Here's a fun little thought that I have been pondering: what defines me? If I asked myself who I am, what would I say? I would describe my fiance, for example as an artist. It is not what she does but it is who Jamie is. She cannot help but be an artist. It defines the way she thinks and acts. We had a discussion about this a couple of nights ago. She was worried that about what would happen to her if she decided to not paint for a living. But we came to the conclusion that even if she didn't paint for a job, she would still be an artist because that is an essential part of her.
But who am I? What part of me is left behind when you take away all the things that I do. I have an idea, but I'm not sure I really like it. Some things that describe me by what I do would be I'm an RA, I'm a Bible study leader, or I teach swing. When you take away those things that I do, what seems to be left behind are two options. In each of those roles is the obvious, I lead. But I don't really like that. I don't mind rising to the occasion, but in the long run, I would rather fade into the background and have a nice quiet life of anonymity. On the other hand, it would seem that serving connects the three. Each one of those requires that I serve those I lead, often putting in long and thankless hours to make things go smoothly. Is that who I am?
It seems that the options open to me are head of state or humble servant of the people. Could it be both? Could who I am be some crazy marriage of the two? I don't know. Maybe I'm on the completely wrong track with this. But as I self-evaluate, this seems to be what I see. Meh. Well I suppose the power hungry, maniacal dictator life can't be all bad. I guess we'll see.
No comments:
Post a Comment