preparing a prayer space

When (if?) you walk into a major retailer, be it Whole Foods, Express, or Apple, you are likely to be attracted in a specific direction, like most other folks. The direction you are pulled in is not an accident so much as the product of millions of dollars worth of research into lighting, spacing, use of color, sound, product organization, and signage. As it happens, there is enough demand to have created the need for specialized store designers and their accompanying professional organizations.

About a year ago when i started writing this post (before i totally got overwhelmed with workflow) Eli K-S encouraged me to write down some of the guiding principles and minor logistical issues that go into a well prepared davening space. We will never spend a dollar on improving the design, but I am certainly interested in using our collective brainpower to effectively consider the small nuances they way the folks due when they build a hotel lobby, a supermarket, or a cafe.

Unlike the retail establishment our chief goal is to create a meaningful experience, rather than to create sales in the near and far terms. The goals, though, may not be as different as they initially appear. That said, i don't intend to wander into the discussion about whether marketing analysis ought to be used in creating religious community. For more on that you can check out this WSJ article and r. daniel brenner's excellent response.

Since our goal isn't to sell stuff we need to set up our spaces differently than commercial spaces are designed. The design of our space, at its most artful, would evoke our values and create the sort of experience we envision. Any discussion of designing a space should begin with a discussion of the values we hope to realize therein.

There are several values issues that impact whether a community chooses to use the Single Direction Approach (SDA), the Circle Approach (CA), or some other approach. I discussed some of those issues here and BZ responds here.This post will primarily deal, not with which approach is preferable but how to implement each in a way which maximizes vibrancy, inclusiveness, ease of movement, intimacy/anonymity, and Al Tifrosh Min Hatzibur (ATMH--don't set yourself off from the community). You can skip the next section on the principles. I say a word on them because I am using some of the terms in a way that may not be intuitive, so I wanted to explain my usage before I utilize them in discussing different aspects of different setups.

A word on the principles:

Vibrancy (V) is the quality and intensity of sound (and emotional energy i suppose). it is connected with the singing output and the space in which it is contained. Singing output (SO) varies directly with vibrancy whereas space, generally, varies inversely. When space is held constant, and as SO increases so does V. When SO is held constant and space grows then V decreases. To create the most vibrancy it is useful to get many people in not much space. At some point, though, the gains peter out because people get claustrophobic or otherwise overwhelmed, but that is a much less common challenge than having too much space.

Inclusiveness has to do with how easily new folks can enter the system and feel comfortable. If the congregation is oriented towards the only entrance and one enters though it, the experience will usually be highly uncomfortable due to feeling like everyone is looking at you. This might cause some folks to be set on edge and diminish from their experience. If a person can't find a prayer book due to the layout and hasn't brought one, this too is likely to cause discomfort. If a person doesn't feel part of the community, of course, this is at odds with this value.

Ease of Movement (EoM) is important so that folks can go to the bathroom, choose a new davening location, or move for any other reason without causing an undue disturbance on others. Much EoM is preferable for the non-mover as s/he is less likely to be disturbed and it is also good for the person who wishes to move as they can go where they want without worrying about the impacts to others. Too much EoM can impact Vibrancy as it requires dissipating people and their energy.

Intimacy is directly at odds with Anonymity. Some communities value a communal feel where those gathered to pray can exchange smiles with there brothers and sisters in the community. Other prayer groups prefer a model where one needn't be concerned with those sorts of connection and can come and go without needing to engage directly with other folks. This situation makes it easier to focus on one's own sense of spirituality according to this model.

Lastly the idea of al tifrosh min hatzibur (do not separate yourself from the community) is very important to thinking about where the leader should be.

----

Now on to actually putting some chairs out.

On The Location of Chairs and Aisles:

Single-Direction SDA Seating

In this model the seats are setup to all face the same way. I generally set them up with an aisle down the center. It is a bad idea for EoM reasons to have long rows without aisles. Though if you set up too many aisles it impacts Vibrancy by reducing the density of daveners. I find the magic number is 7: try to avoid having more than 7 chairs without an aisle. when i follow this guideline, it means that no one is more than three people away from an aisle, and most people are less. Where exactly you put the aisles is dependent on how wide your space is.

