Mirror…Mirror…Tell me the Truth…!
Every few decades a book is published that changes the lives of its readers forever. The Alchemist is such a book. With over a million and a half copies sold around the world, The Alchemist has already established itself as a modern classic, universally admired. May be you have already read that or maybe I can motivate you to read Alchemist, the making of leadership, the prologue of the story goes as follows:
“The alchemist picked up a book that someone in the caravan had brought. Leafing through the pages, he found a story about Narcissus.
The alchemist knew the legend of Narcissus, a youth who knelt daily beside a lake to contemplate his own beauty. He was so fascinated by himself that, one morning, he fell into the lake and drowned. At the spot where he fell, a flower was born, which was called the narcissus.
But this was not how the author of the book ended the story.
He said that when Narcissus died, the goddesses of the forest appeared and found the lake, which had been fresh water, transformed into a lake of salty tears.
‘Why do you weep?’ the goddesses asked.
‘I weep for Narcissus,” the lake replied.
‘Ah, it is no surprise that you weep for Narcissus,’ they said, ‘for though we always pursued him in the forest, you alone could contemplate his beauty close at hand.’
‘But… was Narcissus beautiful?’ the lake asked.
‘Who better than you to know that?’ the goddesses asked in wonder. ‘After all, it was by your banks that he knelt each day to contemplate himself!’
The lake was silent for some time. Finally, it said:
‘I weep for Narcissus, but I never noticed that Narcissus was beautiful. I weep because, each time he knelt beside my banks, I could see, in the depths of his eyes, my own beauty reflected.’
‘What a lovely story,’ the alchemist thought.”
― Paulo Coelho, The Alchemist: The Prologue
We can get to thousand interpretations of this fable immortalized once again the way Paulo Coehlo has chosen to narrate it to his audience in 21st century. Perhaps none may escape from the web of self-love. It is highly captivating. It means that sense of beauty and love emerges at self realization but when love becomes self-obsession, it may culminate at self- destruction. Maybe Narcissus has chosen to die because early sign of aging had appeared on his face, he so fondly looked at. I am reminded of another fable here, Snow White, the step mother of Snow White becomes jealous of her because her “mirror” reports that she was not the most beautiful women of the world.
The epitome of both stories is that both failed to realize the beauty in anything else but themselves. There is so much beauty in the world around us. Do we ever choose to look beyond our mirror? Recently, we witnessed some ‘narcissus down’ (I will use this term for a collective purpose). Whether they misperceived the affinity of their lake or they had failed to sacrifice themselves for the lake?
A critic comments:
Narcissus was undoubtedly self obsessed, and one may say it was “vanity” at its highest. But maybe, Narcissus, despite the fact that he was proud, only found comfort in the lake (his environment as a safe abode, his true home, or the trusted friend), and when he died, he gave the “one and only” precious thing to him back to the lake – his beauty – realized in his self and body.
We began with “enlightened moderation”; then we heard a lot about “change”; we heard a lot about “justice”; we are hearing hue and cry about “democracy”, and now the newest voice in the town is “peace and negotiation.” How sweet these slogans may sound but they hold meaning in the minds of their protagonists only; they have failed to create music in the air. Perhaps freedom of speech has created too much noise; it’s not orchestrated; I am sick, feeling suffocated. I am at Tower of Babel…?
Ah! Another meaning struck my mind. The lake turned into salty tears because it had lost the purity of Narcissus inside it or vice versa…? Alas! How beautiful Narcissus may appear, it will never be able to change the quagmire into oasis. I’ve heard that Tayyib Rajab Erdugan was able to do it for Istanbul by resolving the drinking water crisis, but then he got lost in the quagmire of self, getting stunned by the capitalist dream. In near future we will no more hear about him as we have been for past ten years, as echoes of Ahmadi Nejdat have been consumed by some mischievous black hole in the universe. Muammer Qaddafi, Raza Shah Pehlavi, Saddam Hussain, Zulifqar Ali Bhutto, why such names abound Muslim World only? What was so dangerous about them that the whole universe conspired against them instead of leading them to reach their goal?
