Putting the “Men” in “Dimension” Part 2: In the Company of Guys
I know what you need, boy...
The program Entertainment Tonight has this rage-inducing habit of teasing the audience with ”explosive new details” on, say, Lindsay Lohan – only to reveal in the last thirty seconds of the show that Lins blew a tire on the way to jail. To be honest, they may’ve stopped doing this years ago, right about the time I summoned the self-restraint to stop watching. I don’t care how MILF-y Mary Hart is, I cannot watch – that gimmick is as infuriating as it is anticlimactic. That said, it occurred to me as soon I as I hit “Publish” on my last post that I’ may’ve done the same thing.
I was writing about four great men – Leonardo Da Vinci, Benjamin Franklin, Teddy Roosevelt, and Paul Newman – and how they were my travel companions on the rocky footpath to becoming a Better Man. I suggested their success in life was the result of a balance that comes from learning and understanding many things, a balance that is curiously absent amongst many adult-age males today. Sure, they may’ve been blessed with unique gifts, but they were also mortal: they had bowel movements, they occasionally wished their spouse/mom/offspring would STOP! TALKING! and they drew on more or less the same blessings of our double helix as you and me. Nonetheless, my “cliffhanger” ending suggested I had found the key to finding the same balance in life that they did. I’ll leave it for you decide if I’m Mary Hart or not.
Leo, Ben, Teddy and Paul (aka the Better Man Fab Four) were all curious men, so much so that they were skeptical about the conventional wisdom of the time, and often questioned it. They were also humble (in their way), enough to know that they could never know everything, and personal improvement was something that, for them, could never stop. They were ambitious, in that they aspired to be better, and took steps to bring it about. But the thing that made them great, that made them strive in a way that turned them into household names? Adversity.
Sudha K
To Quote Paul Newman “If you’re playing a poker game and you look around the table and and can’t tell who the sucker is, it’s you.”
So while not disputing your point about hardship I would say the point of being a man is not about “aciton” but about “being” – not sure if that makes sense but I am tired.
Chris
That’s a very zen attitude, although I’ve never been terribly zen. I would argue that the personal hardship has made you even better than I already knew you to be -gave you wisdom and a sense of proportion regarding crises – and that’s hardly a bad thing.
Jac
I think this “balance” you speak of is overrated… I think, in fact, that without “balance”…. that is a GUY word…. that it would be easier to reach true manhood… (if there is such a thing). Being balanced is so… benign. I think a certain amount of UNbalance is perfectly healthy and desirable. Often the things that bring the most joy in life come from hobbies or interests that we’re a little unbalanced about in the kind of time or attention we devote to them but… if they bring you joy….whose to say that kind of unbalance is a bad thing? ANd… often when you start a project… something like…. trying to become a Better Man….. you have to get unbalanced and somewhat extreme to devote yourself to that task… you don’t reach goals or rise to new heights of personal growth and awareness by always keeping it in balance.. in fact… I think that could actually hold you back from reaching full potential if you’re afraid to get a little extreme in some areas…. of course that’s just my opinion!!
Chris
I think you’ve confused my idea of “balance” with “taking it easy.” Two different things.