For Inclusiveness reasons, it is important to avoid having the room oriented in the direction of the main door. It may seem obvious, but it is a very awkward experience to walk into a room of people praying and to feel as though everyone's eyes are on you. If you use a Circle Approach, then this is a non-issue as no more than a third of people can be facing any given direction. Sometimes the spaces we all use have multiple entrances. If this is the case, it is fine to have a door on the wall towards which everyone is oriented. However, it is wise to route people to an alternate door. In addition to their own embarrassment, having people stream into the front of the room is problematic insofar as it is distracting to the folks who are already in the room.

Traditionally, Jewish prayer is oriented eastward. [Of course, the word oriented comes from the orientum /orins, , latin for east]. This is a nice starting point to figure out how to design your space in the room. I have no expertise on the halachic or historic origins of that tradition though it seems there is some flexibility built in when the Mishnah discusses it initially. Generally you can accomplish the outcome where you face east but don't have people enter right in front.

Figuring out where the davening facilitator (Shaliah tzibur--Sh"Tz) should stand in this setup is a tough challenge with no easy answer. If the leader stands in front of the front row, at the center of the room, facing the same direction as the congregation (back to congregation), than it is difficult for the leader to easily discern the reaction of the community and more challenging for the community to pick up on subtle changes in tempo or volume or even tune switches put forth by the Sh"Tz. If the Sh"Tz stands in the front, at the center, but faces the congregation (as in many synagogues) then we have issues with ATMH, as we've created a separation from the community underscoring a difference between the leader and the community. My limited knowledge and experience with the sefardi world leads me to believe they have another common traditional setup which involves a leader in the middle of the room. perhaps our friend ChorusofApes will tell us more about these possibilities. Needless to say, in the single direction seating approach the Sh"Tz can setup in the middle of the room either in a seat or at a shtender (lecturn) in the main aisle.

There are a few important caveats on setting the leader up in the middle of the room facing the same direction as the congregation. If you have a shtender, do not initially put it in the middle!! There is a bizarre rule of human behavior which dictates that in any SDA davening setting no one will sit in front of the Sh"Tz. If you setup three rows back, the front two rows will be empty. It is much better to put the shtender in the front of the room and then move it back once the seats have been filled in. This way, inertia will keep the front rows occupied.

A few additional thoughts on SDA Seating:

• Prayer books should be placed by the door where most people enter. If there are multiple doors where people enter, prayer books should be placed at all locations.
• It is highly advisable to have a person (greeter) seated by the most trafficed entrance. That person should say hello, answer any questions and give folks entering a prayer book turned to the correct page (perhaps even the one they have been using).
• Before services start it is good to try to get folks to move forward to seats closer to the front as later arrivals will feel awkwardly about moving there during the services as they will feel all eyes are upon them. General announcement are almost always ineffective for accomplishing this goal. Speaking to individual community members is likely to be more successful.
• Place rows closer together than seems intuitive. you only need ~18" between the front of one seat and the back of the one in front of it. The person's head will as a result be more like 3' from the other persons head. This will make more sense when you try it out. Actually sit in the chair to figure out if it is too cramped. Putting rows too far away will impact Vibrancy. Any closer than 14" is tough for EoM.
  

CA Seating

When the community uses Circle seating many principles from SDA can still be used:

• Prayer books by all entrances.
• Greeter is great.
• Moving folks who arrive early further towards the middle.
• The aisles are a bit more complicated but the same rule of 7 should still work.
  

There are many differences:

• The Sh"Tz can sit close to the middle of the circle and avoid the challenges in determining where an SDA leader should positions herself.
• You don't need to worry as much about where people enter the room.
  

It is critical to have a minimum of deadspace in the middle of the most central of the circles (which should never be called the "Inner Circle" for al tifrosh min hatzibur reasons). This is very important. Make the circle artificially small or vibrancy will take a nosedive. If you want to have a circle of people sitting on the floor in the middle, you might wish to only fill in 270 degrees or some of the circle to make it easy for them to get the the middle and have it not feel claustrophobic. It is very important if you leave a lot of space for people sitting in the middle to very actively insure that the space is filled. This is very hard to do and if you aren't comfortable with strongly encouraging folks early on the actually fill in the middle you are better off making the middle circle our of chairs. I find 6 works well. Make sure there are at least a couple strong daveners directly adjacent to the Sh"Tz (i suppose this is also the case with SDA seating).


Conclusions:

I hope these thoughts have been helpful, i hope to update them at some point. Please use comments to ask questions, propose alternatives, and comment in any other ways but I especially encourage us to work together towards identifying some best practices.

