How great is being great?

[MyDoorsAreOpen]

I've heard it said that good people are seldom great people, and vice versa. I've heard people ask questions like "Why can't an honest politician win?" and "Why does the entertainment world attract such backstabbers?" It seems to me that if having your name and face as widely known as possible is your ultimate goal, there are just more devious ways to make this happen than non-devious ways, and restricting yourself to the non-devious ways is only handicapping yourself.

I guess I just don't naturally have a lot of what would be called, in the traditional sense, ambition. To those of you who do have a little more of it, I'm curious: Is the drive to be great, to be number one in something significant, something that you have a philosophical justification for? Or is it something intrinsically pleasurable to you, requiring no explanation? Is it the practical advantages of being "somebody" that you seek, for yourself and your descendants? Or is it more the existential validation?

I think I could accept being famous or powerful if I just "fell into it", that is, if I just ended up with this as an unsought side product of doing what I was passionate about. I wouldn't gloat over it, and would be wary of it, but I think I could accept it and even enjoy it. At the same time I'm fully accepting that if I never "sell out" in some way or another, I likely won't ever be famous or powerful. What I don't think I could ever accept is notoriety bought by compromising my principles and abandoning my true passions.

What do you guys think about famous people, past or present, who've served as inspirations to a lot of people? Were the dirty deeds and neglected relationships it probably took them to get to a microphone heard 'round the world a good justification? Oprah Winfrey comes to mind. I don't know much about her personal life, but I'd bet she had to step on some toes to be able to champion a lot of the noble causes she has. What, then, of the many people who play the political games with all the necessary heartaches they need to inflict, only to never make it to the public eye? Was it worth it for them to try, because it worked for someone like Oprah?

 

[belligerent drunk]

I'm fairly good at what I do, but what drives me is the unpleasant feeling of being not good. As in, I don't aspire to be great or anything, I just don't like being bad at something I'm passionate about, so to speak. Of course, it feels good to realize that I'm good at something, but it's not the main reason I try to do what I do better than average. However, I also don't have much ambition in the traditional sense. So, I guess my input is not one you're looking for.

Oh, and I'm not very interested in stuff that other, famous, people do, especially those who are just entertainers or like to talk about random stuff on the television... So I can't answer the latter part of your post either, sorry.

 

[spacejunk]

MDAO, all i know of you are your posts on BL (which i have great respect for) - but i feel you're doing yourself a great disservice here.

The amount of dedication, determination, intelligence and hard work that have led you into a career in medicine are not to be downplayed. Nor, i imagine, is the work yoi do!

I have known quite a few doctors, and many nurses and other people that work in various medical fields.
To me they are all exceptional people. To my mind, it takes a special person to do the work of a doctor or nurse.
I know this, because i could not ever see myself being able to work in such a field - for many different reasons. For some of us, the harsh realities of life, death, suffering and the functions (or dysfunctions) of the human body are things we would rather remain somewhat separate from, and ignorant of. This is certainly the case for me, beyond what i need to know, see and experience.

To me, those qualities are a form of "greatness" more profound and valuable than fame, power, influence or the ambition that drives those things.

I've also known quite a few people that are highly respected in areas that might fit more with the type of "ambition" i think you are talking about.
The well-known musicians, artists and politicians i have known have been interesting people.
But would i define any qualities in their being or personalities as a 'greatness' that isn't present in the doctors i have known?
Honestly - no.

People all have different talents, different skills.
Some of us excel in areas that carry a great deal of social weight, while others are quietly achieving heroes.
Those who understand what they do well, and pursue it, are often endowed with a grace that even the most competitive and ambitious individuals will never be able to achieve.

Some people can achieve great things and never be noticed by the general public, some people do nothing for anyone, and end up famous.
Some people shun the limelight, some seek it out obsessively.
But ultimately i think the only person each of us has to answer to is our own self. I'm not Oprah Winfrey - but to me she's little more than a walking billboard, who made a successful career out of providing people with a platform for marketing and advertising.
I have no problem with her doing this, but i'd much stick to the personal/creative/artistic/career path(s) i've chosen, and leave the fame game to those that seek it.

I'd be willing to bet you've helped just as many - if not more - people than she ever has, despite the millions of viewers that watched her show.

 

[Nixiam]

Hey there MDAO. You have distinctive qualities that make you stand out from others who fall under a typical trend. For instance, depthy inquiry. You've commited yourself to your passions, like medicine, and have used them to help people. You insist on understanding greatness, understanding drive and understanding period. You seem to stand out. Not saying being different from the majority of people is what makes you great, but the qualities of genorosity, humbleness, nobility and progressiveness et cetra, are what make you great.

