==========

“Of all the things created and built by humankind, nothing in my mind is better or worthier than bridges.

They belong to all and treat all alike; they are useful, always built for purpose, at a spot where most human needs entwine.”

–

Ivo Andric

==============

Well. When I saw this quote I thought “wow, I have the companion piece to my Liminal space post”.

Liminal spaces tend to make people feel uncomfortable as places of transition <neither here nor there>. They are kind of the fascinating, interesting, but oft wretched, spots where you have left what was but have not entered into what will be. It is the intangible that create the niggling discomfort or unease <or anticipation>. You are kind of disconnected from any of your real comfort zones.

Bridges make people feel comfortable. They are tangible. They show the clear path from where you are to where you can go. With a bridge you know you can always be connected with a comfort zone <even if you never go back>.

Regardless.

These two things are companions in crime.

Liminal spaces, voids as it were, tend to serve to refocus and remind people of what is at stake and what is really important.

Bridges offer a place to focus. They offer us … well … some pragmatic hope that you can actually get somewhere <even if where you are is kind of unclear>.

Connecting spaces, which is really what bridges are, are invaluable to us physically and mentally.

Almost everyone’s minds excitedly explore uncertain forays into interesting things and, at exactly the same time, get lost as they get snagged on the edge of unexplored thoughts or even those mischievously evil second guesses that are inevitably associated with the uncertainty in much of our lives, thoughts and growth.

And this can make us feel uncomfortable and our mind wrestles with this discomfort as well as dealing with the uncertainty of, well, this liminal space.

Here is some truth.

Ignorance is boundless.

Knowledge is limited <only in terms of time>.

Learning, and unlearning, often contains more uncertainty than it does certainty.

This means our minds are always grappling with the hollow spaces of our lives, i.e., the empty spaces in which we know we have to cross, but just aren’t sure we can see how to cross.

That, in a nutshell, is why we love bridges.

Look. I am a strategy guy or maybe I could be called a “here to there” thinker guy. I like liminal spaces AND I like bridges. While I like navigating liminal spaces I don’t like going back again and again to the same, therefore, I also like to build a bridge in ever liminal space I visit in business.

Not all strategy type people do that.

Some like (just) the theory – the larger ‘trend.’ They are called futurists. I tend to call them relatively worthless <or maybe just misguided in their self title>.

Some like navigating the liminal space, seeing the web of the trend itself and doing the mental gymnastics to weave your way through, leaving some bread crumbs for others to follow.

Some like the practical step-by-step plan of getting from one place to another <the places are less relevant the bridge is all that matters>. I would argue they weren’t traditional strategists but rather strategy implementers, but, call them what you may they play an incredibly important role in getting people from here to there and what is to what could be.

Me? I am a pragmatic strategy person.

Identifying “what could be” is all about navigating liminal spaces and deciding which door to open and walk through … what path to choose and what rivers to cross. It gets the heart pumping, is not for the faint of heart, and is fraught with peril.

I say that because building a bridge seems to help not only tangibly show the ‘rightness’ in deciding the ‘right what could be’ but it also gives people a path. A path in which they have less uncertainty and can focus on … well … getting from here to there.

To me not building a bridge just seems like leaving something incomplete. Like maybe offering someone a map while I could have shared a map AND built a road.

Let me say I don’t think the world needs more of me <god no>, but I do believe we need to appreciate the pragmatic bridge builders in our midst.

Bridges are not typically built willy nilly in some random place. More often they are placed in useful places constructed with connection of those in one place and those in another.

What was and what will be <as it were>.

I am a business guy. But, I admit, I stop and admire well-built bridges all the time. I admire the bridges with character and wear & tear as trains rumble across them.

I do so because they remind me that a well-built bridge may be one of the worthiest things in the world.

While I wish more business thinkers, and strategy people, would think about this kind of shit more often I will lower my wishes and just say everyone should stop and admire a bridge on occasion.

They may be one of the worthiest, least appreciated, things we encounter.

Plus. In a world that seem increasingly uncertain where the intangibles & unknowns seem to outnumber the tangible & certain, well, bridges can be quite tangible, quite certain … and quite comforting. Great reminders that we humans have always been quite good at figuring out how to connect here to there.

=============

“Debate is great for sharpening the mind, but I worry that really skilled debaters might internalize the idea that the point of discussion and debate is victory, rather than truth. In debate, if you encounter a compelling counterargument, you just try to find a way around it.

But you should argue for truth, not for victory.

Really good debaters run the risk of ignoring valid counterarguments.”