And Go Round and Round and Round in the Circle Game, then abruptly stop and face a single direction

in the past several years i have given a lot of thought to how to setup an indoor space for prayer. it seems there are two major schools of thought:

1. The Single Direction Approach in which folks face the same way (often East)
2. The Circle Approach in which folks sit in a large circle or concentric cirlces

The Single Direction Approach has the advantage of getting more people in less space. This can often have a strong positive impact on intensity of ruach as people hear other folks better and the dynamic feedback can create more energy. Some people prefer the personal space they get from this setup. I imagine the personal space advantage some cite is linked to the fact that you can't generally see anyone else looking at you (the people you can see are in front of you and they can't really see you, the people who can see you are behind you and you can't see them). This distinction may be marginal but it may be psychologically significant to the feeling of privacy.
The SDA has the connected drawback of diminishing people's ability to all see eachother and thus makes subtle tempo and melody shifts more challenging for the shaliach tzibur* to create.

The Circle Approach has the advantage of people being able to see eachother and relate to other folks more directly. I suppose for some this interconnection would be viewed as a drawback. The Circle Approach proponents i daven with tend to talk about it in terms of emphasizing the value of the community and valuing the connections within the community. It demonstrates a caring about who is in the room and who is praying with whom.
The drawback here, aside from the non-privacy, is that many use a big circle which is terrible from a ruach standpoint. The dead space in the middle is like the bermuda triangle of energy. People sing and it's as if pirates abscond with the sonorous vibrations intended for the kahal and the one.

Concentric Circles begin to address this problem but they create the problem of figuring out how to get in an out and should always have at least one and preferable two aisles. So i suppose we are really talking about facing semi-circles.

Sometimes these approaches are combined. I find especially awkward the situation where the community has clearly decided to prioritize seeing each other and actively sharing the experience by sitting in a single circle and then come barchu jump up and face one direction. To the best of my knowledge there is no halachic reason to daven any piece of the service except the amidah with a specific direction. The amidah is generally davened towards J-town.
It is especially ironic that barchu (a leader calling her community to prayer) is so often sung to a wall. It is not the wall which is being beckoned to praise the lord in song, word, and soul--it is the people. So why say it to a wall? Unclear.
Perhaps we could have a focusing kavvanah before singing barchu to a wall.
Maybe something like:
O wall, may your solidness inspire us to support this world, may your porousness inspire us to be open ourselves, may you shelter us in peace. amen.

The point is that it is weird to sit in a circle and then stand unidirectionally. There are major merits to both approaches, but generally, it seems, they are best off not mixed.

[also, a quick thank you to Eli Braun who once, while at the Brown Havurah of which we were both founders, as we stood up and faced east for some non-amidah piece of maariv, asked "have our values just changed?"]

*on wikipedia shaliach tzibur points to hazzan which caused me to wince. perhaps that should get fixed.

Article on TLS in the Forward

Julia Appel wrote a great article on TLS in the Forward. I have a post on it over at Jewschool.

Here, for posterity, is the article:

D.C.-Based Minyan Mixes Shabbat With Activism

Julia Appel | Fri. May 04, 2007

Washington - Tikkun Leil Shabbat, a participatory prayer group, or havurah, may soon have to find a bigger space.

The havurah’s average attendance has increased to upward of 150 from 30 since its founding barely two years ago. Even after halting their advertising on Jewish e-mail lists in Washington, every third Friday night dozens upon dozens of young Hill staffers, not-for-profit analysts, community organizers and graduate students spill out from the main seating area into the stairs and hallways of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism’s carpeted basement. For many of them, finding the havurah has meant finding a home in the Jewish community — one they feel actually expresses their progressive values.

“We originally started Tikkun Leil Shabbat as a summer experiment with no intention of continuing it,” co-founder Joelle Novey explained. “The decision to continue it came from the attendees, who, by the middle of the summer, were saying: ‘This has to continue. I’ve been looking for something like this for years.’”

At first glance, the havurah resembles other new independent prayer communities along the East and West coasts — the mostly 20s age demographic, the volunteer leadership team, the desire for participatory and spirited prayer. Its name, however, is the first tip-off that leaders are creating something more than simply good singing or socializing: It combines tikkun olam (repairing the world) with tikkun leil Shavuot, the practice of studying Torah all night on the holiday of Shavuot. As the havurah’s Web site explains, apply the notion of study and prayer for the sake of repairing the world to the Jewish day of rest, and you get “Tikkun Leil Shabbat.”

