Heh, heh, heh …
Rome wasn’t built in a day. Gebser has never been grokked in one reading.
You are. You read, react, post, open up threads of discussion on whatever happens to move you. That is more contributive than you may think.
Now, I’m going to say something that I’ll probably regret, but I’m going to say it anyhow. Personally, I don’t think anyone can make the integral happen. (Sometimes I get the feeling that the more focused Wilberites think we can, that it’s a matter of grasping the overall framework and charting a path and hitting the goal. I’m probably doing them injustice, so I’ll let it at that.) In my mind, if the integral comes, it will be like a thief in the night.
We’ve been doing what you describe – in a certain regard – since I’ve been here (I started with IC during the collective Gebser reading, the Winter of Origins, back in 2016. You may not be aware, but there is a whole channel on this site dedicated to all things Gebser. He is one of thoses figures who floats in and out of many discussions, and a whole series of CCafés over the past year have deal both directly and indirectly with his thinking. (In this regard I highly recommend visiting the CCafé session, The Evolution of Consciousness as a Planetary Imperative, from April of this year. Quite a few of us spend a lot of time mulling over his thoughts on things.
You should know that I am not saying this to dampen your enthusiasm, but rather that there is some history that it doesn’t hurt to know about. There are literally hundreds of posts on this site in which he is discussed or at least mentioned, primarily because he developed an easy-to-remember (but more-challenging-to-understand) model that provides a helpful point-of-reference in certain complex conversations. In fact, Marco is pushing a not-too-far-in-the-future CCafé where we can delve more deeply into the section in Part II, Chapter 9, Section 4 of EPO on “Literature” (and the Integral structure of consciousness). I think you’ll find that the more you engage him, the more difficult it becomes to “distill” him in any reasonable way. He was more a stimulator than a resolver of thought.
And one last thing. You give me far more credit than I deserve when it comes to Gebser’s work. Yes, I’ve read him more than once (both in English and German), but I am anything but an expert on anything he has to say. There are others who are much more qualified than I. But, I also think it’s helpful to keep the myriad aspects and details of his presentation sorted in a meaningful way, and there I can sometimes be of assistance, so I’m happy to hear you won’t be bothered (too much) if I butt in there.