The Art of Gathering

Parker presents one of her book’s most substantial and applicable principles via the concept of pop-up rules. Having created an argument for generous authority in Chapter 3, Parker begins Chapter 4 by arguing that pop-up rules are an effective instantiation of this style of hosting. Pop-up rules emphasize a spirit of play and experimentation, a positive, can-do attitude that encourages participation while upholding the purpose of a gathering. This spirit harmonizes with Parker’s style, which feely incorporates humor and play. This is evident in the anecdotes she cites, such as the discussion of I Am Here Days, freewheeling events open to anything from a museum tour to an impromptu midday dance party in an underground club.

The concept of pop-up rules also demonstrates how Parker is attuned to contemporary society. Various pop-up events are a broad phenomenon, but the emphasis on play and experimentation also portrays Parker’s pop-up rules in a youthful, invigorating light that stands in sharp contrast to traditional rules of etiquette guiding gatherings. She writes that “[i]f etiquette is about sustaining unchanging norms,” then “pop-up rules are about trying stuff out” (120). Parker’s pop-up rules are context-dependent, unlike etiquette. Earlier in The Art of Gathering, Parker critiqued the assumption that a gathering’s success can be guaranteed by attending to superficial elements like place settings and centerpieces, and she now rejects the idea that a gathering can be effectively conducted by following established rules that dictate behavior across time and space.

Etiquette can provide staid rules for acceptable behavior; following them, Parker suggests, is meant to be a clear way to distinguish those of a cultured class. Pop-up rules, on the other hand, encourage a “more experimental, humble, and democratic” (119) spirit by providing temporary ways of striking equality and egalitarianism via guidelines for all to follow. Pop-up rules are antiestablishment, even rebellious, and thus connected to movements for social change. This connection grounds pop-up rules, showing that though they may be playful, their ultimate service is to be purposeful and transformative, once again echoing Parker’s roots in conflict resolution.

The example of Diner en Blanc is one of the most important in the chapter; Parker utilizes it to validate her concept of pop-up rules, since the multinational event is highly organized but led by a temporary set of guidelines. She upholds it as proof of pop-up rules’ success. For example, her claim that the crowd at a Diner en Blanc she attended “was more diverse in every way than that at most New York parties I have attended—and more diverse than the clientele of most New York restaurants of comparable elegance” (128), lends evidence to her claim that pop-up rules encourage diversity, unlike etiquette.

As much as Parker promotes the concept of pop-up rules, she is also honest about the potential difficulties of getting attendees to agree with a set of new, temporary, and perhaps even bizarre rules. Yet again demonstrating her sensitivity to modern life, she is also aware of how constant distractions, particularly those posed by technology, can make it difficult to enact pop-up rules. Parker responds to these challenges by making specific recommendations. She encourages a group consensus to put away smartphones at events (like the I Am Here Days) instead of shaming individual attendees for being distracted, writing that “[t]he kind of restriction that might feel oppressive if permanent can seem compelling and intriguing when it applies sometimes, as part of a conscious effort” (132). By acknowledging these difficulties and offering potential solutions, Parker encourages readers to find her point of view—and thus, her argument—more authentic, believable, and trustworthy.