I don't really have strong ambition in the traditional sense either, but I'm sure it stems from personality and true reasoning from person to person. Someone who was born into a large family who may spend extended periods of time feeling inferior, might develop an overly ambitious or competitive complex.

Greatness is displaying the act going above a personal and social standard. Limelight doesn't make you great, what you've done to get there does.

You've gone above what I see as a trend in personalities. I think that's pretty great MDAO... don't you?

Nix

 

[MyDoorsAreOpen]

Wow. I really appreciate the votes of confidence, guys.

And I think I agree: true greatness is being dedicated to your principles and your passions no matter what, and in so doing inspiring others to do the same. It's forging true connections with other people, and teaching them how to do the same with others they meet. Chasing fame and notoriety for its own sake is a scam, because fame and notoriety, like life, are fleeting. No one can be number one at anything forever. But we will all someday return to our Source, and dedicating your life to reminding people of that, when life feels so cold and separate, has very much a lasting benefit.

What inspired me to make this thread is remembering TheDEA.org posting a philosophically flavored rant years ago in defense of the goal of being number one at something (in his case at bodybuilding, with the use of steroids if he so chose). If anyone here remembers him, he was a BLer in good standing that I really didn't get along with. He had a set of beliefs and principles that would've made Ayn Rand proud.

Frankly, I've never heard a good philosophical defense of "bite and claw your way to the top", other than the nihilistic, "if nothing matters, then why not? It's something to do / believe in, at least!" But what I see in this is more a post hoc justification for an innate drive that the person does not wish to suppress, and sees no good reason to.

 

[herbavore]

Being an artist has taught me a lot about the nuances of the "desire to be great". On the one hand I have to remain committed to the true principles of art--experimentation, playfulness, exploration, expression and craft; on the other hand, I am inevitably influenced by the art world's system of reward and recognition. Even at my humble level of local achievement, there is a constant tension between these two. We tend to romanticize the first and demonize or trivialize the latter but the truth is that a certain amount of recognition is necessary to continue to create. (Without sales, it is very hard to have either the space, time or materials to create freely.) So, at least in this aspect, I think striving for some level of recognition that is comfortable for you is every bit as desirable as striving to perfect your craft or striving to create the habits of diligence necessary to produce work. I did go to school with two guys that wanted fame--not recognition in the form of having an appreciative audience for their work--but FAME; the kind of fame that means that everyone is told, "This guy is great". One achieved that fame eventually and the other killed himself. They were both talented but not necessarily any more talented than others that were less ambitious. I think that the man that achieved fame must have been able to balance his ego's desire (to be famous) with his soul's desire (to create from a pure place) whereas the other man could not find this balance. For me, it was very clear just how far this ambition was going to go in my life because I had two ambitions--one to be an artist but I had as much desire and drive to be a mother. I remember reading about the California impressionists who worked through the great depression. Several of these painters (men) had extremely short careers because their families were more important to them than their own work as artists. No doubt those for whom this was not true had families that suffered. I guess I take an expansive view of it--everything comes down to choice and for me the choice is always pretty clear:connection. The bonds of family are important to me but so are the bonds created by my work. Keeping it all in balance and in perspective seems a very subjective challenge to my own life though I share that same broad struggle with many.

Another thought on this topic: when I first became a mother and stopped working I felt like no one understood my reality and I was whining about it one day to my own mom. ("Everyone seems to think that I stay at home doing nothing all day when I feel like I am working harder than I've ever worked in my life!"). My mom quite sternly and bluntly told me to grow up. She said, "If you are going to be looking for recognition to come from the outside as a stay at home mom, you are going to be doing yourself and your kids a huge disfavor. Do your best every day and the reward is your own recognition that you put your heart and soul into being a mother and creating a nurturing home for your boys." That was the best advice I've ever gotten and it radiated out from motherhood into other aspects of my life like teaching. Once you stop looking for the approval to come from outside, things get so much easier and you have more energy for what is really important.

 

[Nixiam]

U r beatuiful Herby

 

[Noodle]

Once you stop looking for the approval to come from outside, things get so much easier and you have more energy for what is really important.

This is very true.

I always try to remind myself that narcissism is more a personal prison than an enviable life skill.

Yes, narcissists and their ilk are all about being great, even legends in their own minds! But, true wisdom and greatness, is born of humility, honest self-reflection, and the ability to forgive one's self--flaws and all.

This is all in my opinion, of course.