Grokkist Newsletter #88

Hey friends,

As I find myself needing to explain Grokkist to people more and more, I’ve been thinking afresh about the kind of people I tend to encounter and what we have in common.

Most of us aren’t short on insight. If anything, it’s the opposite. We've usually spent years paying attention to things—following interests, crossing domains, getting pulled into questions that don’t neatly belong anywhere.

But when it comes time to explain what we're actually doing, it either comes out a bit flattened, or slightly fragmented, or just… not quite right in a way that’s hard to pin down. Close enough to function on a good day, but not something we can really stand in.

I’ve been increasingly realising that this isn’t really about confidence, or even clarity in the usual sense.

It’s more like a legibility problem.

Not about picking a lane or dumbing things down, but about finding a way for something genuinely yours to be understood without losing the thing itself in the process.

Part of the difficulty, I think, is that we’re often trying to describe something that moves across contexts using language that expects things to stay put.

They assume you can point to a fairly clear lane. A role. A category that holds what you do. And that works well if your practice actually lives inside one of those.

But a lot of the people around Grokkist aren’t really operating like that, or even trying to. What we're doing tends to sit somewhere between things, or move across them, or take shape in the relationships rather than in any one part.

So when we try to explain it using the forms that are available, there’s a translation strain where you can feel the mismatch. We reach for roles or categories because they’re what’s available, but like a pair of cheap pants, they don't fit in a way that's satisfying. So what comes out is either too neat to be true, or too tangled to follow.

Something that sounds right on the surface but doesn’t quite land internally. Or it feels true to you, but doesn’t really travel—just confused faces or polite nods.

It’s a bit like Remy in Ratatouille, trying to explain a flavour to someone who can’t taste what he’s tasting.

What I’m finding myself doing with Grokkist, more and more, is leaning right into that gap.

Helping people separate what they actually think, know, or sense from the ways they’ve learned to package themselves so it sounds legitimate.

And then slowly working toward something that can hold both—something that still feels like them, but can also be received by someone else without a long preamble.

It's what I'm getting at with the “too many tennis balls” feeling I made a song about—having a whole gloriously overwhelming constellation of things in motion, and no obvious way to hold them still long enough to point and say this is it.

Sometimes this work turns into writing, or a talk, or a course. But those are more like containers that come later. The earlier move is just stabilising a way of speaking that doesn’t collapse under those pressures.

There’s another layer to this that I think I’ve been underestimating.

It’s not just that people are trying to express something difficult. They’re also often not quite sure what kind of space they’ve stepped into when they arrive here.

Because Grokkist isn’t a very standard format.

There isn’t a clear script for how to show up. No obvious level of polish to aim for. No shared sense of what counts as a “good” contribution in the usual way.

So there’s often this quiet calibration happening in the background.

How finished does this need to be?

Am I meant to sound coherent here, or exploratory?

Is this a place to land something, or to work something out?

And in the absence of clear signals, people tend to fall back on whatever has worked elsewhere.

Which is usually some mix of over-explaining, smoothing things out too early, or holding back until something feels properly formed (and then blaming themselves for the confusion).

What seems to work better—when it works—is something a bit different.

People saying things that are still in motion. Speaking from a place where something is actually happening for them, even if it’s not fully articulated yet.

A question that hasn’t settled. A pattern that’s just starting to become visible. A sense that something doesn’t quite line up, without needing to resolve it immediately.

And then, instead of rushing past that, staying with it a little. Following it. Letting it be shaped in conversation.

There’s a kind of shared attention there that’s less about exchanging finished ideas, and more about working on them together.

I think that’s also shifted what I mean by legibility.

It’s less about making things clearer in general, and more about finding a way to say something that still holds its shape, still feels like you, and can be met by someone else without needing to constantly re-explain it.

Which turns out to be quite delicate.

And increasingly, it feels like that’s the core of what this whole project is actually for.

If you’re around Grokkist at the moment, there’s a decent chance you’re somewhere in that territory yourself.

Trying to articulate something that doesn’t quite fit the usual shapes yet. Or noticing connections that are real, but not fully sayable.

