The topic of forgiveness has been in the air, lately. There's something about the wintry holiday season that makes people think about making up with those they've been in conflict with. It's a theme in many movies (anyone recall Neil Diamond's "The Jazz Singer" from the 1980s?), sermons, holiday-themed novels, magazine articles.
It's always a nice thought, "making up." The reality is that "making up" is a lot harder to do.
We've all seen the films where the estranged relative or friend or whoever makes an entrance at a family gathering, usually a holiday or a wedding or some such thing. The person the relative is estranged from gets a pained, pleased, tearful, joyful expression on his face and suddenly there are lots of knowing smiles from those who witness this event, and everyone is hugging and clinking glasses in joyful toasts to the renewed relationship.
(cue: swelling music)
It's a nice moment, but what happens afterward? Is everything back to normal from that point on, or is there hours and hours of conversation where old hurts are re-hashed and dissected and new hurts are born out of old arguments and misperceptions?
Most people don't know how to forgive and forget.
We're only human. We can say we forgive, but it doesn't necessarily mean we mean it, at least right away. And we rarely forget entirely the infraction that caused the problem to begin with.
We're only human. Forgiveness takes time. Forgiveness takes practice.
I have a few theories about this, if you can bear with me.
I recently read a short article about forgiveness (Ann O'Connor, "Please, forgive me," Finding God, Volume 6/Issue 2, 2009). The author was a woman who had argued with her teen daughter. The mother kept saying to her daughter, "I'm sorry," and she really meant it. But, she said, her daughter was still upset and the two weren't able to overcome the hurdle of the argument. The mother thought on it for some time, perhaps she prayed, and then approached her daughter and asked, "Can you forgive me?" The mother said it was like a magic door had been opened. She and her daughter were able to communicate better about their argument and finally resolve the issue.
Here's one theory. When we tell someone "I'm sorry," we may genuinely mean it. But oftentimes, saying "I'm sorry" is a way of giving ourselves permission to forgive ourselves, rather than the person we've wronged truly being able to accept our apology.
Now, most people, when someone says, "I'm sorry," will reply, "Oh, that's all right," or some generic equivalent. This response has been programmed into us from childhood. Sometimes, the other person means it when they respond in this manner. Other times, the hurt still festers and things are never put right because of it.
Here's another theory. When we can ask someone, "Do you/can you/will you forgive me," that other person knows first of all, that we are sorry. The other person should know that the perpetrator of hurt has really thought about the conflict and acknowledges his/her own part in the problem. The guilty party isn't just paying lip service to apologize and move on with life - the person is really asking for that other person to forgive him/her.
Now, this isn't to say that the guilty party is always 100% responsible for the rift. We all know there are two sides to every story, it takes two to tango, etc. It's usually pretty rare that only one person is responsible for a rift in a relationship.
If the other person can say, "Yes, I forgive you," what a wonderful gift to all involved. The phrase "I forgive you" may not make the music swell and the flowers bloom. It may not restore to perfection the relationship that was once had. But, "I forgive you" can go a long way toward making a relationship possible again.
In some ways, "I forgive you" is an acknowledgement that there was wrongdoing, and can establish a new set of ground rules. If you recognize that you need forgiveness, for example, and you receive it, one would hope you wouldn't keep doing whatever it was that caused the rift to begin with. Saying "I'm sorry" tends to lead to such behavior because "I'm sorry" is often an empty phrase, said just to placate and used defensively. For example, "I SAID I was SORRY!" As if that is all it takes to make something "better" again. Because "I'm sorry" is often used so thoughtlessly, we tend to forget as soon as we've said it the reason why we said it.
And if we're honest with ourselves, we'll see there's some truth in this.
Now, when there is an argument or a conflict, typically after the hurt registers we want to get even. Some people withdraw, mull over the pain, magnify it, nurse it, and then decide to "get even" with the person/s who caused it. Retaliation may cause a momentary satisfaction, but it does nothing to truly make either person feel better.
Sometimes, when someone says "I forgive you" they think it gives them free rein to then dictate the terms of the relationship from that point on. Holding the forgiveness over someone's head, like a sharpened guilliotine blade, ready to fall the moment that forgiven person says or does something slightly out of line, is not true forgiveness. It's a form of retaliation.