———

professor Robert George: constitutional-law professor

==========================

falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus

<false in one, false in all>

====================

I am a self-proclaimed contrarian  and … well … contrarians end up debating … a lot. Let me be clear. If you suck at debating, you will be a sucky contrarian.

If you cannot debate, you simply are an opinionated person with a non-mainstream point of view sitting angry in some office or at some desk thinking everyone is just not smart enough, and as smart as you, because they just can’t see what you see.

That said. I have never had a desire to be angry nor staring at my own non-mainstream point of views piling up on my desk unused.

Next.

I am a self-proclaimed contrarian and … well … contrarians use truth … a lot.

Let me be clear. If you suck at telling the truth, clearly & concisely & unequivocally, you will be a sucky contrarian. Truth is at the core of being a successful contrarian. Contrarians, simply by offering a contrary thought, find themselves constantly on the defensive defending the thought. This happens even if you go on the offensive.  This happens because contrary ideas & thoughts feel a little less comfortable, less familiar and more risky therefore people will inherently want to pick it apart. There is where ‘false’ haunts a contrarian. One falsehood is not just one falsehood. One falsehood implies others are there only yet to be found.  If you cannot be an unequivocal truth teller you are simply a peddler of possibilities and, well, true contrarians thrive on making possibilities realities.

I have never had a desire to be angry nor staring at my own non-mainstream hopeful possibilities piling up on my desk unused.

All that said. When I saw the quote I opened with I had to sit back a little and think — think about how, as a contrarian, debate is used or not used.

Many contrarians focus on what I would call ‘the bookends’ — what their idea/thinking is and the ultimate outcomes — and judge themselves on that <and far too often dismiss counter thinking offered that changes the contrary thought>.

It is quite possible we contrarians <as well as many other people> should focus on ‘how they play the game’ or how they debate, because I frankly don’t give a shit what you preach nor whether you eventually benefit from what you preach as long as what you preach is grounded in integrity & fair play & truth, what you actually do and how you behave is grounded in integrity & fair play & truth and what you preach isn’t just preaching but rather a thought which inspires additional thinking <which means the original thought will most likely look pretty different at the outcome than it did at the onset>.

If you do it right, if you debate it right, then you, and the idea itself, will benefit in that if the idea & thinking gets adopted in some form or fashion you will have done so as an outcome of what you preached, what you debated and how you behaved during the debate.

That seems like a good thing.

But here is where the opening quote really made me think — contrarianism is like a drug. When you have a contrarian idea and it is actually a good idea <note: not all contrarians can tell if their idea is actually a good idea when being contrary> you can get caught up in the debate. You can start getting what I sometimes call “horizon blindness.” Horizon blindness is when you are so focused on the end destination and getting to the end destination you treat almost anything said, and any objection, as simply an obstacle to getting to the horizon … possibly ignoring any of the value being offered within the debate.

Even the best contrarians can get horizon blindness. Suffice it to say the best contrarians can be aware of what is at exactly the same time as where they want to be. iI permits some ‘cooperative arguments’ which <a> help build a better idea at the conclusion and <b> some ownership within all involved at the conclusion.

Anyway.

Here is what I think about being a great contrarian <maybe this is my wish list of what I could be>.

• Scrupulously fair.

Contrarians have to walk a fine line. They rarely are flippant with a contrarian idea therefore can be dogged in its defense. Yet, they must be fair to the idea, the beauty of thinking itself and what others think & say.

In fact, you have to almost relentlessly be fair to everything else around you … scrupulously fair as a matter of fact.

• Not domineering with beliefs.

This is a fine line to a contrarian. Frankly, any contrarian idea cannot step lightly into the fray. If it does, it gets suffocated by the familiar, the status quo & the easier path. But the key word in what I suggested is “beliefs.” Any contrarian idea is constructed with a number of beliefs.  The truth is that all beliefs reserve the right to not only be challenged but also changed. Therefore, dominating with a belief, in the contrarian world, is just asking for trouble, in addition, it is the wrong thing to do if you truly want the best idea at the end.

• Cooperative argumentative dialogue.

The Socratic method <Socratic debate is a form of cooperative argumentative dialogue between individuals, based on asking and answering questions to stimulate critical thinking and to draw out ideas and underlying presumptions>. Every truly good contrarian I have ever met has been a master at the ongoing cooperative argument. They have been adaptive in debate, flexible in the flow and adept at finding seemingly irrelevant factoids and making them relevant at the appropriate moment.

• Thinking tutor.

