To My Magnificent Agents, Staff and Friends:
It’s been said that if a square peg doesn’t fit a round hole, neither the peg nor the hole is to blame. Between two people, the question “whose fault is it?” is the friend of argumentation and the destroyer of growth-oriented communication. Assigning blame involves listening to criticize and responding to defend, speaking to lower the other person rather than speaking to build each up. Relational progress is impossible as long as blame is the focus because blame and progress are enemies. In our litigation-hungry society we must take care that focusing on fault – which is proper for the courtroom – doesn’t carry over into interpersonal relationships. The heart of loving communication is listening to understand.
Let me illustrate my point by sharing this true story:
Years ago there was a group of brilliant young men at the University of Wisconsin, who seemed to have amazing creative literary talent. They were would-be poets, novelists, and essayists. They were extraordinary in their ability to put the English language to its best use. These promising young men met regularly to read and critique each other’s work. And critique it they did!
These men were merciless with one another. They dissected the most minute literary expression into a hundred pieces. They were heartless, tough, even mean in their criticism. The sessions became such arenas of literary criticism that the members of this exclusive club called themselves the “Stranglers.”
Not to be outdone, the women of literary talent in the university were determined to start a club of their own, one comparable to the Stranglers. They called themselves the “Wranglers.” They, too, read their works to one another. But there was one great difference. The criticism was much softer, more positive, more encouraging. Sometimes, there was almost no criticism at all. Every effort, even the most feeble one, was encouraged.
Twenty years later an alumnus of the university was doing an exhaustive study of his classmates’ careers when he noticed a vast difference in the literary accomplishments of the Stranglers as opposed to the Wranglers. Of all the bright young men in the Stranglers, not one had made a significant literary accomplishment of any kind. From the Wranglers had come six or more successful writers, some of national renown such as Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings, who wrote The Yearling.
Talent between the two? Probably the same. Level of education? Not much difference. But the Stranglers strangled, while the Wranglers were determined to give each other a lift. The Stranglers promoted an atmosphere of contention and self-doubt. The Wranglers highlighted the best, not the worst.
According to the Dali Lama, “The very purpose of religion is to control yourself, not to criticize others. Rather, we must criticize ourselves. How much am I doing about my anger? About my attachment, about my hatred, about my pride, my jealousy? These are the things which we must check in daily life.”
So, a valid question that each of us should ponder on our journey to gain happiness and success in our life is Am I a Wrangler or a Strangler?
Have a wonderful and AWE-full weekend!
Bill
P.S. One of my all-time favorite movies is Walt Disney’s Bambi. Watch this short video clip for a final underscoring of this week’s message …