We should all take more risks

[elspeth]

Celebrities are having a bad few weeks, first Steve Irwin, then Peter Brock both unfortunately died in accidents doing what they cared about, and now Richard 'The Hamster' Hammond (from Top Gear) has been in a pretty horrific driving accident and is in hospital with brain damage which he will hopefully recover from - and I'm sure we all wish him well and sympathise with his wife and two small children.

I read a forum on MSN today, and somebody posted saying that Richard Hammond effectively deserved what he got, that fast-car programmes like Top Gear are irresponsible and are the root of all motoring accidents on the roads today (in the same sense as James Bond films are the root of all gun crime) because people are influenced to such a degree by the media and the behaviour of celebrities.

Once I'd finished spitting venom over this poster's insensitivity, it got me to thinking about these three people who you might argue encourage dangerous behaviour. A racing driver, a car enthusiast and a naturalist who spent his life getting as close as possible to animals with lots of teeth or poison. And we loved all three of them for it, even if they could sometimes be cringe-worthy.

Why do we have this perception that the media is the root of all evil? It doesn't always help, but are we so scared of accepting responsibility for our own lives that we can really justify blaming our actions on celebrities whose job description is to entertain and to do the stuff we'd all secretly love to but don't dare?

And then I got to thinking about what sort of a life the poster mentioned above must lead. Never taking risks, the sort who drives slowly to the supermarket and back once a week so feels he has the right to condemn people who like driving very fast in carefully controlled circumstances. And having finished being irritated at him, it occured to me that maybe I should be sympathising with him as well as with Richard Hammond and his family. This man has never taken a risk, never put himself on the edge to see what it's like and what he's capable of, and I find that incredibly depressing. It doesn't have to be dangerous stuff - any of us who have walked out to play in front of an audience have done it, laid our musical soul out in front of an audience and hoped they won't crush it and that we won't give them reasons to do so.

So, I say, hurrah for people who take considered risks - and I mean considered ones, not reckless ones. The three celebs mentioned above had accidents despite being very good at what they do and taking every reasonable precaution and not putting anyone else at risk. Let's grow up, take responsibility for ourselves and push our own limits. Think how we could improve the world if we all really pushed ourselves to see how good we can be.

So what am I going to do to push myself? First, I'm going to practise my piano more. I've spent the last couple of weeks listening to recitals by some incredible pianists and am feeling inspired rather than inferior. I may never be that good but I can certainly be a heck of a lot better than I am if I apply myself. Second, I'm going to take and pass my professional exams, because I love what I do and I want to do it better. And if I get paid more into the bargain - I deserve it. And third, I'm going to put together the exhibition of some of my photography that I've been talking about for the last couple of years, and I'm going to start planning my next big field trip. Alaska for the salmon run, maybe, or the tiger reserves in India. Or I've been promising myself a trip to Antarctica... choices choices.

[pianistimo]

go, elspeth! 

ps the salmon run isn't that risky if you are wearing a life jacket.  unless you're talking about sharing the shore with bears.  yes.  i'd say that bears are right up at the top for me.  in fact, i would say that bears scare me more than people. 

somehow, youth and risk is intimately tied together.  if a person lives past the teenage years they've probably lived past the most risk taking period of their lives.  then, it is sporadic and random.  a sort of thrill seeking once a year.  that will be my trip to nyc.  although, i am thinking of just letting my dad handle that one.  he is so 'strange' by me.  i was ready to make reservations (as, to my way of thinking, one should always have reservations).  he says...please don't make any reservations.  we'll just 'scope it out.'  what does that mean? sleep on the sidewalk?

[elspeth]

If I do go to Alaska, I'll be on the shores watching the bears... it's a scary thought, but I really want to do it - so I will.

Have fun in NYC! I mean to go there at some point, for the opera at the Met.

[Mozartian]

-

[thalbergmad]

Life without some risk would be boring, just as playing piano without risk can also be boring. What is the point of living to 100 if you have done nothing really exciting?

Climb mountains, jump out of aircraft, do double the speed limit, do anything but be bored.

Thal

[gilad]

There was a sardine run on the coast here in south africa lost year that I saw.
The water was infested with sharks. I mean everywhere.
but yes, smart risks are essential to enjoyable living.

[dnephi]

Life without some risk would be boring, just as playing piano without risk can also be boring. What is the point of living to 100 if you have done nothing really exciting?

Climb mountains, jump out of aircraft, do double the speed limit, do anything but be bored.

Thal

Carpe Diem. (Seize the dat)
Carpe Dictem (Seize the words)
Carpe Eatem (Eat the Fish)
Etc. How many variants can you make?

