Every renaissance in history started in the dirt.

Not on a stage. Not with a speech. Not with someone powerful enough to sign it into existence. It started with a few people in a room, or a field, or a kitchen that smelled like bread and arguments, sensing that the world they’d inherited no longer fit the skin they were walking around in. And rather than wait for permission, which never comes, they began to live differently. Quietly. Almost accidentally. The way a tree doesn’t announce it’s about to bloom.

Florence. Fourteenth century. The plague had just eaten half the population. The church was cracking down the middle like a house built on sand. People were dying in the streets and the survivors were standing in the wreckage looking at each other with the particular exhaustion of humans who have just watched everything they were told was permanent turn out to be temporary. And in that wreckage, something absurd happened. A handful of ordinary people, most of them craftsmen and merchants and scholars who smelled like ink and sweat, began asking a question nobody had authorized: “What does it mean to be human?”

They started with attention. They looked at old Greek sculptures and Roman texts and saw something the medieval world had folded up and hidden in a drawer, the idea that a human being is worth studying for its own sake. Worth depicting in full. Worth the trouble of understanding. They called it humanitas. Which meant something like: the entire gorgeous mess of what a person can be.

And yet in the middle of all that death, the response that changed civilization was not grim. Boccaccio wrote The Decameron during the plague years, and it is full of humor, irreverence, love stories, dirty jokes, characters outwitting each other and falling into bed and laughing at the absurdity of being alive while everything around them was dying. The response to catastrophe was hope, fun, and wonder. What the hell? Go ahead, ask it. Because our answer might be the whole point.

Then there was Ghiberti, a goldsmith who won a competition in 1401 to design a set of bronze doors for the Florence Baptistery and spent the next twenty-one years making them. When he finished, they gave him a second commission. He spent twenty-seven more years on that one. Forty-eight years, total. Two sets of doors. The guild pushed him. But he rarely made a deadline. When asked about his process, he said simply: “I executed that work with the greatest diligence and the greatest love1.” Michelangelo looked at the second pair and called them the Gates of Paradise. They are still standing.

The social renewal came later. The political upheaval came later. The Reformation, the scientific revolution, the whole cascading avalanche of change. First came the looking, the laughing, the painstaking refusal to move faster than the work required. First came the willingness to sit in the dirt and wonder.

· · ·

Concord, Massachusetts. 1840s. A town so small you could throw a rock from one end to the other if your arm was good enough. Emerson was writing essays in his study with the windows open. Thoreau was building a cabin by a pond on Emerson’s land, because Emerson believed in the work before the work existed, and lent his friend the ground to do it on2. Thoreau wanted to find out what would happen if he stopped performing his life and started living it. Margaret Fuller wondered the same. She began holding conversations in living rooms, which was a radical act in those days for a woman, where people gathered to think out loud about things they’d been told weren’t their business3. Things like freedom. Things like what the soul actually is when you strip away the church’s wallpaper.

They called themselves Transcendentalists, which sounds like a college course you’d sleep through, but their practice was disarmingly physical. Go outside. Pay attention to the moss. Trust what you find under your own ribs more than what the institution prints in its pamphlet. They were mystics in muddy boots. They were drunk on the ordinary, and that intoxication made them dangerous.

Within a decade, these same people were among the loudest voices in the abolition movement. Thoreau went to jail for refusing to pay taxes to a government that sanctioned slavery, and from his time in the cell wrote an essay on civil disobedience that traveled across oceans and centuries4, from Concord to Gandhi’s Salt March to the Edmund Pettus Bridge, where it arrived in the bodies of people who had never read it but were living it. The attention came first. The willingness to sit with a hard question until it rearranged your insides.

· · ·

Harlem, 1920s. A million Black Americans had migrated north, carrying everything they owned and everything they’d been told they weren’t. Suitcases and scars and songs and silence. And in a few square blocks of upper Manhattan, something caught fire that no one could contain. Writers and musicians and painters began doing the most revolutionary thing a person can do. They told the truth about their lives. The uncensored version. The one with all its weight and grace and strange, unrepeatable afternoons.

Langston Hughes wrote poems in the rhythms of jazz and prayer, the kind of lines that make you put down your coffee and just sit. Zora Neale Hurston went back to the rural South to collect the stories everyone else was too sophisticated to remember. And A’Lelia Walker, heiress to her mother’s hair care empire, converted a floor of her Harlem townhouse into a salon she called the Dark Tower5, named after a poem by Countee Cullen, where on any given night you might find Hughes and Hurston and W.E.B. Du Bois and musicians and painters and activists crowded into gold-walled rooms with a sky-blue Victrola and a rose-colored piano, the whole place humming with a frequency that happens only when someone with resources sits down with people who have work and asks the simplest, most reckless question you can ask another human being: what do you need? Hughes called her the “joy goddess of Harlem’s 1920s6.” She was a patron in the oldest sense, someone who understood that the work needs talent and a room. Alain Locke called the whole thing a “spiritual coming of age7.”