I am reminded of a Miss Manners column from years ago, where a frustrated writer complained that when she told people, "I'm sorry, I can't attend," the other person always demanded to know WHY. Miss Manners responded that it was poor manners to always demand a reason - we should always be satisfied, at least on the surface, with the statement given: I'm sorry, I can't attend. To demand a reason might embarrass the other person.
We are a society that often gives, and receives, too much information.
We always want to be sure the other person understands our point of view. I think this is why we continue to talk after saying "I'm sorry" or "I forgive you." We want to know that the other person fully comprehends what we went through in our pain, how mortified we were, how depressed, angry, upset, etc. and all the reasons why we felt those emotions.When we say "I'm sorry" or "I forgive you," the statements should come with no strings attached. For instance, to say "I'm sorry, but you really blah blah blah blah" isn't fair, and just continues to rehash the reason why saying "I'm sorry" was needed to begin with. Likewise, saying "I forgive you, but if you ever blah blah blah" negates the forgiveness factor.
And, another theory. It's impossible for us to have complete control in every situation, every relationship. To forgive someone restores an element of control. If someone asks me, "Do you forgive me," I can say "Yes," or "No," and thus control the direction the relationship takes from that point on. Asking forgiveness also gives a little control to the asker, as well. It is a way of confronting a problem head on, but in a different, much more sincere way. As long as you are sincere.
Forgiveness should not be about control, however. Forgiveness should be simply. . . forgiveness. No strings attached.
Forgiveness shouldn't be an arbitrary thing, either. "Oh, it's been a few days of you twisting in the wind and being on tenterhooks, so....I'll forgive you. La la la la la!" Forgiveness shouldn't be an occasion to torture.
It may take a while to "forget," or "move on," after forgiveness. Some people, when angry, say things and really mean them, and they aren't sorry for what was said or done. Others say things and don't mean them, and are sorry for what was said or done. Either way, most people are sorry about the results of misplaced words or actions, some of which are made out of pure thoughtlessness and not any desire to truly hurt someone.
Asking for forgiveness need not be a deeply religious experience where your minister or rabbi must be present at every occasion, or Disney-esque birds and flowers appear the moment forgiveness is near. For many people though, saying I'm sorry, or asking for forgiveness can be a very humbling experience. "Can you forgive me" sounds archaic to our ears, and thus very awkward from our lips. It can be a very intimate phrase to say. We aren't comfortable with intimate and archaic, they're too private, personal, too close to our hearts whether or not we want to admit it.
Now, I'm in a situation where I wronged someone. It was unintentional, certainly not personal, at least from my point of view. But, I did it, and it was thoughtless. The other person was understandably upset, disappointed, and then made an insulting statement to me. I felt the insult very personally, I felt wounded - and it became obvious to me that what I had done was felt very personally by the other individual. "But I said I was sorry and I meant it," I thought to myself. That may be true, but maybe the end of the conflict doesn't come when one person says, "I'm sorry," leaving the other party with no response.
Because, maybe it isn't "ok" or "all right." Perhaps, asking for forgiveness not only forces us to acknowledge that "I'm sorry" isn't always good enough, but also allows the other person to engage in what is really being asked, rather than continuing to be unwilling to let the hurt go.
Granted, a person may not ever be forgiven, and both sides will have to learn to live with the new dynamics of the personal or professional relationship. Sometimes, a hurt is so deep that there is no forgiving. If that's the case, choices need to be made: Is it better to not be with such a hurtful person? Is there something I can say or do to improve the situation?
If you're the one who can't be forgiven, you also have choices to make. Have I truly made every effort to mend the problem? Have I honestly asked forgiveness and made apology, no strings attached? Are my actions denying my words?
Whether or not you are forgiven, and whether or not you forgive, there are always choices. What happens is up to you, and you aren't going to know unless you ask.
Will you forgive me?
this post also appears at http://www.spanitz.com/, Spanitz Consulting, "Articles and News," http://www.spanitz.com/artman/publish/index.shtml (Northern Michigan Notes).
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Keep Dreaming your Dream, Susan Boyle
In case you don't remember, Susan Boyle was the Scots Youtube sensation in April 2009, as a contestant on the British show, "Britain's Got Talent." Those of you who watch American Idol, the American version of BGT, already understand the set-up.