We are living in an irrational world, where idols are chosen by the ignorant and the ideals are refuted by the intellectuals. Ideas wither and become stale in no time, when speed rules the change. Do we need to alter our vision here? So many questions will remain unanswered and the present version of world will reach its end. The generation next may raise the questions:
Whether personal success in a particular career can make you a diverse political leader? It applies for bureaucrats, cricketers, army-men, and industrialists alike. What makes them dumb and deaf is their own specialty in one type of leadership. Does one size fits all…? Do we need a green apple always to standout among the red ones? While living in irrational world, how useful could be the typical rational decision making techniques elaborated by scientific management and bureaucracy…? What about bounded rationality [1] and group think [2] and what about escalated narcissism [3] gearing the world leaders towards fatal decisions…?
Human instincts overpowered by greed turn motivation into molestation. Unable to decide for the rights of others no collective good is created; in order to mask failure further wrong decisions are piled up burdening the soul of an unjust society. The dark triad of leadership [4] then rules: Machiavellianism, narcissism, and psychopathy have repeatedly been recognized as aversive personality traits. Narcissism, the grandiose sense of self entitlement & self-righteousness, coupled with uncontrolled desire for superiority and dominance, blinds one’s ego to see other’s reality. Machiavellianism (everything is fair in love and war; means justify the ends, manipulation and use of brute power masqueraded by personal charm) and psychopathy (inability to pursue higher values, apathy, callous social attitudes, impulsive wish fulfillment, and interpersonal antagonism). Unfortunately, all our leaders begin with honest vows, but personal pride validated by unmatched success and achievement in one’s life leads to narcissism and exceeded desires for control, Machiavellianism. The flattery and unbounded praise offered by close circle makes leader deaf towards collective needs of masses – the truth – pushing the leader into quagmire of psychopthy, where he chooses to empower the corrupt. The vicious circle is on, governed by one instinct – callousness. Love, compassion, empathy, sympathy and concern seem to be crazy items swirling in lunatic doom.
Many Narcissus rise and fall like any mortal in the world making the whole world a swamp around them, and the poets and Sufis keep contemplating about the Rose and Bulbul, dreaming for a garden.
End Notes
[1] Bounded rationality is the idea that in decision-making, rationality of individuals is limited by the information they have, the cognitive limitations of their minds, and the finite amount of time they have to make a decision. It was proposed by Herbert A. Simon as an alternative basis for the mathematical modeling of decision making, as used in economics, political science and related disciplines; it complements rationality as optimization, which views decision-making as a fully rational process of finding an optimal choice given the information available.Another way to look at bounded rationality is that, because decision-makers lack the ability and resources to arrive at the optimal solution, they instead apply their rationality only after having greatly simplified the choices available. Thus the decision-maker is a satisficer, one seeking a satisfactory solution rather than the optimal one. (Wikipedia)
[2] Groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that occurs within a group of people, in which the desire for harmony or conformity in the group results in an irrational or dysfunctional decision-making outcome. Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences. (Wikipedia)
[3] Narcissism could be healthy and positive which helps the person to quote self ideals and pursue them without hurting and damaging other’s ego & self esteem. Escalated Narcissism is described as pathological by many psychologists and spiritualists. Imam Ghazali has described it as spiritual disease of Kibr and ajab. See Alchemy of Happiness / Keemya –e-Saadat; also Deen-o-Duniya by Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanavi
[4] The dark triad of leadership has been discussed in detail in the 8th chapter of Social Intelligence by Daniel Goleman.
About the writer
Seema Arif is associate professor at School of Social Sciences & Humanities in University of Management & Technology, Lahore. Pakistan. She portrays herself as humble seeker of the Sufi way. Her academic output relates to organizational behavior and concerns about leadership. She has published widely in local and international newspapers, magazines and journals.
Contact her: seema.arif@umt.edu.pk
Visit her website: www.jehan-i-seema.net
