Tuesday, September 4, 2007

A Lesson in Personal Change

I went absolutely nowhere this last weekend. I didn't really do much of anything, either. But it was a fantastically productive weekend because of a few hours I spent in private thought on Sunday afternoon.

What I was thinking about, and the conclusions I came to, will be the subject of the next few posts.

When I was in college, my trumpet professor had a small piece of paper tacked on the bulletin board just outside his office that read, "Without change, there can be no improvement."

I don't remember who this quote was attributed to, but it has stuck with me all these years and I'll never forget it. Without any further elaboration, it's a powerful lesson.

So simple. Yet so profound.

I believe this phrase, which I think about nearly everyday, is part of the inspiration for me to try new and different things. As Matt Bingham told me recently, "The Stan, you're a man of ventures. Everyone else, when I ask them what they've been up to, say 'Oh...you know...same 'ole, same 'ole.' But you...you're always up to something!"

I can't help it. Without change, there is no improvement. My greatest fear is stagnation. Or worse, degeneration. Only the willingness to change, to try new things, to push yourself can you hope to become a better person.

The other day, I was reading the words of Igor Ledochowski, a well-known hypnotist and corporate consultant, when I came across a sentence that immediately struck me and will be with me for years to come:

"Great people become great because they got pushed--either by circumstances or by themselves--to keep growing on a daily basis."

Wow.

Did that ever hit home! "To keep growing on a daily basis." Not only is it important to change. It's important to change on a daily basis. Otherwise, it's too easy to become stagnant. Too easy to become lazy and complacent.

So what does it mean to be a "great person?" And how, exactly, do you become one?

This is what we'll discuss in the next few posts.

The Stan

2 comments:

Abel said...

I agree with most of what you've said. Certainly, great people in most poeple's eyes are people you are great at the one thing they do. We rarely look at the other aspects of their lives. For some reason John F. Kennedy comes to mind. He was a great man, not only for his achievments, but also for his character, demeanor, professionalism, talents, etc. Ironically, it is no myth he had is faults. I think your definition of great is a bit "Jesus" like, almost impossible to find a person like that. However, I understand how a person who achieves that level of greatness, if possible, might feel and influence others.

I think of great musicians, like Colrane (as you pointed out) and Tommy Johnson (tubist) and great conductors who, more than great people, also left a legacy which is still influencing people today. I think a lot of it has to do with leaving a legacy.
I'm certainly not an expert on "the greatness of people and what that entails" but great people, for me, are those who leave a legacy and inspire others to improve themselves.

I've always been curious about the personal aspects of great people's lives. Of course, no one is perfect and as I said earlier, people have flaws.

Gotta run....we'll continue this later :)

The Stan said...

Certainly people have flaws. I think my description leaves a lot of room for personal flaws. Though, admittedly those flaws would be small in comparison to the effectiveness and greatness of such a person.

For example, what good does it do to be a great musician but die young from a drug addiction? What kind of legacy is that? Or be a "great" leader, but have secret unethical dealings on the side?

Those are BIG flaws. And I can't really respect someone with those kind of flaws. I can respect Coltrane as a musician, but nothing more. He was not a great man in my opinion.

Even though he seemed to have reformed in later life, he was all over the place spiritually (Islam, Hinduism, Spiritualism) and was rumored to have taken LSD in his later life.

I'm not trying to judge the man, but clearly, his "greatness" leaves something to be desired.

My point, was simply that greatness must be about something more than just being great at some thing.