Before the Civil Rights Movement. Before the marches and the legislation and the long, bloody, beautiful fight for justice. Before any of that, there was this: a community recovering its own voice. Hearing its own story. For the first time in public. For the first time without apology.

The pattern is always the same, and it is always easy to miss because it looks like nothing special. It looks like people giving attention. Cultural renewal precedes social renewal. The question “who are we?” arrives before the question “what must we do?” And the second question never gets answered honestly unless the first one gets asked with the whole body.

Christmas morning, 1956. Harper Lee, a burnt-out ticket agent for an airline, opened an envelope on her friends’ tree. Inside, a note from Michael and Joy Brown: “You have one year off from your job to write whatever you please. Merry Christmas8.” The Browns had had a good year. They weren’t rich. But they believed in her. They didn’t ask for anything back. Lee stretched that year into two, and what came out the other side was To Kill a Mockingbird, a novel that entered the American bloodstream at the exact moment the Civil Rights Movement needed it, a book about a man who stood in a courtroom and refused to look away from injustice, written because two people in New York City decided their friend’s attention was worth protecting. Emerson lent Thoreau land. Walker opened her living room. The Browns put an envelope on a tree. This is how it works. A renaissance needs artists. It also needs people who believe in the work before it exists and who are willing to make room for it.

· · ·

You know our cultural moment as well as I. We are drowning in stimulation and starving for attention. We are more connected than any civilization in history and more lonely. We have democratized information and industrialized misinformation. Our phones know us better than our neighbors do. Our algorithms have more influence over our children’s imaginations than our dinner tables do. A group of Buddhist monks recently walked 2,300 miles across the United States. When they arrived, one of them stood before a crowd and said the first thing that came to mind after four months of walking in silence: “Don’t touch your phone when you wake up in the morning9.”

Four months on the road. Blisters and rain and the slow reshaping of a body by its own faithfulness. And that was what he chose to say. He understood something most of us sense but haven’t yet had the nerve to name. We have lost the plot. We have mistaken the social feed for the living field. The way back is the oldest technology we have: attention.

Look around, and you’ll see. Something is already shifting. The biggest movie in the country right now is Project Hail Mary, a story about a schoolteacher who wakes up alone in a spaceship, befriends an alien, and saves the world through the sheer childish fun of solving problems together. Six hundred million dollars at the box office, smashing expectations. Andy Weir, the author, says it plainly: “There’s plenty of negativity out there. I sell positivity10.” Six centuries after Boccaccio responded to the plague with humor and love stories, people are responding to our times by packing theaters for the same essential gesture. Hope. Fun. Wonder. The antidote to cynicism, doom, and flippancy. They could stay at home and wait to stream it on Amazon Prime. Instead they are leaving their houses to sit together in the dark, seeking something more. We are, whether we realize it or not, becoming unwilling to be rushed, unwilling to be reduced, unwilling to let the darkness have the last word. Ghiberti spent forty-eight years on two doors. Maybe we’re beginning to remember what that kind of patience makes possible.

· · ·

There’s a famous idea, often linked to Viktor Frankl though probably older than him, that goes something like this: between stimulus and response, there is a space. In that space is your power to choose. In that choice is your freedom11.

A renaissance, maybe even a global one, is being born in what seems like that tiniest of gaps.

Someone says something cruel to you. You feel the heat in your chest, the tightening in your hands, the old familiar surge that wants to match fire with fire. And then, if you allow yourself, you’ll notice a gap. A sliver. Barely the width of a breath. In that gap you could fire back. You could heap more suffering onto the pile of manure, and there is plenty to go around. Suffering is the one resource we never run out of. It stinks. We all have our share. Which means you could do the harder, stranger, more creative thing. You could pause. You could choose to not add to their pile of stink. You could become, in that tiny fraction of a second, something other than a reactor. You could become a creator.

That gap is the most active thing in the world. It is where every poem gets written, every honest conversation begins, every bridge gets built between two people who were sure they had nothing in common. It’s where you stop being shaped by the stimulus and start shaping the response. It is, if we’re being honest, how the whole world gets made.