I want to be careful here because this is not to suggest contrarians are better thinkers or smarter thinkers and that they, and only they, can be the professors of thinking. What I am suggesting is that contrarians, in general, do think differently and they see things slightly differently. This means when you do it right, when you debate well & fairly & cooperatively, other people seem to walk away thinking about things in a slightly different way.

• Relentless truth teller

One lie, one half truth, one ‘truthful hyperbole, and the whole house of cards tumbles down. Great contrarians are great pivoters away from what they do not know. what I mean is that instead of offering a ‘lie’ <falsehood> when faced with not knowing something they typically place an “I don’t know” on the table and pivot to a “but here is what I do know” and place a truth on the table where the “I don’t know” used to be. Key to what I just shared is a slavish attachment to truth … even at the expense of an “I don’t know.” contrarians realize the game being played is chess and you will sacrifice a piece rather than imperil the entire board.

That’s it. When I saw the quote I opened with I loved the nuance in the description of debate and made me think that maybe we, in business, misuse the concept. We may really debate in business … and maybe we shouldn’t be debating. Maybe we should be arguing for truth, not for victory.

===========

“Courage and grace is a formidable mixture. The only place to see it is the bullring.”

—-

Marlene Dietrich

================

Lots of discussion about Purpose in business and having a meaningful job which reminded me of a great little article, Cape Crusader, in an old New Yorker about Justo Algaba (great website) who is “one of the world’s most respected matador tailors.” This article made me think of a couple of things.

First is “that perfect job for you.” Perfection is a myth but, on occasion, someone actually does find their dream job. Algaba? This hombre loves his job and ultimately calls it “his destiny” (oh. Don’t we all wish we could say that). Being able to do your passion for work, well, I am not sure there is anything better <careerwise>.

Second. The article reminded me of the time my parents took me to a bullfight in Spain years ago.

But, first, the perfect job.

Justo Algaba’s Madrid business just produces matador outfits (called trajes de luces (“suits of light”), because of their shimmery, multicolored adornments). That’s it. He makes more than a hundred and fifty matador suits each year for matadors around the world.

——

“Every suit I make is like having a child.”

Justo Algaba

———–

Just so you know, a good matador will order between six and ten suits a year. Anyway. As a youngster he had a different dream – to be a pilot. But when Algaba was 18 he saw a help wanted ad for a tailor’s shop, wandered in and met the famous bullfighter El Cordobés being fitted for a suit. While I would have been speechless meeting El Cordobes, Algaba remembered four years earlier he’d made a promise to himself that he’d either be a bullfighter or make clothes for them. Thus began the life of a Matador tailor – one of five matador tailors IN THE WORLD (all the tailors know each other and they all live in Madrid).

Interestingly, matador suit appear to be a personal thing & customized based on a combination of style, superstition and showmanship. I was surprised to find out many bullfighters let Algaba take creative license. For instance, for Paco Ojeda, a Mexican bullfighter whom Algaba considered a star he created a suit with stars and poinsettia flowers. Other matadors are picky & superstitious – especially about color.

Algaba:

“There was one bullfighter” (Jesulín de Ubrique, of Spain) “who was very lucky with the ladies. And there was another bullfighter” (Manolo Mejia, of Mexico) “who’d seen that de Ubrique had so much luck he was wondering if wearing the same kind of yellow suit would work for him as well.” So the Mexican tried a yellow suit—“and it worked.”

Okay. So the suit is sometimes less about in the bullring and more about outside the ring. But hey. I don’t begrudge these guys some fun outside the ring before taking on some half ton pissed off snorting hunk of beef with really big horns.

So this is a great story about a guy who found his dream job in a pretty cool ‘industry.’ But, I imagine, the real thought here is that he found ‘the coolness’ <or passion> in an unexpected place in an unexpected way. It is kind of a behind the scenes glamor job. It is not glamorous, in fact, I imagine it is quite tedious day to day . Yet this person has found a happy place in which to find satisfaction in his work.

The lesson? Great jobs exist outside the spotlight. In fact, many of the greatest jobs ENABLE the spotlight.

Secondly. The bullfight.

My memory of my bullfight day is fuzzy but distinct in some ways. If you want me to recall the particulars I cannot (beyond the fact I know I was mortified that my mother cheered for the bulls). Anyway. Think of a bullfight like a boxing match – a number of undercard matches and then the main match. I do remember distinct bits & pieces. The bullfight is a spectacle. At its worst it was a bloody mess. At its best it was stunningly scary and majestic. The pageantry remains in my mind even today. The horses, the horsemen (the picadors), the matadors sweeping in, the smallish stadium with uncomfortable seats packed to the top with shouting people and these massive bulls. It is marred by death but underlined with a heroic grace – from the matadors as well as the bulls (even the greatest bulls of all time have names). I don’t regret having had the experience. For a little boy it teetered between horrifying and delightfully, and manly, brutal.

