Itt-Ott, 1973 (6. évfolyam, 1-6. szám)

1973 / 1. szám

heritage will he shared with more and more persons, and therefore the aim is deeply motivated and pure in seeking greater effectiveness. The lines of communication are extended and extended, the gaps, the distances become wider; the generations, in time, lose contact with the source of recovery and the bearers of the rediscovered cultural heritage.

When examining what I have delineated, we are faced with a dilemma that seems to hang us on either of the two horns of the dilemma, by virtue of the construction of the situation in which we find ourselves. And yet, this is a slice of the real life situation. Cultural organizations, local and extended, emerge and attempt to do their thing, in the contemporary vernacular. Effective administration leads to "successful" extension of the original circle to include a larger area. As it does extend itself, greater local visibility is a necessary prerequisite for continued expansion. Without the necessary expansion and extension the organization would not, nor could it fulfill its purposes and aims. By this means the expanding organization seeks to approach the one-to-one relationship which is so necessary for ultimate effectiveness. The success or failure to achieve a modified one-to-one relationship at this point may be the criterion either for continued expansion and extension with a healthy, wholesome, vital, modified one-to-one relationship, or for continued expansion in which the organization moves away from the one-to-one relationship, this disoersing its effectiveness.

Now I come to the proposition which I referred to at the beginning, that is, that we may be compelled to deal with apparent contradictions and operate from such a basis by accepting the following. First, we need to retain the ideal of the one-to-one relationship unit, that is, the strength of small groups that are effective in attaining their goals. Secondly, we should also be mindful of the fact that small circles tend, like pancakes, to extend themselves. As they extend, they overlap one another.

The remedy of this latter situation of pancaking—for ecological reasons—is to seek, through cooperative means,to limit the extension of each "pancake" or circle, to keep it from overlapping—by that I mean to prevent every organization from doing the same thing, from carrying out the same or similar cultural programs. The avoidance of duplication conserves resources and energy that cannot be dissipated by any group. The depletion of any of the resources present in the American Hungarian community for duplicate efforts is a waste that cannot be allowed, because the resources available are in short stock.

My conclusion is that the effectiveness of American Hungarian organizations is reduced often to a grade of either "slightly effective" or "not effective" because of the "pancaking" and overlapping found on the scene. Programming and sharing of ideas on a cooperative basis would maintain the ecological balance needed for continued growth and nourishment of the various cultural organizations. (From the time of the founding of the American Hungarian Studies Foundation, about which I can speak with some authority, the Foundation has sought out, in a consistent manner, various organizations and their leadership to work on this cooperative basis, each doing his particular thing, but avoiding duplication, by having others know about the areas in which the Foundation is working and programming. )

34