If you've lived under a rock like me and only got hooked on the American Idol show in the last year or so, and don't know how it works, here's an overview.
For several months during a year, 3 and most recently, 4 judges (in the U.S.A.) locate to one major city in various areas of the country and anybody who thinks they can carry a tune turns out with hopes of making it big. Some make it through the pre-screening process, and generally those are the people who stand the most chance of being on the televised show where contestants are eliminated one by one, each week, as their vocal talents are put to the test and equally lauded or shredded depending on the mood of the judges.
Sometimes, really interesting people make it through the screening process and those of us watching from the comfort of our living rooms can see the looks on the faces of the judges as they attempt, often unsuccessfully, to not laugh at the contestant. Some can't carry a tune in a bucket, others are so outrageous in personality or dress that I'm sure some joker who gave them a microphone and sent them in to the judges must have been laughing himself to tears.
For Susan Boyle, her entrance on the stage of the set for Britain's Got Talent was just such a moment.
She was a 47-year-old unemployed woman. She had a frizzy brown permanant, or perhaps just an unflattering hair style remniscent of a character in a 1940s period BBC production. Her figure was what I would call matronly but not at all horrific. Her dress was likely something worn only for special occasions, and too formal for church - but perfect for such an audition. She wore minimal, if any, make up. Her hose was dark against her off-white shoes. The judges looked askance at each other. The audience tittered and grimaced as Susan Boyle announced that she wanted to be as "great as Elaine Pearce."
Jaws were dropping after Susan sang the first notes of her song, "I Dreamed a Dream," from the musical, "Les Miserable." Susan was sassy, she was confident, she had a style all her own. And with all that, was a natural shyness that covered a "cheekiness" that also won over the judges - as if her vocal talents weren't enough. By the end of the first verse, the entire theatre was on their feet, eyes glued to the stage in rapt attention as Boyle belted out her song like a professional, with a controlled abandon that few can manage.
Well, long ramble short - Susan didn't win "Britain's Got Talent," and was understandably devastated. Her hopes had been high since the audition, media attention had built up the tension, and there were regular confidence boosts of how Susan would win this comptetition hands down. When she was announced runner-up, Susan suffered a break-down.
People got cruel after that.
I was saddened by the response of the general public, but not having access to British publications and what-not, I didn't have any idea of what life had been like for Susan Boyle during her contestant days, and the time immediately afterward.
I scoured the Internet for Susan Boyle, hoping to hear her amazing vocals online. I was disappointed, and gradually, Susan Boyle drifted from my thoughts until just last week, when I was Christmas shopping. In a small downtown shop I found a CD by Susan Boyle near the register. The store owner and I chatted about Susan, and agreed that she had an incredible voice. We talked about how amazing her audition had been, and the perceptions that others had of her - that she was an object of ridicule until she sang.
Even after she sang, some ridiculed her.
So sad for them, it is their loss if they ignore the talents of Susan Boyle.
I am enjoying her CD, titled "I Dreamed a Dream," and am looking forward to purchasing anything else she releases. Her cover of "Wild Horses," originally a Rolling Stones tune, is magnificent. There is something in Boyle's vocals that brings out the longing, the yearning that the lyrics of "Wild Horses" can inspire.
"Cry me a River" likewise makes a listener think that Boyle has "been there, done that," with a broken heart - and while she may feel wistful over the fickleness of a lover, she'll make sure she gets even with him, too.
I was really surprised to hear a Madonna song on the CD - but "You'll See" is there, and I have to say I hope that Madonna gives up on this song herself, and turns it over completely to Susan Boyle. She has a full-bodied voice with excellent tone to carry this tune well, in comparison to the thin and nasally vocals of Madonna.
The religious selections that are here are standards, Amazing Grace is beautifully done as is Silent Night. My only disappointment was not getting to enjoy Boyle's voice for all verses of How Great Thou Art. For some reason, only the chorus of that song is recorded, and while very powerful, I really wanted to hear the entire hymn. Daydream Believer is ok, but it has never been my favorite song no matter who sings it - so don't trust my judgement on that one.
Others may be hesitant to purchase a CD "sight unseen," and prefer to hear a few tracks before committing to the $14.95 price tag (at the small downtown shop, where I live). Anyone visiting Susan Boyle's site will be able to click "music" and hear some of her CD.
