A question

[dampscribbler]

"The time has come," the Walrus said,
"To talk of many things:
Of shoes--and ships--and sealing-wax--
Of cabbages--and kings--"


How do I know when (or if) I am "living up to my potential"?  

I always feel like no matter what I am doing it is neither good enough nor just plain enough.  Now I'm starting to feel like maybe I'm doing too much, and spreading myself too thin, and I can't figure out whether I'm supposed to stick it out and learn how to be "better" (do more, be more, achieve more) or whether I need to draw a line and say, in the immortal (?)* words of Popeye: "I yam what I yam and that's all what I yam."

So, how do you decide?  

Thanks.

---------
* It occurred to me as I typed this that Popeye cartoons aren't on anymore, and today's generation of kids may have never heard that amazing phrase.  I feel a little sad to think about that.  

Comments

[caelista.livejournal.com]

Here I am commenting on two in a row. :-)

I can relate to this question. For the past couple of years I've been trying to reconcile two apparently conflicting ideas: "Whatever I am is fine and whatever I do is enough" and "I need to strive and challenge myself and be growing all the time."

Some of this is an ongoing sense that I could always be better, DO better, and some is a midlife crisis that involves trying to decide what's most important for me to be doing with the rest of my life.

Is it better to be content and live a quiet life of simple pleasures, or is it better to push forward and improve and try to make a mark?

Recently I heard someone say "We're here to have fun" and it hit me like a tsunami. Could that be true??

I still haven't sorted it out. But it seems like living up to our potential should be as simple as doing something we love and feeling good about it and enjoying the time we have here.

[dampscribbler.livejournal.com]

Whoohoo, Lisa! It's nice to be hearing from you! :-)

Here to have fun, to experience joy . . . pretty earth-shattering stuff, I think.

I think I'm in the process of redefining for myself what it means to be challenged and to grow. I do want to keep pushing my limits, expanding my skills, but I think that the level on which I am now doing those things is much more micro. In my 20s and 30s growing and being challenged meant striving towards goals that would be recognized on a macro scale -- for example, winning literary awards (huge ones, like Newbery, Pulitzer, Nobel), making blockbuster movies (that win Oscars), or solving some huge world problem like cancer or clean water or something. Then I spent a while with a "tend your own garden" philosophy. I really had to turn inward and give attention to things that mattered pretty much only on a personal/household level. Now I'm looking at something in-between, and frankly it's feeling a lot better than the striving toward a huge goal. Instead of writing a book the world will judge as outstanding, I want to write the book I want to write, doing the best I know how to do, and still tend to my garden.

[caelista.livejournal.com]

That sounds good. :-)