Failing

I live in an environment where the idea of failing is brutally scary. Failing, specifically in an educational setting, carries both an individual and communal aspect to it.

In one sense, failing or not failing carries some dehumanizing effect of how you, as an individual, either are or are not "satisfactory" in the things you do.  On the other hand, failing is what separates you as unfit to remain a part of a community; failing means you don't belong.  This two-seamed meaning of what it is to fail in my current setting makes having "failed" be just about the last thing you want to be true of yourself.
...

There are, of course, other ideas and applications of the term failing.  In general, to fail at something means that not only did you not do something particularly well but whatever you did was so poor that it wasn't even acceptable.

However, interestingly enough, knowing the origin these standards of acceptability or otherwise is really important.  This is because it is important to differentiate between the standards we set for ourselves and the ones which are mandated to us by others.  Both have obvious weaknesses and, in effect, will claim something of us in an oversimplified way that is very problematic.  Even still, we are constantly being graded either by ourselves or by others.  Sometimes we pass, sometimes we fail.

Such is life.
...

What I think is most important is how we handle the situations we find ourselves in whenever we are on the brink of failing.

It is clear to me that I often have standards set for myself which are very unforgiving and offer little grace even in their existence.  I suspect others have a habit of setting up for themselves equally unfair standards and being substantially bothered when they "fail."  Sometimes it seems to point to a lack of self-dicipline and the inability to follow through with what we start.  But I don't think that is the whole story.

I think that if we are honest with ourselves we can say that a lot of us push ourselves too hard.  We bite off more than we can chew.  We accept responsibility for things to the extent that our responsibilities outweigh our abilities.  That isn't to say our abilities are poor or that we don't have anything to offer.  I would say that it has more to do with the fact that we are believing in an illusion that we must be these productive efficiency machines which need no rest and seem to run better with the more there is to do.

I don't think that is an accurate depiction of what people essentially are, and we become painfully aware of that when we look in the mirror or when we "fail."  Yet, that doesn't mean we compromise our expectations or standards, rather we just loathe the image in that mirror and whatever it represents: us.
...

Consider as well the standards that differentiate "failing" or not that are often instituted to us.  These standards divide us into two groups: satisfactory and unsatisfactory.  Such a separation suggests that whatever the task at hand, it has something to say about your worth to the community at hand.  Now, no doubt there are communities and environments where only those with a specific skill set are needed or useful, but those communities are fewer and further between than the majority of situations in which I think we find ourselves.  Instead of simply understanding that this moment of failing is more to do with overall circumstances and our ability to complete some very specific task, we take this assessment to extend to our worth as an overall individual.  And to be labeled as a failure, a blanket statement over all that we are, is more painful than we can necessarily comprehend outside of the experience.

It is beyond sad.
...

It is sad because it isn't true.  It is sad because the idea of failing has penetrated our understanding of who we are as people.

Failing is damaging because we allow whatever task at hand, whether assigned to us or a challenge of our choosing, to define us.  Our identity becomes wrapped up in what we can or cannot do; and specifically what others have to say about our abilities.

Allowing our identity to become wrapped up in what other people have to say of us is very risky.  Whatever affirmation we do receive from people is fleeting in much of its essence (which is why affirmation is consistently needed again and again).

And so it becomes necessary to define ourselves differently than we do or what people have to say about what we do.  We must have identity in something else.
...

This is a very difficult and very uncomfortable transition to go through.  But I do think it is a good transition.  It's a transition into a kind of identity that has longevity.  It's a transition into believing things about ourselves that dont have to adjust at the whims of others opinions.

And that is good because peoples opinions are fickle.

...

You can "fail" and it's okay.  People will still value you for the most part and the ones that don't aren't so important.  But the really big things that matter the most wont change.  Things that are bigger than you, things that define who you are because of the fact God created you and He only creates things that are good, won't shift or rattle.  They'll be consisent.  Even if you fail.

You can't fail out of God's love.
...

Peace.