[le_poete_mourant]

Love is a risk we all take.  And a pretty big one. 

[nanabush]

Risks make life interesting... it's as simple as that, if you play by the rules then u'll never be satisfied.

[Bob]

I'm all for risk taking.     .... As long as it's carefully and thoughtfully planned out

[pianistimo]

my thoughts exactly.  now, bob, i've been meaning to ask you.  exactly what did i say that was confusing.  all or a little of it?  was it a word? 

[invictious]

Sex without condoms
Masturbation with hot iron
Play Rachmaninoff at 3am

Those are risks

[timothy42b]

There is a difference between physical and emotional risks.

Physical risks:  bad.  Avoidable.  Involves activities like unprotected sex, drunk driving, using power tools without protective equipment, juggling chainsaws, walking alone in bad sections of town.  Risky, not rewarding, and eventually will bite you. 

Emotional risks:  good if within reason.  Involves activities like allowing oneself to trust or become vulnerable, sharing, trying new things you might fail at, having adventures.  Risky but rewarding.

Just gotta be careful category two doesn't drop you into category one, sometimes the boundary can be fuzzy.   

[lostinidlewonder]

The greatest risk in life is to take no risk at all.

This is to me one of the most powerful quotes I have ever read. I see most of the people in this world like to live in a way which doesn't break routine, they like to live life safe, so that they know what the outcome will be and they don't have to give a lot of effort.

It is, I guess stupid to take risks which involve physical death or injury because you are playing with your life which is quite important, but it is all relative isn't it? Steve Irwin taking risks with his life to protect endangered animals is a good risk, because that was his reason for being here and he did caused a huge difference in the world for the better, because of it.

We must live life expecting to die tommorow, this is hard thing to keep in our heads. Life is precious, there is so much we can do with it, luck plays such a little role in our life, I find the more I work the luckier I get! Same with piano, the more I study and practice, the less chance I have in hitting wrong notes, the more chance I have producing sounds which are desirable.

But there are greater risks alltogether, no so much what you do but how you think. Taking risks to try to understand something you do not understand. The bible for instance (not trying to turn this into a religious talk) a lot of people do not know what it is all about, they do not even want to risk trying to undertsand it, it is pushed aside, preconceptions made, the mind does not want to risk the fact that something there might offer them something they didnt know!

I find we humans are always in 4 different states of thought. 1) We think we do not know, 2)We think that we do know 3)We don't know we know 4)We don't know that we don't know. Each of these states restrict our willingness to take risks in different ways.

Each of these thought quadrants cause us to react in different ways. I find that most of the times people are in 1 and 4, these are the most dangrous quadrants to be in because we assume too much and ignore the facts. To think you do not know is almost putting yourself down, saying, well I don't know and I'm too stupid to ever work it out. It is even worse to not know that we don't know! That is a very vicious cycle, it is like a drug addict, not knowing that they do not realise that they are hurting themselves and taking away potential in their life. It could also be a student studying for examinations, they do not know that they need actually 200 hours of study and simply study 2 horus every day and hope that is enough (they cannot see into the future or assess their situation, they simply do not realise they are not studying enough until it is too late, until they move into quadrant 1, which can go back to 4 then back to 1 forever and we get no where).

Risk is about ignoring what you know and doing it! Stop measuring up risks, if you have nothing to lose then do it! You either take the rocky road now so then in the future it will be a nice smooth road, or you take the smooth road now so later on it will become rocky and difficult. In all reality if we do nothing we are risking more! If we do a lot we risk very little! Anyway Ill stop typing because I won't stop on a subject like this, ill tangent all over the place eheh

[ted]

I took many calculated risks of varying type when I was younger. I think that responsibility for other people, wife, children, aging parents, has forced me to take far fewer risks as I have become older. Were I accountable only to myself, I would probably risk a great deal more, but if negative outcomes of risk might affect other people, then I do not consider I have a moral right to accept risk on their behalf. So that has slowed me down a bit.

[pianolearner]

Celebrities are having a bad few weeks, first Steve Irwin, then Peter Brock both unfortunately died in accidents doing what they cared about, and now Richard 'The Hamster' Hammond (from Top Gear) has been in a pretty horrific driving accident and is in hospital with brain damage which he will hopefully recover from - and I'm sure we all wish him well and sympathise with his wife and two small children.

I read a forum on MSN today, and somebody posted saying that Richard Hammond effectively deserved what he got, that fast-car programmes like Top Gear are irresponsible and are the root of all motoring accidents on the roads today (in the same sense as James Bond films are the root of all gun crime) because people are influenced to such a degree by the media and the behaviour of celebrities.