The havurah also is unique in that it has an official co-sponsor: not the Jewish federation or even a supportive synagogue, but rather the activist group Jews United for Justice, known for its involvement in local labor and affordable housing issues.

In place of a talk about the weekly Torah portion, known as a dvar Torah, Tikkun Leil Shabbat has a dvar tikkun — a talk by a representative from a local social justice organization on the group’s latest campaign and what attendees can do to help.

“We’re framing the talks about local social justice work by giving them a Hebrew name and a sacred context,” Novey said. And her hopes extend beyond D.C. “One thing I would hope is that we could contribute something, that the idea of a dvar tikkun will become second nature for the next generation, just like how for us, we think, ‘Of course Tu B’Shvat is about environmentalism.’”

The model is sticking. Hundreds of miles north in Boston, the Kavod Jewish Social Justice House has instituted a dvar tikkun in its own services.

Novey and several other JUFJ board members proposed creating and co-sponsoring the havurah in 2005. “We only had to discuss it a few minutes before recognizing that it would be a wonderful experiment,” said the organization’s president, Shelley Moskowitz.

Today, that experiment has become integral to JUFJ’s strategic plan. “It’s part of a three points of contact theory,” said the organization’s director, Lori Leibowitz. The havurah “is one of those points of contact for people, and maybe they’ll also get an e-mail or they’ll see a flier, and suddenly JUFJ has become a familiar entity to them and they are more likely to volunteer.”

In addition to outreach for its campaigns, JUFJ uses the havurah as a showcase of sorts.

“Funders are impressed with our programs when I describe them, but I can’t show our successes to them unless I bring them to TLS,” Leibowitz explained. “Several members speaking at a community meeting isn’t that interesting, but TLS is a window to what we do. I can say, ‘This is our constituency. Here is a community of young Jews who really care about justice.’”

Prior to the launch of Tikkun Leil Shabbat, JUFJ, like many Jewish activist groups across the country, had focused on more secular expressions of Jewish values.

Avi Rosenblit, who was director of JUFJ at the time, sees the havurah as coming out of a desire to shift this status quo.

“Here were people who felt like their interest in Jewish spirituality and in social justice were two disconnected parts of the same idea, but there was no place to synthesize them,” Rosenblit said. “The desire for that synthesis is what I think animated those first meetings and ultimately the continued success of the program.”

In a city in which a glance up at the skyline reveals the Washington Monument, and in which the bars play C-SPAN like it’s baseball, the havurah’s combination of social justice and prayer is uniquely appealing. Regarding the havurah’s popularity, Novey posited, “The political tenor of life in D.C. meant that there were already people looking for a way to articulate their activist work in an explicitly Jewish way, so we tapped into what I think was already present.”

Rosenblit thinks the political backdrop does not sufficiently explain the appeal of the havurah. “People aren’t satisfied anymore with tack-on social justice or tack-on Judaism,” he said. “They want to really know it, on a deeper level.”

In other words, while synagogues often shy away from politics and Jewish activist groups from prayer and God talk, Tikkun Leil Shabbat is diving into both.

The havurah features a full, traditional Kabbalat Shabbat liturgy in Hebrew, communal blessings over wine and challah, Sabbath songs and grace after meals. Service style alternates between instrumental accompaniment with circular chair arrangement and instrument free with chairs facing East, toward Jerusalem, to allow for a range of Sabbath observances. Potlucks feature two tables, one for regular vegetarian food and one for vegetarian food adhering to the most stringent kashrut specifications, so that all attendees can eat. At the same time, alongside the dvar tikkun, “greening” efforts have meant reusable dish ware, cloth napkins and recycling for potlucks, and attendees are encouraged to walk or bike to services in order to reduce carbon emissions.

The havurah’s activist focus has not been without its tensions. One attendee commented that she found the political bent to be overdone: “It might be nice for others, but I come for the people and the davening.”

And recently, the steering committee caused quite a flap when it decided not to use kosher wine for communal Kiddush. In boycotting what some members see as a xenophobic kashrut law requiring that no gentile participate in the wine’s production, the steering committee has stuck to one interpretation of social justice in this case, but it has lost some attendees who no longer feel that their religious needs can be met. The committee is now re-examining the issue in light of communal feedback.

Of course, as much as organizers of the havurah talk about the social justice component, they also freely admit that a basic reason for its popularity is social. In a city as transient as D.C., Tikkun Leil Shabbat provides a welcoming community with a potluck dinner. But even for those seeking socialization, the self-selected constituency is important.