With that said here are five bullfighters whose names you should know (I have missed some but figured if I stuck with Andalucía and southern Spain I would be able to share some of the best “matadors” of all time):

1. Antonio Ordóñez 1932-1998

Antonio Ordoñez was one of Spain’s most famous bullfighters. Born in Ronda in 1932, he made his first public appearance as a bullfighter in 1948 and in 1951, aged 19, he appeared in the bullring in Madrid. In the amazing career which followed, Ordoñez came face to face with over 1000 bulls.

His father was “El Niño de la Palmas”, also a well-known bullfighter. He fought in Pamplona in the 1920s where he met Ernest Hemingway, who had developed a great interest in bullfighting. Antonio knew Hemingway as a boy and called him ‘Father Ernest’.

Antonio virtually retired in 1968 and turned to bull breeding on his estate near Ronda.

Following the family tradition, his grandson Francisco Rivera Ordóñez also became a bullfighter.

2. Francisco Rivera Ordóñez 1974 to present

Legend has it that Francisco Rivera Ordoñez was born to fight bulls. His father was the famous bullfighter Paquirri who died bullfighting in Pozoblanco, Córdoba in 1984 when he was caught by the horns of a bull named “Avispado” (from the Spanish for wasp, “avispa”). Antonio Ordoñez, his grandfather, was one of Spain’s most famous bullfighters. At the age of 17 he was out in the bullring for his inaugural fight at the Ronda Bullring, which his grandfather was running. That was the beginning of what has so far been a spectacular career. The bullfighter’s mother Carmina Ordoñez, was known as the Queen of Exclusives by the press in Spain. As daughter of a bullfighter, she surely understood better than anyone else the risks her son was taking by embarking on this career.

3. Manolete 1917-1947

Manolete was born in 1917 in Cordoba and died in the bullring at Linares in Jaen in 1947. What transpired during the years in between was the making of a myth and legend so great, the world of bullfighting in Spain will forever remember the name of Manolete.

This distinguished bullfighter was named after his father, who was also known as Manolete and was also a bullfighter. With natural grace and talent he rose to legendary status with a style of bullfighting that would serve as a model for generations to come. He was caught by the horns of a Miura bull on the 28th of August as he pe
rformed in the Linares bullring.

4. Pedro Romero Martínez 1754-1839

Martínez was a legendary bullfighter from the Romero family in Ronda, Spain. His grandfather Francisco is credited with advancing the art of using the muletilla; his father and two brothers were also toreros. As a child he participated in two bullfights in Algeciras then fought in Seville in 1772 and in Madrid in 1775. In 1776 he killed 285 bulls, fully establishing his reputation. He allegedly slew over 6000 bulls before retiring in 1799, all without a scar on his body. He was equally famous for being the first matador to view his job as an art form rather than just a display of courage. After retiring, Romero was appointed the head of a bullfighting school in Seville. At the age of eighty, a crowd looked on as he allegedly killed numerous bulls in a bullring in Madrid, probably the last bullfight he ever participated in. (All these guys were nuts)

Ernest Hemingway’s novel The Sun Also Rises often alludes to the legend of Pedro Romero. He is referred to as the “perfect” male, or a representation thereof. Romero was immortalized in Goya’s famous portrait.

Lastly. Probably the most famous bullfighter of all time. El Cordobes.

5. Manuel Benítez Pérez

Born in 1936 in Palma del Río near Córdoba and is known as El Cordobés (“The Cordobese” – “The Cordovan”).

This famous matador of the 1960s brought to the bullring an unorthodox acrobatic and theatrical style. (In other words he was a nut. Ok. a brave nut.)

His signature move was one that I can only envision was spectacular live. Breathtaking and scary and beautiful all at the same time. This original and dangerous technique which El Cordobés frequently demonstrated was first shown to the world at Anjucar. In a massive departure from the traditional formality of bullfighting he would wave his Banderillero (called a Columpio formally) away, then broke his banderillas down to pencil length, stand with his back to the bull as it charged, then moved his right leg out moments before the bull was upon him causing the bull to swerve which allowed him a moment to slam in the bandrillas from just behind the left horn. (Ok. See? That is nuts. A bull typically weighed over a half a ton and was typically slightly pissed at having been stabbed with a variety of sharp objects by this time.)

This maneuver was subsequently repeated in bullfights across Spain sometimes with even more dangerous variations such as standing with his back to the barerra and driving in the banderillas after the horns passed either side of him.

