How do you know where to draw the line between accepting yourself as you are, flaws, strengths, good and bad - and striving to be something better, something more, something dynamic instead of static, something you can be proud of? How do you stop thinking about all the parts of you that you wish were different? If I changed all those things, would I be substantially different? Would I still like me, would others? If I changed all those things but wasn't substantially different, what would be the point? One of my favorite merry-go-rounds is the whole accomplishment thing. I sometimes thing that I should know more - learn something new. How to speak another language perhaps (most educated people around the globe speak at least two if not more, and most Americans speak just the one), or at least re-learn all the Spanish I knew in high school. Or perhaps I should pick up the violin again and really commit myself to the community orchestra so I could learn new music, and refresh my skills. Or what about something completely new - like German? Or knitting? Soccer? But then I think about all the things I already know, the things I already do, which inevitably leads to all the things I used to know but don't anymore. And I wonder, "should I just accept this? Is this just a normal part of getting older?" If I’m not learning anything, or really accomplishing anything (but just maintaining the status quo) am I really living? Or then am I just existing? And then there are all the parts of my less-tangible nature: I'm opinionated, emotional, melodramatic, and so on. For example I like that I am sensitive, but I don’t like how I get so easily upset. If I change one, does it change the other? If so, is it worth that price?
Posted by Liz at 12:28 PM