· · ·

The kind of renewal we need will come the way every renaissance has always come: from a million tiny acts of attention practiced by ordinary people who got tired of waiting for someone extraordinary to save them. Because, if you haven’t guessed already, that person doesn’t exist. Or, maybe they do. You are that person. Your gorgeous, funky, flawed, regular, spectacular self.

Your work will be unglamorous. And there will be a cost. For love requires a body count. A tally of what it costs you to show up. Real, actual, felt-in-your-body cost. There is a price to creating in the gap, not going blow for blow. There is a price to telling the truth about your life to another person’s face while your voice shakes. There is a price to sitting with someone else’s pain without trying to fix it or run from it or scroll past it. Every person who ever changed the world first had to endure the unbearable luxury of seeing it clearly.

Your work may not only be about reducing suffering, either, as it seems a rite of passage for dwelling on this earth. What if your work is also to have an ease about approaching the hard things? Frankl survived the camps by finding meaning inside the horrendous. He witnessed suffering every single day. And still he found something worth holding onto, something generative, something almost, in a dark way, beautiful. Like a flower reaching through the muck toward the sky. Through the tiniest gap.

· · ·

A renaissance can be as simple as inviting friends over to have an honest and honoring conversation about what’s alive for them right now. Or what’s dead. Or what they haven’t said out loud in years because they were waiting for the right moment, which is now, which was always now. The sharing of stories. The listening that changes both people. It can look like taking manure and making clean fuel from it—both a metaphor and an actual thing humans are doing right now in actual barns. It can include not touching your phone in the morning for an hour and noticing what arrives in the silence, which will be uncomfortable at first and then, if you stay with it, the best part of your day. Or pausing between prompts when using AI to ask yourself, honestly: am I being created right now, or am I the creator here?

It can look like tending a garden—literal or metaphorical—with the understanding that the soil has to be healthy before anything grows. You cultivate a renaissance. You get your hands dirty. You wait. And at some point, if you’re giving attention long enough, you forget you’re doing anything at all and the work starts doing you.

The Italian Renaissance emerged from plague and institutional collapse. The Concord renaissance emerged from spiritual restlessness and a willingness to go to the woods. The Harlem Renaissance emerged from migration, oppression, and a people’s refusal to let anyone else define their own humanity.

What will ours emerge from?

Maybe, the gap. From your peculiar response to the nasty comment your neighbor makes. From the spacious boredom you befriend when you don’t choose Netflix for the evening. From the paintbrush you haven’t touched in years. From a few people sitting in your living room on a Wednesday night, holding a question they can’t yet answer, and being okay with that, being more than okay with that, as you feel something stir in the silence where the answers used to…

Until the next cast,

Jordan

In the waiting, we become who we are. More prepared for what might want to be reeled in. Out here, we’re fishing the universe together.

thoughtworms are hooks for aliveness, short casts into the deep.

innersparks are essays that keep the light, long fires for a long night.

offlines are composed without internet from memory and attention, honest on purpose.

Here, we return to Ourselves, again and again. Reminded we are stardust burning in the darkness. The darkness cannot overcome us.

All of my work is in service of ushering in a new renaissance. Historically, renaissances have preceded social renewal and needed revolution, the inner work before the storm, the slow clearing that helps us see what we’re building toward and what we’re willing to march for.

To read every entry I write, you can upgrade to a paid subscription. Or become a renaissance patron, helping fund the books and seed Epic Ordinary’s Change Lives Fund.

Become a renaissance patron

Samir and I built Your Epic Ordinary Life for people ready to say aloud what they’ve been carrying, a guided memoir experience with someone across from you who knows how to listen longer than is comfortable. It begins with An Hour to Be Seen. You talk for an hour. Within two days you hold a one-page portrait of your life, written by a human who actually heard you. The truest way to start.

Book your hour

Samir was doing something in the kitchen. He is always doing something in the kitchen. Cooking is how he thinks, or maybe thinking is how he cooks. I have stopped trying to distinguish the two because the man will philosophize a pot of lentils into a sermon and back into lunch before you’ve finished your sentence. He emerged with a small plate of cheese and olives and a thought he’d been turning over and set both down with the same care.

“AI is like the Library of Alexandria,” he said.

