Am I supposed to be meek? Am I meek enough? What does it
mean to be meek and what does it suggest about me? For the last several days I
have been surrounded by what might best be described as archetypes of the alpha
male.
Men with Popeye forearms who hunt, skydive, strip down engines from gigantic motorcycles and build
walls using massive power tools. For someone for whom wall-building is an alien
craft, this has been both somewhat unsettling and has provoked a few inner
thoughts. I watch, hands like violin cases, as structures emerge amidst the
piles of dust, with me generally staying out of the way. Mostly, the French artisan is affable, genial and hardworking, but not longsuffering when it
comes to his perception of fools. A gentle inquiry as to why the pool filter
was positioned above the water surface, instead of 50cm below it as specified
in the instruction manual, was met with a terse ‘you read too much’. I smiled
and walked away.
A friend has written a little
meditation about meekness, which, to use a grunting, masculine metaphor, primed
the pump for my own thinking. ‘Meek’ is an old-fashioned, almost derogatory
word. It initially suggests spinelessness, docility, conformity, a willingness
to give way or even submit by threat of force to the will or opinion of others without good reason (italics mine). The
meek are the doormats, trodden on and walked over by the strong. Meek is weak.
When I taught physics, a
favourite exam question in material science was to ask the candidate to explain the difference between common terms such as tough or brittle, hard or soft. It’s
interesting that the derivation for the word ‘meek’ comes from an Old Norse word
meaning ‘soft’, in the sense of ‘compliant’ – not as we might currently use the
word - instead, compliant people are easy to deal with, prepared to listen and
if necessary compromise, actively choosing not to take offence. An alternative is from the
Greek word for a horse that has been properly broken in and is ready for battle (italics again mine). The Book of Mormon –
hardly my favourite reference – suggests that the ‘natural man’ is savagely
self-seeking, driven by bodily desires which must be ‘put off’, thereby
becoming ‘meek’. The meek, we are told, will inherit the earth. There’s reward
in there somewhere, although I have enough trouble already with nine acres of
wild land here. Taking as natural an interpretation as the Matthian beatitudes
suggest, meekness is used there in the sense of poverty or powerlessness. The
meek won’t just miraculously dispossess the strong and plunder their goods, but
their very attributes of kindness and reasonable behaviour dispose others to
think well of them – an absolutely alien concept at the time. Nietzsche
believed that this kind of thinking resulted in a slave mentality, and only the
strong could be permitted to survive, a philosophy whose application became
only too clear a half-century later as Hitler put into practice ideas that
Nietzsche only raved about.
Now, back to the inconveniently elevated filter.
I chose to give way to another’s opinion, despite having evidence that it might
be flawed; instead taking the longer view that if it really mattered it could
be fixed and the loss of goodwill an argument would have caused would make
future interaction more difficult. Does this make me meek, I wonder? No, it certainly doesn’t,
but it suggests a willingness to become more so, which might just be all that God asks
of me.
The difference between "doormat" and "meek" is the underlying motivation for choice of action. The latter is driven by a forward-thinking long range view of human relationships and problem-solving, the former by an internal framework of personal anxiety and unmet &/or unacknowledged needs. In both cases the individual almost always has exactly the same degree of actual functional personal power to effect change in the situation at hand.
ReplyDeleteWho knows? Maybe in the South of France things are different and the instructions for the pool filter did not take this into account. ;)