If you know me at all, you may know that I've felt stuck for awhile. The idea that you may be planted somewhere in life, but that you have control over what happens, was liberating. If we're talking in plant-terms, I can choose to "bloom" and achieve or wither and remain stagnant.
At some point in the last few years following that Disney class, I stumbled upon this quote by Jim Rohm: If you don't like where you are, move. You are not a tree.
Again, for me, it was another "aha!" moment!
Recently though, I've had to think of these ideas realistically and practically, not just as quotes you could find on Pinterest, and I'm finding these ideas to conflict.
Like I mentioned before, I've felt stuck for awhile and I've been trying to make the most of things. I've been trying to bloom where I'm planted. Different circumstances change, and situations occur that make me question why I feel the need to make things work where I am. If I'm not happy with the way things are, I should change them, no?
You can't be the plant that blooms if you are choosing to uproot yourself. This is the idea that I've been struggling with. If you choose to change things and start over, I feel like society makes you feel as though you've failed. Especially if you're not uprooting for the first time.
If we really want to stick with this vegetation metaphor, what is wrong with moving a plant? If we find that it's suffocating and dying where it is, shouldn't we try to give it new life in a new place with new soil for it to take roots?
If we are no longer prospering in our lives, and are finding that we just cannot continue to grow and bloom, shouldn't we move? Or am I being all too assuming that this is the end, but that really you should just keep trying to make things work?
I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this topic.
At what point do you decide that you can no longer bloom where you are planted? At what point do you choose to uproot yourself? Do you try and stick it out to see if things can and will get better or do you change the environment in which you want the growth to take place?
x Lauren
At some point in the last few years following that Disney class, I stumbled upon this quote by Jim Rohm: If you don't like where you are, move. You are not a tree.
Again, for me, it was another "aha!" moment!
Recently though, I've had to think of these ideas realistically and practically, not just as quotes you could find on Pinterest, and I'm finding these ideas to conflict.
Like I mentioned before, I've felt stuck for awhile and I've been trying to make the most of things. I've been trying to bloom where I'm planted. Different circumstances change, and situations occur that make me question why I feel the need to make things work where I am. If I'm not happy with the way things are, I should change them, no?
You can't be the plant that blooms if you are choosing to uproot yourself. This is the idea that I've been struggling with. If you choose to change things and start over, I feel like society makes you feel as though you've failed. Especially if you're not uprooting for the first time.
If we really want to stick with this vegetation metaphor, what is wrong with moving a plant? If we find that it's suffocating and dying where it is, shouldn't we try to give it new life in a new place with new soil for it to take roots?
If we are no longer prospering in our lives, and are finding that we just cannot continue to grow and bloom, shouldn't we move? Or am I being all too assuming that this is the end, but that really you should just keep trying to make things work?
I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this topic.
At what point do you decide that you can no longer bloom where you are planted? At what point do you choose to uproot yourself? Do you try and stick it out to see if things can and will get better or do you change the environment in which you want the growth to take place?
x Lauren