If you like a solo vocalist with simple musical arrangements (primarily piano and orchestral strings) you will enjoy this offering. There are no distracting back-up vocals to compete with, just the dulcet and powerful tones of Susan Boyle.
Be amazed, too, at the physical transformation. Boyle sports a stylish new hairstyle, and what looks to be a beaded dress.
She's absolutely beautiful - but anyone who knew her before her appearance on Britain's Got Talent or Youtube already knew that.
Keep dreaming your dream, Susan Boyle, and please - share it with the rest of us.
If you've lived under a rock like me and only got hooked on the American Idol show in the last year or so, and don't know how it works, here's an overview.
For several months during a year, 3 and most recently, 4 judges (in the U.S.A.) locate to one major city in various areas of the country and anybody who thinks they can carry a tune turns out with hopes of making it big. Some make it through the pre-screening process, and generally those are the people who stand the most chance of being on the televised show where contestants are eliminated one by one, each week, as their vocal talents are put to the test and equally lauded or shredded depending on the mood of the judges.
Sometimes, really interesting people make it through the screening process and those of us watching from the comfort of our living rooms can see the looks on the faces of the judges as they attempt, often unsuccessfully, to not laugh at the contestant. Some can't carry a tune in a bucket, others are so outrageous in personality or dress that I'm sure some joker who gave them a microphone and sent them in to the judges must have been laughing himself to tears.
For Susan Boyle, her entrance on the stage of the set for Britain's Got Talent was just such a moment.
She was a 47-year-old unemployed woman. She had a frizzy brown permanant, or perhaps just an unflattering hair style remniscent of a character in a 1940s period BBC production. Her figure was what I would call matronly but not at all horrific. Her dress was likely something worn only for special occasions, and too formal for church - but perfect for such an audition. She wore minimal, if any, make up. Her hose was dark against her off-white shoes. The judges looked askance at each other. The audience tittered and grimaced as Susan Boyle announced that she wanted to be as "great as Elaine Pearce."
Jaws were dropping after Susan sang the first notes of her song, "I Dreamed a Dream," from the musical, "Les Miserable." Susan was sassy, she was confident, she had a style all her own. And with all that, was a natural shyness that covered a "cheekiness" that also won over the judges - as if her vocal talents weren't enough. By the end of the first verse, the entire theatre was on their feet, eyes glued to the stage in rapt attention as Boyle belted out her song like a professional, with a controlled abandon that few can manage.
Well, long ramble short - Susan didn't win "Britain's Got Talent," and was understandably devastated. Her hopes had been high since the audition, media attention had built up the tension, and there were regular confidence boosts of how Susan would win this comptetition hands down. When she was announced runner-up, Susan suffered a break-down.
People got cruel after that.
I was saddened by the response of the general public, but not having access to British publications and what-not, I didn't have any idea of what life had been like for Susan Boyle during her contestant days, and the time immediately afterward.
I scoured the Internet for Susan Boyle, hoping to hear her amazing vocals online. I was disappointed, and gradually, Susan Boyle drifted from my thoughts until just last week, when I was Christmas shopping. In a small downtown shop I found a CD by Susan Boyle near the register. The store owner and I chatted about Susan, and agreed that she had an incredible voice. We talked about how amazing her audition had been, and the perceptions that others had of her - that she was an object of ridicule until she sang.
Even after she sang, some ridiculed her.
So sad for them, it is their loss if they ignore the talents of Susan Boyle.
I am enjoying her CD, titled "I Dreamed a Dream," and am looking forward to purchasing anything else she releases. Her cover of "Wild Horses," originally a Rolling Stones tune, is magnificent. There is something in Boyle's vocals that brings out the longing, the yearning that the lyrics of "Wild Horses" can inspire.
"Cry me a River" likewise makes a listener think that Boyle has "been there, done that," with a broken heart - and while she may feel wistful over the fickleness of a lover, she'll make sure she gets even with him, too.
I was really surprised to hear a Madonna song on the CD - but "You'll See" is there, and I have to say I hope that Madonna gives up on this song herself, and turns it over completely to Susan Boyle. She has a full-bodied voice with excellent tone to carry this tune well, in comparison to the thin and nasally vocals of Madonna.
