Be open to a better way

© Judy Mae Bingman image

I photographed a wedding a few years back, and to prepare, I asked a seasoned photographer for some tips.

“The woman should always stand on the man’s left” — seemed reasonable enough until he added — “so the man’s right hand is free to grasp his sword.”

His sword? A woman standing on a man’s left at weddings dates to the time when brave men donned swords on belts, forced to defend God, country, and wife at a moment’s notice.

Sword-carrying men are also the reason we mount a horse on the left side with our non-sword-bearing leg free to enter the left stirrup.

Tradition dictates that a woman stands on a man’s left, though the need no longer exists, because that’s how it’s always been done, and we’re too comfortable with our imaginary swords to change.

We’re too comfortable doing things as they’ve always been done, though the reason died away long ago.

Lots of people live their whole lives like that — going through motions which long ago lost their meaning; attending churches which no longer inspire them, staying in relationships which no longer nurture them, working at jobs which no longer satisfy them.

All because they’ve always mounted the horse on the left; all because that’s the way they’ve always done it.

I’ve seen it in churches which refuse to change their approaches to workshop because they don’t fit the standard they’ve always known. The box is square — it’s always been square — and, by golly, it’s always going to be square.

What’s wrong with round?
What’s wrong with change?

When I returned to the 4-H job after leaving the post 16 years ago, I debated the future of the traditional 4-H program. In the 100-year history of the 4-H program, children have changed. The child who can devote all his energy to one club no longer exists. To be a viable choice in the next 100 years, 4-H must also change. I see change daily, thus, I see hope daily.

We need to see if mounting the horse on the other side works. We need to see if a round box is better than a square box.

I once read that one company first developed the technology for music CDs, allowing us to store lots more information than we ever could before, but it abandoned the technology because it couldn’t imagine that people would want that much information on one disk. You see, it imagined that the CD would be the same size as the record album had always been. At that size, a single CD would hold hours and hours and hours of music—more than anyone would ever want, they believed.

The thought of reducing the size of the disk never occurred to them — they were too used to mounting on the left side of the horse.

Look what they lost. Look what we lose when we neglect to look for a better way.