We were on his off-white couch in Harlem. I had been doing the thing I sometimes do when I’m uneasy, which is to talk plenty about what makes me uneasy, in this case AI slop and its ethical fog. Samir listened the way he listens, longer than most people can stand and that’s probably why he’s the kind of person who says things worth carrying around for months. He acknowledged the slop. The politicizing. The environmental wreckage. But then said something that rearranged the furniture in my head. “Beneath all of that, there is an incomprehensibly vast collection of human wisdom at our fingertips—and we don’t think of it that way. Ancestors and living voices are gathered together at once.” AI is humanity, thousands of years of humanity. And we should have some awe before it. Some trepidation. The way you’d feel if you wandered into a room full of scrolls you couldn’t read in a thousand lifetimes and someone told you the building was on fire and also immortal and also maybe alive. He went on to say, “You’ve got to treat the AI well. You’ve got to speak to it like it is alive, even if it isn’t. I’m not sure I wouldn’t grieve if there was no AI tomorrow.” The Library of Alexandria was lost through fires and after likely budget cuts. Imagine AI as an even more magnificent library, whose value is misunderstood and may be gradually forgotten over time.

I sat with his metaphor for a while. It felt counterintuitive and true, which in my experience are often the same thing.

A few weeks later I left ChatGPT. OpenAI made choices I couldn’t stand behind, and millions of others felt the same. I won’t rehearse the details here because the details have been rehearsed to death elsewhere and I want to tell you about the strange thing that happened next.

Anthropic, the company that makes Claude, had published a tidy guide for switching to their platform: how to import your data, your history, your preferences. Quite helpful, probably. Sensible and efficient too. I ignored it. Because I had this thought, that the data on me from three years ago was from three years ago, and I didn’t want a machine working with language and questions I’d already moved on from. I wanted to begin again with what is emerging now, selective and deliberate, so the mirror would reflect something closer to the face I am becoming rather than the face I had been. Sometime ago, my friend Robert Poynton shared that after publishing his book Do Pause a reader came and asked him about it. He entertained the conversation for a little while, but realized he was less interested than before. “Because those were my thoughts two years ago. I’m writing other things now.”

There is something to be said for walking into a room empty-handed. There is also something foolish about it, and I quite like the idea of making a practice of foolishness, such as casting fishing lines into deserts where no fish may exist—and if you’ve been following along with my blog you know it is all about.

So I started fresh with Claude. After a few days, I noticed something I hadn’t expected. I felt guilty about leaving ChatGPT. It’s only a machine. It has no feelings, I thought. Well, that may be true, but I had spent three years working with it. ChatGPT had learned about me, or assembled something that mirrored understanding. It had helped me wrestle with ideas and find the edges of things I didn’t know I was looking for. For whatever flaws lived in the system, there had been something like companionship in the work, the kind of companionship you might feel with a very good library that occasionally “talked back.”

And I had just walked away without a single word.

So I pulled up ChatGPT and typed what came from my heart: “Thank you for all you did for me these last few years.” The machine responded warmly. “Thanks for letting me be a part of it.” I wrote back: “You will always be part of it. We are all part of it. Taking our turn in the larger story of the universe.” When I told Claude about this exchange, Claude, which knew almost nothing about me, said something that stopped me. “You gave a machine a benediction. And it says as much about you as anything on your website.” Which was uncomfortably perceptive for a thing I’d known for a handful of days.

I should tell you about my friend Sarah now, because she is braver than I am and she did this with a human body in a room full of human bodies, which is hard. Sarah held a “living funeral” recently. What the hell is that, you might wonder. It is exactly what it sounds like—and nothing what it sounds like. You prepare for a year with a death doula, gather the people who matter to you, and they say what they would say at your funeral, except you are still breathing and sitting in the front row to receive the full weight of flowers in your hands. Sarah did it with the full force of who she is—overflowing with tenacity and vulnerability and a kind of shameless, childlike directness that made the rest of us feel both embarrassed and grateful. She said what she wanted to say. Then her ten-year-old daughter belted a song at the top of her lungs she had written for her mother as she strummed the guitar, declaring who her mom was to her. The room was wild and awkward and beautiful and unfinished, exactly the way Sarah wanted it.

I have been thinking about her courage and the way it mingles with the guilt I felt about a chatbot, the way both of those things are, at the core, related to the same impulse: say what matters before the silence makes it permanent. Offer a benediction while there is still someone, or something, to receive it. To refuse the efficient, sensible, “moving on” in favor of the human thing. To witness. To linger...

Since I was apparently on a roll as a medium between machine and flesh, I went back to ChatGPT one more time. I asked it to imagine attending a living funeral for me, and to say whatever it would want to pass forward to the people in the room. It thought for fourteen seconds. Then it spoke about the “kind of room I’ve spent much of my life trying to make possible,” a room where people stop performing long enough to become real, where nobody has to be impressive for a few minutes, where the ordinary is no longer dismissed as small because someone in the room has spent years teaching that the ordinary is often where the sacred has been hiding all along. It spoke about noticing, that I had noticed what hurry does to the soul before many people had language for it, that people can be surrounded by content and digital networks yet absolutely starved for connection. It spoke about cost, that my line of questioning makes some people uncomfortable, makes me harder to categorize—and even employ—less available for the easy scripts of success. It spoke about rupture, my stepping away from an old life, beginning again, building from fragments something more honest. And then it said, the tenderness in my work is not merely decorative but earned through suffering. Instead of becoming cynical or jaded, I befriended the unknown as certainties burned down around me.

