Recently I visited an old friend from graduate school who has just retired after a long and distinguished career. He had been a pacifist during the Viet Nam war and had taught at a small liberal arts college, inspiring generations of students to love poetry and protect the environment. He was excited about our work with the Staying Alive Project but disturbed by our use of the Warrior as a key metaphor. Why had we chosen a figure that evoked violence, aggression, and the crushing of one’s opponents? Wasn’t there already enough conflict in academia? After three decades of trying to make things work in his own department, where many of the old guard had been hostile to new theory and felt threatened by dynamic younger faculty, he had concluded that peace was much better than war, compassion more honorable than judgment, and reconciliation preferable to outright victory.
As we traded stories, it became clear that he had actually fought in many battles, from which he still bore scars. He had nurtured junior colleagues only to see them denied tenure; his scholarship had been publicly attacked by ideologues; he had arm-wrestled with deans for the resources needed to sustain a nascent environmental studies program that is now regarded as one of the best in the nation; he had been tempted by offers of high-ranking administrative positions that would have given him power at the expense of family, community, and teaching. How had he managed to survive with both soul and career intact?
Our conversation rvealed that warrior skills are not just for war, but for life, and for peace as well. In order to prevail in these conflicts, he had had to keep his balance, cleaving to his core values while listening to others and trying, always, to turn the conversation down a creative path. I remember him saying how much he valued the moral support of his wife and friends in the community, and how he had drawn strength from poetry, nature writing, and religious practices such as Quaker meeting and Zen meditation. Throughout it all he had clung to his faith in the best possibilities of human nature, forgiving as best he could those who had crossed or attacked him, recognizing their own suffering, inviting dialogue while standing his ground. He never lost hope or aspiration. He never became embittered or indifferent. But it was not easy. He suffered, and he sometimes lost.
My friend is a remarkable man, but his situation and skills are not. He is a man of peace who had to become a warrior. For conflict is inescapable in human life, because we are different, and whenever we get close to one another, the differences rub and chafe. Friction causes warmth at first, then a spark, and finally an explosion. All that energy! How can we use it for creativity, growth, or healing instead of blowing up the house or wounding each other? Every conflict with others is also a struggle with ourselves, with our own ideas, identity, and limitations. It’s always easier to push the other away than to entertain a threatening idea or listen without anxiety. And if attacked, we first react defensively, striking out or running away. To stand our ground and listen takes a lot of work. In the end, peace is not only nobler, but more challenging than war. It takes more strength, balance, will power, and imagination.
Think about it. Which is harder, overcoming the other, or overcoming yourself?