“I work in nonprofits, so it’s not like I’m looking for another way to get involved,” said Alix Davidson, who has been attending Tikkun Leil Shabbat regularly since its founding. “I come because I like having a space full of other progressive young Jews, who I know share my values.”

TLS-DCRC makes the front page

I am excited to report that the TLS-DCRC meger has just made the front page of the Washington Jewish Week. A favorable article discusses the reasons for the merger and the characteristics of the new Tikkun Leil Shabbat. Mazal tov to all the folks who spoke with the news editor and gave such compelling quotes.

So that we'll have it indefinetly here is the article:

6/1/2006 7:50:00 AM

Soul mates D.C. chavurot find love, 'marriage' by Paula Amann News Editor The chuppah was held high, the vows spoken, the glass crushed underfoot last week as two became one. Well, not exactly. But, with a tad less ceremony, two District lay-led Jewish congregations "wed" at their first joint service the Friday before last. And in a novel twist, the chavurot are inviting area Jews to help them celebrate their union through an online registry that will enable the new group to purchase a set of 60 prayer books. The pair, Tikkun Leil Shabbat and the DC Reform Chavurah, will hold combined kabbalat Shabbat services every three weeks through the summer at the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism in the Dupont Circle neighborhood. After the High Holidays, organizers say they will reassess the calendar of services, which so far draw mostly people in their 20s. The new congregation, which keeps the name of Tikkun Leil Shabbat, will hold a full Friday evening service with a d'var Torah that touches both on the parsha, or biblical portion of the week, and social justice causes. Joelle Novey, 27, a District member of the old Tikkun Leil Shabbat and among those involved in the merger, explained the thinking behind it. "There's a real interest in combining lived Jewish life with meaningful action for a better world," said Novey, a staffer at Co-op America, a District-based network of green businesses. "We're coming together to pray together, to eat together and sing together, and we're also taking a moment to learn about issues in our own city and how to address them." DC Reform Chavurah member Rob Levy popped the question of marriage at a joint meeting of the two congregations in April, Novey said. Calling the congregational couple "ready for commitment," Levy, 26, gave a similar reason for the move: "Our primary reason for being is to have really good davening that's filled with ruach ‹ good ruach," or spirit, and social justice. The Reform group has met for some 2 1/2 years; Tikkun Leil Shabbat was launched last summer by members of the local group Jews United for Justice. The combined group settled on Siddur Haverim Kol Yisraeil: In The Fellowship of All Israel, a siddur, or prayer book, designed by a Boston chavurah that, organizers said, has the advantage of presenting Hebrew, transliteration, English and commentary side by side. "It means Hebrew and non-Hebrew readers can all be looking at the same page," Novey said. At press time, the online "marriage" registry had generated 24 purchases of the purple siddur for the new congregation. Talk to those active in the two former chavurot, each of which drew 30 or more to their services before merging, and you hear the word "pluralism" a lot. "Pluralism often falls prey to the frummest common denominator ... or you're trying to meet everyone's desires and no one gets what they want," said Eli Staub, 24, of the District, who pointed to "community baselines" worked out for the merger. These include two distinct service formats: facing east, without musical instruments and circle-style seating, with use of instruments. Even refreshments include a taste of pluralism. The new chavurah follows the old Tikkun Leil Shabbat's tradition of two vegetarian food tables for the post-service oneg Shabbat ‹ one with foods bearing the kosher hechsher mark and the others simply nonmeat items. "Especially for young people, there's more and more appeal now to have these nondenominational Jewish communities," noted Novey. Asked why the chavurot participants chose to form their own congregation instead of joining existing ones nearby, Staub, who hosted the first gathering of the old Tikkun Leil Shabbat at his former home in Dupont Circle, said that "getting to do it yourself is very empowering." Plus, he said that those involved in forming the original group and its new incarnation had a clear idea of the kind of community they hope to build: "very soulful, politically progressive, traditionally committed and fiercely egalitarian." Staub, a research analyst with the Service Employees International Union and an affordable housing activist with JUFJ, touts the religious pluses of uniting the two chavurot. "We're living in a time of frenetic Jewish innovation, especially in the Reform movement," Staub said. "This merger, this marriage, allows us to bring the best of all these experiments together." Michelle Brownstein, 24, a District trade association professional active in both groups prior to their wedding, predicted a "very happy union" and "no prenups whatever" as the pair pool both material resources and ruach, or as she dubs it, "spiritual activism."