The ills of resilience
Dear Editor,
The narrative of resilience must be actively done away with by our Government, industries, environmental and medical scientists, businesses, and the common man or woman in his or her personal life, and be replaced by adaptability.
Although the difference may seem insignificant, the three illustrations that follow might help to illuminate the difference between the two and the importance of this difference.
Firstly, if we were to imagine that an architectural structure represented resilience, it would quite likely be as rigid and as hard as a solidly built wall. In the Bible, the rock is what is often used to depict such foundation, cover, or barrier. However, it is the same rock which the Bible suggests can shatter one’s feet, bruise heads, or break men’s skulls. Although it is very important to be firm and determined in what we strive for, leaving some room for adjustment is just as important, hence the appeal of being adaptable.
The passing of Queen Elizabeth II of England has opened up a can of worms. Among the worms is the striking and genuine difference between this late queen and the late Princess Diana, her daughter-in-law. Some have claimed that The Queen held a grudge against Diana because of the warmth afforded to the latter from various creeds of people, and was earned rather than inherited.
Likewise, our quest must be towards adaptability, being reflective of inclusivity, compassion, and the dynamism of people and things which Princess Diana represented, and not the callousness of her antithesis, played by The Queen and the institution to which she was sworn.
Resilience is often made out to be linked to the efforts and cleverness of men, perhaps even in their attempts at outwitting God. Contrarily, adaptability acknowledges that there is an inevitable, uncontrollable, and unpredictable force which we simply have to work with, not deny and/or resist.
When the extensive nature of the novel coronavirus pandemic started to be seen, the late Queen quoted in her speech of April 5, 2020, “This, too, shall pass,” as though she knew something that or someone whom the rest of us didn’t, and that information or person had nothing to do with God, for she made no reference to Him in that speech. That, brothers and sisters, was resilience and godlessness, a grave error made by those wishing to confer a sense of deity onto themselves.
Andre O Sheppy
astrangely@outlook.com