Comments

If you resist anger, you are under its full influence.

If you let anger flow through you, then you no longer feel anger.

If you no longer feel it, you don't need to manage it...

And then you can devote your creative energy to harmonious endeavours that make a difference.

At any rate, it is pointless to force yourself into managing fury into or out of your system with the utlimate intention to "perform". If you want to perform, then... perform. Why do you need fury and anger?

That's my way. Perhaps letting anger flow is what you mean by "stay furious".

Posted by alex at February 28, 2005 2:34 PM

ENERGIZED is how I think it and feel it - anger is 20th century. Energy and harmony and grace is 21st century practice and politic.

Posted by John at February 28, 2005 6:57 PM

Fury, I think, is at once greater and smaller than anger. Anger is strong, but futile. Fury wants to change things.

It is weaker than anger in its capability to destroy. By this, I mean that Fury isn't as concerned with destroying the status quo as it is with achieving a change. In the process, it may destroy what currently exists, but that is usually a consequence of its actions rather than a goal in itself.

I speak from experience when I say that Fury motivates like nothing else possibly can. Fury demands action, now!

Posted by Deepak Morris at March 13, 2005 3:12 PM