Once I'd finished spitting venom over this poster's insensitivity, it got me to thinking about these three people who you might argue encourage dangerous behaviour. A racing driver, a car enthusiast and a naturalist who spent his life getting as close as possible to animals with lots of teeth or poison. And we loved all three of them for it, even if they could sometimes be cringe-worthy.

Why do we have this perception that the media is the root of all evil? It doesn't always help, but are we so scared of accepting responsibility for our own lives that we can really justify blaming our actions on celebrities whose job description is to entertain and to do the stuff we'd all secretly love to but don't dare?

And then I got to thinking about what sort of a life the poster mentioned above must lead. Never taking risks, the sort who drives slowly to the supermarket and back once a week so feels he has the right to condemn people who like driving very fast in carefully controlled circumstances. And having finished being irritated at him, it occured to me that maybe I should be sympathising with him as well as with Richard Hammond and his family. This man has never taken a risk, never put himself on the edge to see what it's like and what he's capable of, and I find that incredibly depressing. It doesn't have to be dangerous stuff - any of us who have walked out to play in front of an audience have done it, laid our musical soul out in front of an audience and hoped they won't crush it and that we won't give them reasons to do so.

So, I say, hurrah for people who take considered risks - and I mean considered ones, not reckless ones. The three celebs mentioned above had accidents despite being very good at what they do and taking every reasonable precaution and not putting anyone else at risk. Let's grow up, take responsibility for ourselves and push our own limits. Think how we could improve the world if we all really pushed ourselves to see how good we can be.

So what am I going to do to push myself? First, I'm going to practise my piano more. I've spent the last couple of weeks listening to recitals by some incredible pianists and am feeling inspired rather than inferior. I may never be that good but I can certainly be a heck of a lot better than I am if I apply myself. Second, I'm going to take and pass my professional exams, because I love what I do and I want to do it better. And if I get paid more into the bargain - I deserve it. And third, I'm going to put together the exhibition of some of my photography that I've been talking about for the last couple of years, and I'm going to start planning my next big field trip. Alaska for the salmon run, maybe, or the tiger reserves in India. Or I've been promising myself a trip to Antarctica... choices choices.

The problem with celebrity "Risk takers" is they are doing it for the fame. I have no admiration for them. Compare this to people who risk their lives by caring for people with AIDS or searching and removing hidden land mines around the world.

[rimv2]

Celebrities are having a bad few weeks, first Steve Irwin, then Peter Brock both unfortunately died in accidents doing what they cared about, and now Richard 'The Hamster' Hammond (from Top Gear) has been in a pretty horrific driving accident and is in hospital with brain damage which he will hopefully recover from - and I'm sure we all wish him well and sympathise with his wife and two small children.

I read a forum on MSN today, and somebody posted saying that Richard Hammond effectively deserved what he got, that fast-car programmes like Top Gear are irresponsible and are the root of all motoring accidents on the roads today (in the same sense as James Bond films are the root of all gun crime) because people are influenced to such a degree by the media and the behaviour of celebrities.

Once I'd finished spitting venom over this poster's insensitivity, it got me to thinking about these three people who you might argue encourage dangerous behaviour. A racing driver, a car enthusiast and a naturalist who spent his life getting as close as possible to animals with lots of teeth or poison. And we loved all three of them for it, even if they could sometimes be cringe-worthy.

Why do we have this perception that the media is the root of all evil? It doesn't always help, but are we so scared of accepting responsibility for our own lives that we can really justify blaming our actions on celebrities whose job description is to entertain and to do the stuff we'd all secretly love to but don't dare?
choices.

There are people (like moi) who will do whatever it takes to be heard by the public. Most of them don't really have the level of conviction towards the ideas they convey as you would think. They even have the ballz to issue public apology. Then there the few others who refuse to change there ideas, simply because they've made a public declaration and taking back what they said would seem inconsistent or weak.

People tear apart and ridicule inconsistency. They're holding on to their opinions as  a sort of defense mechanism.

WAIT FOR IT....

[pianowelsh]

Agreed! I should share my faith with more people.. thats a risky business, people might get offended, report you to the police, beat you up....kill you - ok possibly not in UK - yet!! At least they might not ever speak to you again and mock you publically... But hey - yep! I think its worth the risk Because Jesus is awesome.
On perhaps a slightly more physical level I had considered going for a quick swim between a morning and an afternoon student which would mean risking getting back with slightly less time to prepare my studio and paperwork..but actually not that risky because I could just get up at 6am and do it before I start and my studio is usually uber tidy anyway.. As you can tell - I live life on the edge (on the edge of what I can hear you ask)