Ever hear Teddy Roosevelt’s “Man in the Arena” speech?
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong
man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.
The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is
marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who
comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and
shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows
great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy
cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement,
and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that
his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know
victory nor defeat.
Let’s say the critic is one who sits on the sidelines, the opposite of who the speech is talking about.
and Teddy gave this speech at the height of his popularity and people ate it up – it’s truly worded.
but what about Teddy? After he left office, he tried to become president again (lost), was nearly assassinated. Almost died exploring the Amazon, killed thousands of Big game animals that are fighting extinction now, and then ended up fighting in world war 1 at 59 years old.
This isn’t to minimize TR’s great contributions to the world, most people who contribute this much to the world fall short in other areas – the point is to show that he was driven by work and activity, maybe this was even his addiction.
Imagine if TR tried to sit still? He’d go crazy so it seems.
And with us, are do we share that characteristic of being driven by an “addiction”? We’re afraid to sit still, so we seek action – is it a distraction? Choosing to be at war, literally or figuratively, to keep us busy – when maybe, just maybe, peace is the more fitting choice.
The man in the arena mostly always will be admirable, but only if we’re in the arena for the right reasons.
Joe DiAndrea 