements: gestures of a contemporary jester | 139