The religious selections that are here are standards, Amazing Grace is beautifully done as is Silent Night. My only disappointment was not getting to enjoy Boyle's voice for all verses of How Great Thou Art. For some reason, only the chorus of that song is recorded, and while very powerful, I really wanted to hear the entire hymn. Daydream Believer is ok, but it has never been my favorite song no matter who sings it - so don't trust my judgement on that one.
Others may be hesitant to purchase a CD "sight unseen," and prefer to hear a few tracks before committing to the $14.95 price tag (at the small downtown shop, where I live). Anyone visiting Susan Boyle's site will be able to click "music" and hear some of her CD.
If you like a solo vocalist with simple musical arrangements (primarily piano and orchestral strings) you will enjoy this offering. There are no distracting back-up vocals to compete with, just the dulcet and powerful tones of Susan Boyle.
Be amazed, too, at the physical transformation. Boyle sports a stylish new hairstyle, and what looks to be a beaded dress.
She's absolutely beautiful - but anyone who knew her before her appearance on Britain's Got Talent or Youtube already knew that.
Keep dreaming your dream, Susan Boyle, and please - share it with the rest of us.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Early December Mish-Mash
The other night my daughter had a church youth group event she attended. It started at 6 pm, and so I made sure she ate dinner and was there on time. It got to be about 8 pm and I said to my husband, "So this is what it's going to be like waiting for our kids to come home once they're old enough to date?" He nodded ruefully and said, "Yep. Guess we'd better get used to it."
It was a strange thing waiting for 10 pm to roll around so I could go and get my pre-teen daughter and bring her home again. I'm not sure I'm ready for this increase of outside activity and the whole growing up business!
A relative of mine says she is tired of the ridiculous clamoring of "I want, I want, I want" for Christmas. Isn't Christmas, she says, supposed to be less about what you want than about what you give? And she wasn't talking about "giving" in the sense that you'd be satisfying someone else's desire for that latest technological advance in video gaming, i-pods, etc. I would, she says, rather give things that satisfy basic needs. Given that people are feeling more of a crunch than ever this year with job losses and the loss of household income, you'd think the clamoring for largely unnecessary things would slow down.
On a somewhat related note to the post above, earlier this week I was headed to the mall to pick up a Christmas present. On the corner of the busy intersection where the mall stands, was an anemic-looking woman holding a sign that read, "Will work for food or diapers." She looked like she meant it. She didn't wear a fierce expression on her face, one of those, "I dare you to stop and insult me/hire me" looks. Instead, she looked pinched - as though she were trying not to cry, as though she wished she could be invisible but still that some kind of magic would occur and she would be able to meet some basic needs of her own family. I did see that there were many people who stopped in the parking lot near where the woman stood and it appears that they gave her money. I sincerely hope that those gifts were a help to this woman.
Being easy prey for such things myself, and having been bilked in the mall parking lot this summer of a few dollars (ok, I gave it willingly) to a person professing to be in need of gas money to get from that location to points much farther north where public transportation doesn't go, I'm always a little leery of signs that read, "Will work for food." I have stopped with a bag of groceries, though. Is it easier to meet face-to-face the people you help, or is it better (read: easier for us) to give anonymously? Does it make it easier for the recipients to not be judged, and for us not to judge?
We had our first light snowfall of the season this week. My son was rather dismayed that low temperatures and snow meant snowpants for him. "I'll be the only kid wearing them," he moaned. Well, he certainly wasn't the only one, though I'm sure he felt like it. It still amazes me the number of parents who send their children to school unprepared for an outdoor recess during cold weather. Our school has a stockpile of snowpants and jackets - and I'm thinking that maybe this week I may personally go room to room and discreetly ask who needs what. It's time some of those things were distributed, I think, if there are far too many shivering kids because someone can't afford to purchase a winter coat or snowpants. Of course, there's always the battle with the kids who truly believe they'll be warm enough in just a sweatshirt, but I guess I'll have to see who I can enlist to help fight that little war.
One Facebook friend asked, "What is your Christmas gift to the world?" Many of us might think we can't give something on such a scale, because we aren't made of money, etc. But can't gifts be about more than just monetary philanthropy? How about starting small, like dropping some change in every Salvation Army bucket you see?
