This blog is created for readers interested in discourse on writing, research and practice that goes beyond conventional ways of thinking and dives deeply into meaningful explorations into new territories of doing and being. I hope it proves to offer substantial ideas and commentary that can help others navigate the ever-widening field of integral-level understanding. I hope that by introducing readers to authors and artists by orienting their work in relation to integral discourse, more connections will be made among ideas, and novel ideas will emerge in the spaces “in between.”
Here you will find themes that extend themselves over a range of books and/or authors — in ways that hopefully open up interest and commentary.
Unless otherwise noted, all reviews are written by me, Bonnitta Roy. I write about books, art and video that I am personally interested, and oftentimes have committed to reading for a variety of purposes related to my own explorations, research, and writing. Readers are invited to submit reviews of their own.
The term Integral carriers many meanings. In the context of Integral Review, integral does not so much mean that the works reviewed are “integral” in any sense — although many of the works can certainly be seen to qualify as integral in one sense or another ((i.e. cross disciplinarian, meta-systematic, analytically integrative or synthetic, methodologically pluralistic, domain-integrating (as in body-mind-soul or science-spirit), enframed by Wilber’s AQAL “Integral” Theory, based in a developmental spirituality, etc…)) — rather, we hope that you find that our reviews are integral in the way they digest diverse works across wide ranges of themes, issues, interests, and concerns. We hope that you find our view — the fundamental depth of the “platform” from which the reviews are written, is integral in the sense that it is liberating from old habits of mind that are embedded in hidden assumptions, dualistic thinking, and the disconnect that results from reified thinking. We hope that our reviews might contribute “integrally” in the way described by Jean Gebser in The Ever Present Origin— that they might evoke a systasis — a new kind of statement, and help render what what previously hidden or latent, transparent or diaphanous. For in a very real sense, the whole world and the entirety of creation and all of thought, too– are right in front of our very eyes– in the spaces between the words, in the spaces between our breaths, in the spaces between existence and emptiness, in the very deep space between those spaces. An Integral Review should have the capacity to trans-literate those very spaces.