October 26th, 2023
This week has been a significant test of my resilience, particularly my experience with the group project deadline for Professor Davies’s History of Modern Art class. The initial plan, hatched on Monday with Sarah and Ben, was to divide the research for our presentation on Dadaism. I was assigned the section on key figures, Ben was to cover manifestos, and Sarah volunteered for the historical context. We felt confident, even a little smug, about our efficiency. However, by Wednesday, it became clear that Ben had underestimated the complexity of the Dada manifestos. He’d spent most of his time reading tangential articles, not the primary source documents we’d agreed upon. This left me scrambling to incorporate his material at the last minute, and Sarah’s section on context was left underdeveloped.
My initial reaction was frustration, bordering on anger. I felt let down by Ben's lack of commitment, and I worried intensely about our grade. My instinct was to confront him directly, perhaps even to complain to Professor Davies. But as I sat down to start pulling together my research and Ben’s vague notes, I paused. Was this truly the most productive path? What would be gained by an immediate outburst or a formal complaint? It wouldn't magically create the missing research. Instead, I decided to try a different approach. I reread the assignment guidelines and the syllabus, focusing on the expectations for collaborative work. Then, I messaged Ben, not with accusations, but with a specific request: "Hey Ben, I'm struggling to connect the key figures to the manifestos. Could you send me the specific quotes you found most impactful from the 'Dada' manifesto itself? I need to make sure our sections align."
This subtle shift in my communication, from accusation to a request for specific, actionable information, seemed to defuse the tension. Ben responded within an hour, and while his initial reply was still a bit scattered, he included a few actual quotes from Tristan Tzara. This gave me something concrete to work with. I then took the initiative to find a few more key passages from Tzara and Hugo Ball myself, weaving them into my presentation. I also reached out to Sarah, acknowledging her excellent work on the historical context and asking if she had any specific points that might connect to the artists’ motivations. She was more prepared and shared some insightful ideas about the post-WWI disillusionment that fueled the movement.
The presentation itself, while not perfect, was a success. Professor Davies commented on the clear connections we'd drawn between the artists and their ideological underpinnings. My grade was an A-. The real takeaway, however, wasn't the grade. It was the realization that my initial, emotional response could have derailed the project and damaged relationships. By choosing a more strategic, communicative, and less reactive approach, I not only salvaged the project but also learned a valuable lesson about managing interpersonal conflict in academic settings. This experience has highlighted a pattern in my own behavior: a tendency to default to frustration when faced with perceived incompetence or lack of effort from others. This journal entry is a conscious effort to reflect on that pattern and to document the alternative, more constructive strategy I employed. Moving forward, I want to prioritize understanding and clear communication over immediate emotional reactions when faced with similar challenges.