On the day the 44th President of the United States was inaugurated, I held on to a popular reaction. It had seemed, to some, that this act of ceremonial tradition triggered a difference in the world’s appearance. Some felt that on this day life looked differently, in a positive way. This expression quickly reminded me of my own thoughts not too long ago.
Over the holidays I did some traveling. One might even say that I enjoyed something old, something new, something borrowed, and something blue. I visited my old place of employment in South Carolina, explored a new city, stayed in other people’s homes, and lost myself in the beauty of the Blue Ridge Mountains. And, as usual, I acquired some miles along the way. It was during these very miles that I found myself dissecting my own reactions to change.
Could it be that the sunset experienced in a new location looks more beautiful than the same one experienced at the place we call home? Are the hills of another state more attractive simply because of their location? The rivers more serene? Time, itself, more meaningful? When I reflect on my disclosed summaries of trips I have taken in the past, I remember promoting the grandeur of all that I had seen with a tone of excitement. The sunsets were, in these testimonies, indeed the most beautiful, the hills were more attractive, and the rivers more exquisite. Somehow, time WAS more meaningful and had to be treated as such.
Could it actually be the change in location that defines these moments more positively in our minds? The newness of the experience? Do we get so wrapped up in the change, and our need for it, that we cloud our vision of its truth? Is it better because it is, or because we need it to be? We want it to be?
When I left Missouri’s borders for the New Year transition, I came back with a new challenge. The challenge to see the place I call home with a new set of eyes; to find the same beauty in the sunsets of Missouri as I can anywhere else in the world…the same inspiration from the hills…the same serenity from the rivers. If I choose to see my state, my own backyard, differently…I believe I will.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Balance
If it’s Sunday, it’s Meet the Press…or, if I slept in longer than usual, that other political show with George Stephanopoulos. Regardless, it is a time for me to watch and listen to those who govern our nation, as well as those who critique their decisions. With green tea in hand, this morning was no different.
As I listened to the roundtable discussion that seemed to jump from one conflict to another, I found my thoughts wandering elsewhere. I began thinking about many of the conflicts facing the world today, not to mention those of our own nation. And, like most, my first reaction was sadness and frustration. But, almost just as instinctually, my second reaction was one of appreciation.
Not too long ago, I had a conversation with an older Korean man who dialogued with me about the importance of good and evil. His basic argument was that the existence of evil allows good to be understood or appreciated as such; the idea that the struggle of life allows its counterpart to exist. And this is exactly where my mind wandered to with regard to all of the world’s advertised pain and suffering.
Is it possible that these very conflicts are necessary for the world to be balanced? While it is shocking, even to me, to advocate this very idea…the idea that peace and violence provide a healthy balance to existence…it also brings about a resolve that is very calming when troubled with the question, “Why?”
When I reflect on the purpose of many that seems to revolve around the troubling nature of things---problem solvers, peace keepers, employees of homeless shelters, civil rights advocates---I can’t help but question if life really would be better without conflict. Would we really appreciate good? Can worldwide peace truly exist? Or is it in our nature to create conflict for a purpose, which may or may not involve balance?
I cringe at the idea of war; I get uncomfortable around guns; and I cry when shown visions of genocide. But, it is my opinion that those reactions are a direct result of their counterparts. Worldwide peace will, I’m afraid, continue to be a lifelong purpose for mankind. But its achievement, if accomplished, will be extraordinary due, mostly in part, to the suffering that preceded it.
As I listened to the roundtable discussion that seemed to jump from one conflict to another, I found my thoughts wandering elsewhere. I began thinking about many of the conflicts facing the world today, not to mention those of our own nation. And, like most, my first reaction was sadness and frustration. But, almost just as instinctually, my second reaction was one of appreciation.
Not too long ago, I had a conversation with an older Korean man who dialogued with me about the importance of good and evil. His basic argument was that the existence of evil allows good to be understood or appreciated as such; the idea that the struggle of life allows its counterpart to exist. And this is exactly where my mind wandered to with regard to all of the world’s advertised pain and suffering.
Is it possible that these very conflicts are necessary for the world to be balanced? While it is shocking, even to me, to advocate this very idea…the idea that peace and violence provide a healthy balance to existence…it also brings about a resolve that is very calming when troubled with the question, “Why?”
When I reflect on the purpose of many that seems to revolve around the troubling nature of things---problem solvers, peace keepers, employees of homeless shelters, civil rights advocates---I can’t help but question if life really would be better without conflict. Would we really appreciate good? Can worldwide peace truly exist? Or is it in our nature to create conflict for a purpose, which may or may not involve balance?
I cringe at the idea of war; I get uncomfortable around guns; and I cry when shown visions of genocide. But, it is my opinion that those reactions are a direct result of their counterparts. Worldwide peace will, I’m afraid, continue to be a lifelong purpose for mankind. But its achievement, if accomplished, will be extraordinary due, mostly in part, to the suffering that preceded it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