If that’s the case, you probably don’t need to resolve it before you speak.

In most cases, it actually helps if you don’t.

With curiosity and care,
Danu

💌 P.S: Grokkist member Zaheer is testing a simple idea in the community—weekly quiet co-working for creative projects. No pressure, just showing up and getting a bit of space to make something move. If that sounds like your kind of thing, there’s a post up with a poll for times—feel free to drop a like or comment so he can get a sense of interest.

Fresh and Featured Pressings

The Practice of Being Alive

By Jim Palmer (4 min read)

When we notice a gap between ourselves and our experiences, what do we do next?

Read the article ↗

Seed of a Wish | Letter 5: Dance of Lead+Follow

By Margarita Steinberg (11 min read)

Before we can know our desires, we must give them room to grow.

Read the article ↗

More from the Press

• Artificial Boundaries (Rodney King, 4 min read) – As we continue to carve the world into smaller pieces, it's easy to lose sight of our own power to put it back together.

Upcoming Events

Featured Gatherings

🟢 Shoes-On Studio: The Ethics of Persuasion

🗓️ Tue 14 Mar | 2pm–4pm ET (view in your timezone)
Facilitated by Kendra Fee

Shoes-On Studio is an open space for anyone who wants to get more comfortable speaking in public—whether that means giving a talk, leading a session, joining a panel, raising your hand, or just saying what you mean when it matters.

This month, we’re exploring a rich and slightly thorny one. During our March session, the question was raised of how persuasion can so easily slide toward manipulation or coercion, and it was clear it struck a nerve.

We talked about how, for a lot of us, part of what makes speaking up feel hard is not just fear or nerves. It is also not wanting to sound like the kinds of speakers who cross an ethical line or add to the noise. That feels like exactly the kind of thing this space is for.

So this month, we’ll spend some time there, talking about:

• How do we speak with intention without slipping into performance, manipulation, or empty noise?
• What makes persuasion feel ethical?
• What makes it feel gross?
• How do we find ways of speaking that are both effective and still ours?

Event Details and RSVP ↗

🟢 Grokkist Town Hall: Four Years In

🗓️ Sun 19 Apr | 4pm–5.30pm CEST (view in your timezone)
Facilitated by Danu Poyner

It’s been four years since Grokkist began as a small experiment in building spaces where curiosity, care, and lived experience could meet. This Town Hall is a chance to pause, take stock, and look ahead together.

As usual, I’ll share a clear view of where things stand: the financials, key community and platform stats, and the practical realities of running and growing Grokkist. I’ll also walk through the financial plan and broad roadmap for the coming year, including several recent platform updates that quietly lay the groundwork for what comes next.

Alongside the updates, there will be plenty of time for open conversation. How is the space feeling to you right now? What’s working well? What would you like to see more of — or less of — as Grokkist continues to evolve?

Town Halls are part transparency, part sense-making, and part collective steering. If you care about where Grokkist is heading, this is the room where we talk about it.

Event Details and RSVP ↗

Other Upcoming Gatherings

• 6 Apr | 🟢 Grokkist Writing Salon
• 15 Apr | 🟣 Members Lab & Lounge
• 16 Apr | 🟢 PhilosophyGym @ Grokkist
• 21 Apr | 🟢 Coddiwomple Cafe: The Practice of Being Alive
• 29 Apr | 🟣 Members Lab & Lounge
• 3 May | 🟢 Coddiwomple Cafe: American Dream Disillusionment Trauma

#1 - What makes people proud of their country?

What Makes People Proud of Their Country? | Pew Research Center

From diversity in Indonesia to food in France, people in 25 countries share in their own words what makes them proud.

Pew Research CenterLaura Silver

A wide-angle glimpse at national pride, drawn from more than 30,000 people's responses across 25 countries, all answering a single open-ended question: what makes you feel proud of your country? Rather than offering predefined categories, the study lets people speak in their own words—later coded into themes like culture, politics, people, and place.

