Putting Food on the Table

To think that one’s identity is static and complete unto itself – at any point in one’s life – is arrogant, for it requires the utmost humility for one to recognize that he needs improvement. The person has assumed that his ken -- most likely, a body of knowledge bequeathed him by an authority figure, i.e. a parent, political/religious leader, or a companion – is all that he will need to get by on for the rest of his life. He assumes that as long as he flies under the radar, doesn’t do anything unorthodox or off-track, he has enough. He’ll be fine. After all, he tells himself, Life is just about having a job and paying your bills. A child who dreams of becoming an actor is told by a person of authority, “You know that it’s a one in a million chance that you can make any money at it, right? There are only a few successful actors in the world and they had to fight really hard to get there.” This is a common one: “They don’t call them ‘starving artists’ for nothing.” Obviously, this stills fear in the heart of the child as he grows into adulthood. Of all the things to fear, he learns to most fear… hunger.

What the child also learns from this is that he will be able to derive his sense of self-worth from his level of ability to put food on the table. The parlance for this has been "to provide" or "to be a provider." To use the term in this way makes it almost impossible to debate. Why, of course, my highest value is to provide for others. I'd be remiss if it weren't! What kind of human being (or Christian) doesn't want to provide for his family?

Years later into his adulthood, the child who dreamed of a creative and glamorous life as an actor, has a very respectable job, stable, interesting enough. With his earnings he’s going to buy a house, heck, a few houses. His job is his job – it’s what pays his bills. But these houses, these investment properties, have become his new dream. It seems to be a good choice for a dream, he’s been lead to believe: it’s tangible, it’s practical, and you can actually see progress. Besides, everyone else seems to be doing it, so it must be a sound plan. It seems to be a very concrete object to vest one’s aspirations in. In the evenings he can work, little by little, on rehabbing his dream. The more time and energy he puts into it, the more successful it will become. He will be able to flip the houses for a huge return so then he can afford to be… well, even less potentially hungry.

He is very active, busily rehabbing the property. Yet he is still inert. While he may be highly motivated for home improvement, he is not on the track for self-improvement. On some level, as I had written yesterday, this inertia is borne out of fear, fear of change, fear of responsibility, fear of one’s self. Perhaps, now that he’s older, grown a little cynical and jaded, he’s forgotten what it’s like to dream of a best possible self, a highly self-actualizing self. Eh, it doesn’t get you anywhere. I’ve seen how it doesn’t get you anywhere. Really, he doesn’t know whether or not chasing the idealized version of himself is worthwhile because he never really made the effort. So, while on some level, his inertia is fear of one’s self, it is rooted in laziness. It requires a lot of work without a manual, a lot more mental power to stay on track toward an intangible vision. This mental power is imagination... and it takes all you got.

As for hunger, it’s not so bad. It passes. In North America, eventually you get fed. I’m often reminded of this anecdote: I was walking along St-Catharine in Montreal with a friend. He noticed a bird picking something off the ground and eating it, and remarked, “God provides even for the least of His creations.”

Nourishing your Self, however, is up to you.

More on 'sloth'

In an earlier post I dubbed mental laziness 'sloth'. Here are more thoughts on sloth.

Some of this mental laziness comes from the refusal to grow up. The refusal to grow up entails the resistance to learning new things, things about life, about how the world works. It comes from hubris and the feeling that one knows all that’s worthwhile knowing.

Sometimes this refusal to change, to grow up, to evolve, is borne out of the feeling that one’s identity was rejected or deemed ‘not good enough’ by someone else. In her defiance to these feelings of rejection, she becomes determined to be her self unwaveringly. She assumes the credo, “I gotta be me. Come what may, I gotta be me.” But this sense of her self is limited to how she sees herself in that moment when she has decided to stay firm in her selfhood. Therefore, she effectively ‘freezes’ herself in time. The totality of the self that she had come to know at, say, the age of 21, remains the same self she insists on knowing into her chronological 30s, 40s, and beyond.

It is fear therefore that has made her lazy. It’s paradoxical: on one hand she is firm – exerts force – in holding onto this identity; on the other hand, she has been weakened by the fear of being rejected or disappointed again. As a result she has limited herself to the point of self-debilitation for to learn is to feed oneself.

To “be me”, to be one’s authentic self, is also to be mutable. To relish the wonder of Life as a young person would is to be open, hopeful, curious. Contrary to what this person believes, to define herself according to a finite array of tastes, interests, and notions is a disservice to her self. It is the failure to honour her organic nature. And this failure to honour her natural, evolving self, is grounded in the ego, which, by the way, is not endemic to humanity; it is earthly.

Ultimately, this frozen identity eventually becomes angry, frustrated that her limited point-of-view and, therefore, limited understanding, has fallen short of leading her to a place of self-satisfaction. To add insult to injury: she’s angry and dissatisfied and she can’t understand why. She doesn’t know what she’s missing.