Compromise-d

‘One of the truest tests of integrity is its blunt refusal to be compromised.’ (Chinua Achebe)

My struggle at the moment is just trying to make sense of the world. Like Rick James’ opening words in a webinar on the future of humanitarian work, ‘There’s so much I don’t understand.’ And then there’s the important question of deciding what to do. On the same day that I visited a former Nazi concentration camp this week, where the infamous propaganda film ‘Triumph of the Will’ (a chilling celebration of Hitler’s personal power) came to mind, I received an email from my own coach, Sue, with a recommendation for a book called ‘The Surrender Experiment’.

Now there’s a polarity. At one extreme, the determined power of the will to force reality to bend and comply with whatever we want. At the other, to stop pushing and let go, go with the flow, and be responsive to whatever emerges. Sue asked what I notice about the spectrum. I said, 'The extremes are most visible to me.’ Perhaps that’s a life trait too. Sue asked where, if anywhere, I would place myself on that spectrum. I felt an immediate resistance to placing myself in the middle, as if the middle represents a place of compromise, which feels too much like compromise-d.

It’s something about finding a different stance, a third position that somehow captures the best of the extremes, without the worst, and doesn’t settle for the lowest common denominator in the middle. The power of the will is an important factor in choice theory and personal agency. It’s that sense that I can change things, even if not everything, if I commit myself to it. There’s also wisdom in being open to the present; for me, a kind of prayerful responsiveness and agility. Beena Sharma likens navigating the creative tensions in a polarity to a dance. A very apt metaphor.