Art, after all, is intended to create conversation, and in doing so, to build community. And, if we are honest with ourselves and each other, it’s also intended to create conflict. While most of us agree on the value of “art for art’s sake,” the implementation sometimes feels less clear cut, and therein lies the rub.

I’ve realized, that the details of what our class responded to—what we were comfortable with, and the places we found discomfort—aren’t important. What is important is that it created the opportunity to listen constructively to smart people whose worldview is just a bit different than our own, to share our own ideas, and to become just a bit richer in the process. And, isn’t that the point?

Our very full day included:

• A lecture on the history of Portland’s power players by preeminent local historian Chet Orloff,
• Tours of the KGW Studio on the Square and downtown, and
• A panel with media specialists and another with senior staff from two of Portland’s leading public agencies (TriMet and the Port of Portland).

With more than half of our class being imports to Portland, the lesson on the history of the community was particularly helpful in understanding the context for what made Portland successful in the first place, and provides clues about how we can apply the lessons of the past to our future.  On this, of all days, I suspect that we each walked away with different ideas about the most valuable thing we learned.

For me, the day’s core takeaway was related to the time it takes to move a plan from its early stages to full fruition. In 1904, the Olmsted brothers designed a plan for Portland’s parks. More than 100 years later, that plan is just coming to its full realization. While not everything takes that long, it was a ringing reminder that leadership means coming to the table and planning for the future you want to see, even if you might never see the full impact of your work.