Germans and Swedes most often cite their democracy and federal system of government (36% and 53% respectively), the French their arts and culture (26%), Nigerians their natural resources (21%), Australians their people and “mateship” (25%), Americans their freedoms and liberties (22%), and people in the United Kingdom the character of the British public (25%), though they just as frequently mention things they are not proud of (29%).

There's an interactive tool on the webpage and a full PDF report for those who want a deep dive into the full research methodology and results.

#2 - What the Road said

“I said to the Road, where do you lead? The Road said, be a leader and find out.”

A librarian’s reading of What the Road Said by Cleo Wade, where a child meets the road and asks the question that sits at the edge of any beginning: how do you move forward when you don’t know the way? The road answers in a language that feels a lot like coddiwompling—the art of travelling purposefully toward an unknown destination. The road doesn’t offer a map or a plan. It offers companionship in motion. A way of trusting that direction can be felt, even when it can’t yet be seen, and when the path only exists because you’re willing to take the next step. (6 min watch)

#3 - Stunning line-based artworks by Nathan Yoder

The work of illustrator and brand identity designer Nathan Yoder begins and stays with the hand: pencil and pen on paper, line by line, before anything becomes digital. On his process page, he walks through this commitment as a constraint he’s chosen to think inside of. Each piece emerges through accumulation—marks building into form, decisions made slowly enough to stay visible. Rather than presenting finished outcomes alone on his site, the accompanying case studies extend that logic, showing how each identity or illustration is worked through from first sketch to final system.

Some Snackables come from the grokkist community. Follow the links below to join the conversation, or add your own in the Snackables space on the Grokkist Network.

#4 - Broken trust beyond the personal

The Heartbreak of Institutional Betrayal

In my practice, I’m witnessing a bipartisan heartbreak. I see confusion and deep questioning of some existing systems while watching the real-time dismantling of others.

Psychology TodayLaura Federico, LCSW, CST

🙏 Contributed by Grokkist member Chris F:

When I first read the term “Institutional Betrayal Trauma” a few months ago, my pulse quickened as I realized that credible psychologists had actually studied and developed language around a feeling that was entirely too familiar, but which I had never known how to describe. This article gives a brief summary of Institutional Betrayal (IB) Theory and some symptoms of harms caused by entities which cannot be held personally accountable. Further reading has granted me hope and empowerment, knowing now how to quantify and empathize with the ways so many of us have been wounded by systems we were taught to trust.

(Discuss this Snackable further on the Grokkist Network)

#5 - Appreciating the small things

🙏 Contributed by Grokkist member Will S:

I’ve often fallen into the misanthropic habit of looking down at small talk as shallow or pointless, allowing me to smugly write off my many bungled attempts at pleasantries. Though I can still be a clumsy conversationalist, my attitude towards small talk softened when I heard it compared to bird song, a shared ritual of rhythm and melody that is often more about tone than information.

I recently stumbled into an unfolding digital discourse that deepened my appreciation of the ritual. Someone likened small talk to conversational foreplay, establishing trust and safety before venturing into more intimate and vulnerable territory. It reminded me of a silly song from one of my favorite artists and comedians, Brian David Gilbert. While he hints at the insecurities that can keep us trapped in the shallows, his unabashed enthusiasm for small talk inspires me to take a break from all the deep dives and big ideas, and appreciate the little, mundane joys that I often take for granted.

(Discuss this Snackable further on the Grokkist Network)

Grokkist is a living ecosystem — 🟢 free to enter, powered by members 🟣.

If you’d like to go deeper, you can join as a member, explore Signature Projects, or work with Danu.

Become a Grokkist Member ($99/yr or $27/qtr)

Parting thoughts...

"The world is full of people suffering from the effects of their own unlived life. They become bitter, critical, or rigid, not because the world is cruel to them, but because they have betrayed their own inner possibilities. The artist who never makes art becomes cynical about those who do. The lover who never risks loving mocks romance. The thinker who never commits to a philosophy sneers at belief itself. And yet, all of them suffer, because deep down they know: the life they mock is the life they were meant to live."

– Carl Jung