Or, making more of an attempt to make eye contact with those we interact with - like clerks, public service people, co-workers, family? Instead of completing our transactions at places of business by saying, "Oh just a minute," into the cellphone as we grab out change or credit card slips, we end our cellphone calls and direct our attention to the person who is serving us. It's common courtesy, I think. Look that person in the eye, smile back, and say, "Thanks - you too," when they say, "Have a nice day." When you respond, say it like you mean it.
Hold a door for someone.
Offer to help someone with their groceries.
This sort of thing is contagious. It does spread, and while it might take a while to reach global proportions, it's a gift to the part of the world you reach.
It was a strange thing waiting for 10 pm to roll around so I could go and get my pre-teen daughter and bring her home again. I'm not sure I'm ready for this increase of outside activity and the whole growing up business!
A relative of mine says she is tired of the ridiculous clamoring of "I want, I want, I want" for Christmas. Isn't Christmas, she says, supposed to be less about what you want than about what you give? And she wasn't talking about "giving" in the sense that you'd be satisfying someone else's desire for that latest technological advance in video gaming, i-pods, etc. I would, she says, rather give things that satisfy basic needs. Given that people are feeling more of a crunch than ever this year with job losses and the loss of household income, you'd think the clamoring for largely unnecessary things would slow down.
On a somewhat related note to the post above, earlier this week I was headed to the mall to pick up a Christmas present. On the corner of the busy intersection where the mall stands, was an anemic-looking woman holding a sign that read, "Will work for food or diapers." She looked like she meant it. She didn't wear a fierce expression on her face, one of those, "I dare you to stop and insult me/hire me" looks. Instead, she looked pinched - as though she were trying not to cry, as though she wished she could be invisible but still that some kind of magic would occur and she would be able to meet some basic needs of her own family. I did see that there were many people who stopped in the parking lot near where the woman stood and it appears that they gave her money. I sincerely hope that those gifts were a help to this woman.
Being easy prey for such things myself, and having been bilked in the mall parking lot this summer of a few dollars (ok, I gave it willingly) to a person professing to be in need of gas money to get from that location to points much farther north where public transportation doesn't go, I'm always a little leery of signs that read, "Will work for food." I have stopped with a bag of groceries, though. Is it easier to meet face-to-face the people you help, or is it better (read: easier for us) to give anonymously? Does it make it easier for the recipients to not be judged, and for us not to judge?
We had our first light snowfall of the season this week. My son was rather dismayed that low temperatures and snow meant snowpants for him. "I'll be the only kid wearing them," he moaned. Well, he certainly wasn't the only one, though I'm sure he felt like it. It still amazes me the number of parents who send their children to school unprepared for an outdoor recess during cold weather. Our school has a stockpile of snowpants and jackets - and I'm thinking that maybe this week I may personally go room to room and discreetly ask who needs what. It's time some of those things were distributed, I think, if there are far too many shivering kids because someone can't afford to purchase a winter coat or snowpants. Of course, there's always the battle with the kids who truly believe they'll be warm enough in just a sweatshirt, but I guess I'll have to see who I can enlist to help fight that little war.
One Facebook friend asked, "What is your Christmas gift to the world?" Many of us might think we can't give something on such a scale, because we aren't made of money, etc. But can't gifts be about more than just monetary philanthropy? How about starting small, like dropping some change in every Salvation Army bucket you see?
Or, making more of an attempt to make eye contact with those we interact with - like clerks, public service people, co-workers, family? Instead of completing our transactions at places of business by saying, "Oh just a minute," into the cellphone as we grab out change or credit card slips, we end our cellphone calls and direct our attention to the person who is serving us. It's common courtesy, I think. Look that person in the eye, smile back, and say, "Thanks - you too," when they say, "Have a nice day." When you respond, say it like you mean it.
Hold a door for someone.
Offer to help someone with their groceries.
This sort of thing is contagious. It does spread, and while it might take a while to reach global proportions, it's a gift to the part of the world you reach.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Hurry! You have until December 7, 2009!
Greetings! As you send your holiday greetings to friends and families, please consider sending a card to cheer up our troops. Contact the American Red Cross (see link) for more information. Cards postmarked later than December 7, 2009, will not be accepted. This is just one of a short list of guidelines. Please - consider supporting this cause.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)