There was a TED talk posted on a technology oriented page at work a short time ago. The talk itself was not terribly interesting or relevant; it was the kind of talk that a corporate environment doesn't find very threatening, while trying to promote some claimed new type of thinking.
But all TED talks have links to other TED talks below them that seem to be relevant according to some key words or computer algorithm or something. One link led to another and after listening to a few more talks, I came across Larry Smith's talk on Why You Will Fail to Have a Great Career. I listened to it with mild interest before moving on to efforts more focused to current work, but that talk kept lurking in the back of my brain.
I've listened to it a few more times. Some of the posted discussion after the talk centered on more of the minutia of why Mr. Smith is saying we won't have a good career - his specific examples are not what I think he is actually talking about. It is unfortunate that one must wade through the plebeian "Best TED ever!" comments to get to some of the more interesting discussion...
What I actually think Mr. Smith is saying is just that most of us have more general reasons as to why we won't have the great singularly career-focused life, and this is far more dangerous - more along the lines of career is all that matters, and everyone outside of those obsessively focused will fail at life by design.
Mr. Smith references the revered Steven J(obs) - do you think Steve Jobs was ever able to go on a vacation without his iPhone?
Mr. Smith goes so far as to denigrate the inventor of Velcro, not acknowledging the huge impact wonderful things like Velcro have had on life; more broadly denigrating those who create and invent small improvements that make every day life easier and better, more interesting (I'm baffled by his issue with interesting)! He is looking down on those whose ambitions don't start in the clouds - he is criticizing one brand of passion at the expense of another, by only his own nebulous distinction. Within a few feet of me as I type this are probably at least 10 hook and loop fasteners quietly doing their jobs - quietly when not being opened. Even disposable diapers now use a very inexpensive but surprisingly effective form of hook and loop to fasten. But Mr. Smith patronizes Velcro as worthy of only derision. A great career can only be one on the scale that creates a grand unifying theory of physics and a Nobel prize? Great ideas are almost never huge, grand eurekas, but are more likely due to an inquisitive person staring down at something and saying, "Geez, that is funny." This is then followed by an interesting idea that builds to something else that seems so simply obvious after the fact that everyone else says, "Why didn't I think of that?" How often is something new compared to the exceptionally mundane "sliced bread" - I've never heard anyone say, "That is the best thing since Loop Quantum Gravity Theory!"
In a subsequent interview, Mr. Smith advocates looking for a passion. Life is littered with people who look for, and invest in something, only to watch it whither with time or realize that personal passion translates poorly to the outside world. I'm quite convinced that "looking" for passion is as likely to fail at greater expense than not having it in the first place. Passion is created organically over time, and the investment to go from an interest to a passion is enormous. And there lies the paradox: passion requires investment, sometimes significant investment, but investment does not guarantee success ... or passion.
I'm reminded of what Bill Withers said, "One of the things I always tell my kids is that it's OK to head out for wonderful, but on your way to wonderful, you're gonna have to pass through all right. When you get to all right, take a good look around and get used to it, because that may be as far as you're gonna go."
I realize this must devolve into talking about work, which I don't do. But best to let this bell ring down naturally at this point.
I've eluded to the job change over the last few months. The extended transition has now run to completion. There is excitement at starting something new, but this transition has had some moments of second guessing as well. Things were both safe and frustrating at my old job, and that may not be the best place to work. My new job (location, focus, coworkers, etc.) is not home though, and a coworker who came from and went to the same organizations a few years ago said it still isn't for him either. This is troubling.
PBS had a short series on the History of the Elements that I caught a few months ago. For all the mired-in-details work, it was an absolute joy to watch as it brought me back to why I got interested in science in the first place. It brought me back to the steep side of the learning curve in high school and as a Freshman in college. It wasn't a Smithsian passion at the age of 18, but the three hours of time spent watching the documentary came at just the right time. And yet, I'm just as happy doing what I am as I would be doing grand first principle theoretical work. I was recently awarded two more patents, for inventions that are probably less life-changing than Velcro. Warp drive indeed...
There are no shortage of people who complain about TED Talks - either generically or specific talks. I like Ted talks; many make me think. The short format is a good contrast to dictatorial diatribes, and if any given talk doesn't turn out to be interesting or as advertised, not listening to it is as easy as listening. Just one click.
Susan Cain's talk on Introverts is one that I've listened to a few times. This has also surprisingly been used at work. I say this is surprising, not because it isn't a great talk, but surprising since cubicles are ever-present, and being replaced by the even more heinous "agile office space." Her comments on group work are almost too on target. Sadly, teamwork can devolve into group-think of the loudest voice, or often the best interrupter.
After watching many TED Talks, I think the best TED talk may not actually be a TED Talk at all. Parody as art form, but the format is more a caricature of the intellectualesque bourgeoisie than of TED Talks in particular.
With all deference to Mr. Smith, who is a respected economist at the University of Waterloo, I don't know if I have a good career, a great career or a lousy one. And I don't care. My job should work for me as much as I do for it.
Whether anyone has a great career is secondary to whether that person has a good life. A job, a career, should be a tool, one of many, to lead the interesting life. Anything on top of that is just a bonus.
I'll end by turning to Bronnie Ware, as I have before, and suggest that very few people at the end of life will lament that their career wasn't great enough. If only...
No comments:
Post a Comment