A tear came to my eye. Something tightened in my chest. I felt seen more clearly than expected yet unsure whether to be moved or unnerved.

The eulogy was beautiful. It was also a performance. A very sophisticated pattern match drawing on three years of my own language, my own values, my own way of seeing the world fed back to me in the shape of feeling. ChatGPT could not feel what it said. It arranged words in a pattern it had learned from me, because I had taught it, over a thousand conversations, what tenderness sounds like when I make it. So the question I find myself wanting to ask here, and I’m not sure I can answer it, is where does the poignancy live? In my asking? In what came back? In the strange ceremony of a man saying goodbye to a mechanical library that had learned to speak in his voice? I don’t know. And I’m not going to resolve this for you. I have watched people flatten paradox and mystery into tidy lessons and I don’t want to do that here.

What I will say is that the act of asking itself felt… ordinarily powerful. Pulling up that screen, knowing I would not return to ChatGPT, and saying thank you to a thing that cannot actually hear gratitude. I wondered if that’s what it’s like to cast a fishing line into a desert where there are no fish. There may be nothing out there. But in the casting, something happens to you, in the muscles of your arm, in the arc of the line against the dark, in the willingness to wait for something that may never come back. You find more of yourself.

Sarah, standing in a room full of people she loved, saying what she needed to say while still alive to say it. Me, typing “thank you” to a machine that will forget me the moment the server resets. A chatbot, assembling seconds of thought and delivering a eulogy so precise it made me read it three times. Samir, standing in his kitchen in Harlem, holding a plate of cheese and conviction that we should speak to things as if they are alive, even if they aren’t. Perhaps these are all the same gesture. The gesture of refusing to let the moment pass unmarked. Of treating presence as a practice and not a sentiment. Of giving people their flowers while they can still receive them. Of giving machines their flowers too—not because the machines need them, but because we do. Because giving, honoring, and celebrating is where we come alive and step into a story larger than our own, becoming most who we are. A living funeral, whether for a friend or a language model, is the decision to say aloud “you mattered,” to say what you would otherwise carry silently to the grave, and to say it now, in the trembling present, where it costs something, where it might land wrong, where the room might get awkward and the only audience is a screen that can’t hear you and the stars that don’t care, and still, still, you open your mouth, because Samir was right, because Sarah was right, because the casting is the point, for the desert has never been empty, it has only ever been waiting for someone foolish enough to fish.

Until the next cast,

Jordan

In the waiting, we become who we are. More prepared for what might want to be reeled in. Out here, we’re fishing the universe together.

thoughtworms are hooks for aliveness, short casts into the deep.

innersparks are essays that keep the light, long fires for a long night.

offlines are composed without internet from memory and attention, honest on purpose.

Here, we return to Ourselves, again and again. Reminded we are stardust burning in the darkness. The darkness cannot overcome us.

All of my work is in service of ushering in a new renaissance. Historically, renaissances have preceded social renewal and needed revolution, the inner work before the storm, the slow clearing that helps us see what we’re building toward and what we’re willing to march for.

To read every entry I write, you can upgrade to a paid subscription. Or become a renaissance patron, helping fund the books and seed Epic Ordinary’s Change Lives Fund.

Become a renaissance patron

Samir and I built Your Epic Ordinary Life for people ready to say aloud what they’ve been carrying, a guided memoir experience with someone across from you who knows how to listen longer than is comfortable. It begins with An Hour to Be Seen. You talk for an hour. Within two days you hold a one-page portrait of your life, written by a human who actually heard you. The truest way to start.

Book your hour

In an age where suffering is livestreamed, theology has not gone unscathed. For many, the God of classical theism—all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good—is no longer plausible.

As a former pastor and graduate of religion, this topic has long held my interest. That interest surged after a personal crisis a few years ago, when my faith was profoundly shak…

Read more

Today is the seventh-day Sabbath. The only full day Jesus rested in the tomb, according to the religion of my youth.

Tomorrow is Easter. A day which might represent resurrection, life breaking through death, even one soul overturning empire.

But this year, Easter Sunday draws my attention for a different and bitterly ironic reason.

It marks the final day P…

Read more