With a quick search-engine search – to not say Google, it is easy to find informations and even more easy to get lost in that myriad of informations. I clearly had anxiety when I flipped through the Wikipedia page of the Slow Movement. I’m slightly exaggerating, but hold on…
How many sub-movements they are, are they organizations or templates used in enterprises, or stand-alone associations with no link between each other? It directly clashed with my assumptions brought with the literal meaning I was under of, meaning it might not be under the spectrum of the neo-tribe’s definition.
Now I’m looking back into my first post which was indeed very spontaneous and pretty close to a rant, since it is merely a mood I have felt at numerous occasions. I was quickly under the assumption that I have found a tribe, while I have only found a subject to study – which isn’t too bad, as this clearly strikes my interest. In reality, I have yet to find anything close to qualify it as a tribe, or should I say to be accurate – a neo-tribe in this particular context.
What I find interesting in the concept of neo-tribalism, is that Michel Maffessoli wrote it in a post-modernism stance. However, I can’t possibly apply the concept of neo-tribalism onto the Slow Movement without understanding its accurate value. I still think the Slow Movement itself is very interesting, and I do want to pursue my research on that despite the risky ambiguity I have here.
Let’s start by the basics, then. I discovered the works of Carl Honoré — journalist and writer of the bestseller In Praise of Slow. It was the first real highlight I got about the Slow Movement. I highly recommend you to watch his TED talk he gave back in 2007. The main point I noted are similar to my first post — reaction to the high-speed society. I also appreciate how right this quote sounds → “It isn’t about doing things at a snail’s pace, but doing things at their right speed.“