photo by Jason North, age 13
Michael, Jason and Bruce got the garden ready for planting. I don't call them gardeners now. And that's not the reason I love them, although it did make me happy (so maybe it helps).
If you ask someone what they do, they almost always answer, "I am a..."
I am a doctor; I am a housewife; I am a school teacher. So here's the question: Is a person defined by, or of value because of what they do?
Right now Bruce teaches school, but I don't think of him as a school teacher. I wash dishes every day, but I don't think of myself as a dishwasher. Well, not really. Here's another example: My mom likes to brag about her kids (don't we all?). Even though I haven't danced in years she still tells people that I am a ballerina. (Actually, I never really was a ballerina—I was just pretty good at ballet.)
I am very talented. I'm pretty smart, too. And I'm not just tooting my own horn (although I am apt to do that). I really am smart and talented; I can do a lot of things well. In fact when I make up my mind to do anything, I do it very well. Bruce often compliments me on the things I do, and sometimes will even say he loves me because I do "this" so well or because I'm so good at "that." Other people who know me say that I am "amazing." Which is all very nice and very flattering and makes me feel great! (OK, you're thinking that I am really full of myself; but hear me out.)
So people might say, "Loralee is a great cook," or "Loralee is a good pianist." But if I were to get in a terrible accident and lose the use of my body and/or mind—all or in part—would I then be a different person? If I couldn't cook, or play the piano, or write, or dance, or any number of things that I do, would that change who I am? I don't believe so. But it's a question that's been kicking around in my mind for a few weeks now.
Sometimes, in Relief Society, some well-meaning teacher will ask everyone in the room to look at the person at their left (or right, or directly in front of them) and then tell the class one thing that makes that person wonderful. So, at a moment's notice I'm supposed to come up with something that sounds nice and will make everyone feel good (and I really don't just want to say that her make-up looks great). I hate that exercise. Not because I dislike that person, and not just because I may not know them well. It's hard for me to do that for people I know, too.
For example: At the beginning and end of each school year at least one teacher—sometimes all of my kids' teachers—throw me for a complete loop by sending home a paper that I'm supposed to fill out saying what is wonderful about my child(ren). It just boggles me. They're just wonderful because they are! They're cute and smart and funny and they're really great. Are they great because of the things they do? I don't think so. I mean, sure they do things that I like; things that are kind, helpful, funny. But it is hard for me to tell you the good things about them.
Bruce, too. I can't tell you why I love Bruce; I can't make a list of the wonderful things he does or has done that make me love him. I just love him because he's Bruce.
I am a doctor; I am a housewife; I am a school teacher. So here's the question: Is a person defined by, or of value because of what they do?
Right now Bruce teaches school, but I don't think of him as a school teacher. I wash dishes every day, but I don't think of myself as a dishwasher. Well, not really. Here's another example: My mom likes to brag about her kids (don't we all?). Even though I haven't danced in years she still tells people that I am a ballerina. (Actually, I never really was a ballerina—I was just pretty good at ballet.)
I am very talented. I'm pretty smart, too. And I'm not just tooting my own horn (although I am apt to do that). I really am smart and talented; I can do a lot of things well. In fact when I make up my mind to do anything, I do it very well. Bruce often compliments me on the things I do, and sometimes will even say he loves me because I do "this" so well or because I'm so good at "that." Other people who know me say that I am "amazing." Which is all very nice and very flattering and makes me feel great! (OK, you're thinking that I am really full of myself; but hear me out.)
So people might say, "Loralee is a great cook," or "Loralee is a good pianist." But if I were to get in a terrible accident and lose the use of my body and/or mind—all or in part—would I then be a different person? If I couldn't cook, or play the piano, or write, or dance, or any number of things that I do, would that change who I am? I don't believe so. But it's a question that's been kicking around in my mind for a few weeks now.
Sometimes, in Relief Society, some well-meaning teacher will ask everyone in the room to look at the person at their left (or right, or directly in front of them) and then tell the class one thing that makes that person wonderful. So, at a moment's notice I'm supposed to come up with something that sounds nice and will make everyone feel good (and I really don't just want to say that her make-up looks great). I hate that exercise. Not because I dislike that person, and not just because I may not know them well. It's hard for me to do that for people I know, too.
For example: At the beginning and end of each school year at least one teacher—sometimes all of my kids' teachers—throw me for a complete loop by sending home a paper that I'm supposed to fill out saying what is wonderful about my child(ren). It just boggles me. They're just wonderful because they are! They're cute and smart and funny and they're really great. Are they great because of the things they do? I don't think so. I mean, sure they do things that I like; things that are kind, helpful, funny. But it is hard for me to tell you the good things about them.
Bruce, too. I can't tell you why I love Bruce; I can't make a list of the wonderful things he does or has done that make me love him. I just love him because he's Bruce.
Michael, Jason and Bruce got the garden ready for planting. I don't call them gardeners now. And that's not the reason I love them, although it did make me happy (so maybe it helps).I just don't really think of people that way—"I like them because of this or that." I hope this is not just because I am so self-obsessed that I can't see what's good about anyone else. But I think really people are just people and I value them because they are people. I admit I like some more than others; some a lot more. Bruce is my absolute favorite and my kids run a very close second. But that's because I know them, I know their personalities; not because they are "a school teacher," or "great students," or "smart," or "they clean their rooms," or anything like that.
It's an interesting thought. Is a person defined by, or of value because of what they do?
It's an interesting thought. Is a person defined by, or of value because of what they do?
5 comments:
Thank you so much for that post. I am so much like you (not talent wise, but with regards to why I like people). I agree that a person isn't defined by their talents or what they do but by who they are as individuals. :)
That picture that Jason took is amazing- thanks for posting it.
Loralee, that's a great question. I have an answer, which may not be a complete answer, but I think it might get you closer: No, it's not what they do but rather their potential. Without the use of your body or your mind, you still have the same value because with that physical or mental ability, you do wash the dishes and finish the laundry. With their potential, Bruce and your sons will work in the garden. We see the good in ourselves and in others. The quality of acting on that good is also part of the potentiality. What is the worth of souls? With all of our faults and shortcomings, even with a more able body or mind, don't we all have more potential than what we now exhibit? The value within us is inherent and God-given. People aren't necessarily good for what they do, especially when there are so many that will do such evil things. It's that potential to do things that are tremendously good and wonderful. And by the way, Loralee, you ARE wonderful! :) - Brad via Becky's blog account
Thanks, Brad. You are absolutely right. I believe that people have inherent value, simply because we are. So the real question is: DO we value people for or define them by what they do? And should we?
I don't think we should value someone over someone else because of what they can or can not do. Because if we did I wouldn't be of much value because most days I get nothing done.
I like people for who they are and what their personalities are like and not what they accomplish in a day.
Post a Comment