El Cordobes was born in poverty brought up in an orphanage in a village near Córdoba. He was a construction worker and petty criminal who dreamed of being a bullfighter (and achieved that dream by jumping into the ring and showing he could fight a bull). This was extremely rare to become a toreador with that background.

A highly memorable point in his career was his first appearance at Las Ventas, the bullring of Madrid, on May 20, 1964. An event watched on television by many Spaniards which ended tragically with the near-fatal goring of El Cordobés on the horns of the bull “Impulsivo”. Oh. You want to understand what a matador is like? Well, just 22 later El Cordobés fought again <again, this guy ,,, well … these guys … was nuts.>

There you go.

Now you know about a matador’s tailor and some of the most famous matadors of all time.

=======================

“But I will find new habits, new thoughts, new rules. I will become something else.”

—–

Divergent

========================

Well. I encountered a neat thing called the “20 Things” which is a little assignment this small consulting company sometimes uses with people they are considering adding to staff:  “What are the 20 things that have defined you – experiences, books, movies, people, travel, challenges, etc.”  When a friend told me about it I immediately began scribbling down ‘things.’ It was surprising how fast the important ones are noted and how easy it is to “fill in” to get to 20.

That said … and me being quite comfortable not following rules … I ended up with 15. They show up in no real order except number 1 and number 15.

I purposefully bookended the list with the two most impactful in terms of immediate and ongoing impact. 2 thru 14 can be juggled any way you want.

–          my grandfather

The greatest man I have ever had the pleasure of knowing. A simple kind man who honored integrity, kindness and truth above all. He taught me more about me, life and how to live Life <without overtly teaching> than anyone I have ever known. He remains my North Star for my life. I can only hope to be half the man he ever was … but at least he gave me something to aim for.

–          the pulled foul ball

Sports always came quite easily to me. And then I pulled a foul ball off a Tom Seaver fastball <before I struck out swinging on a slider which disappeared just before I was sure I had the fat part of my bat on it … hey, c’mon, the guy did win 3 Cy Youngs>. Regardless. I realized this was as good as it was going to get with me & sports. It didn’t mean I stopped sports, it just meant that I realized I needed to get going on the rest of my life.

–          The Hobbit

The first “real” book I remember. I devoured Hardy Boys & Nancy Drew until there were no more, but when I heard The Hobbit read to me during reading period in elementary school I entered a world of words & imagery & imagination — and thinking of ‘what if.’  It hooked me on books and reading and thinking. The first time I read The Hobbit myself I was still too young to see anything but goblins & elves. I have read it maybe 10 times <probably more> and I still see new things every time I read it.

–          Diplomacy <by Henry Kissinger>

I wish I had found this book earlier in my life. On the other hand, I may not have understood it earlier. Kissinger writes about diplomacy, but he is really discussing problem solving. He gave me one thing: “studying history is not analogous but contextual.” More people should heed this lesson. I certainly have learned this lesson.

–          Supertramp <my first concert, and more specifically, their encore song “crime of the century”>

I grew up in a house with music, but it all changed at my first concert and especially the encore. The encore was maybe 10 plus minutes of music and film with a growing image of hands on prison bars in space and I walked out of there in a thoughtful excited daze. I had words & notes & imagery imprinted in my brain from that point on as a powerful tool to inspire me to think in different & creative ways. Music has never left my life <and I have forgiven Supertramp for doing Breakfast in America>. Music and imagery is at the core of how I think and like to express myself <when it is possible and relevant to do so>.

–          Spike Lee

I was in my early 30’s in the audience when I heard Spike Lee say these words about his films: “I recognize everything I do impacts how people think … and even what they do … I have a responsibility every time I create anything.” It changed how I viewed what I did and actually how I did it moving forward. Basically I began assuming responsibility for everything I created. I have never stopped assuming that responsibility.

–          unstuck

I was a young manager with far to much responsibility doing the best I could and after one meeting my boss looked at me and said “nice job, they’ve been stuck on that for years, but you got them past it.” It was when I realized it appeared like my skill, or ability, was to “unstuck” people, businesses & situations. The truth is from that point on I actively began seeking things to ‘unstuck’. Maybe an odd version of ‘finding my passion’ or ‘doing what I love to do’, but I preferred thinking of it as making things unstuck.

–          St. Chappelle

I grew up in a home where we were expected to understand religious choices, but was, in general, ambivalent to religion. I was always indifferently interested in religion. I imagine I just took a pragmatic view on life in which God didn’t really enter into the equation. And then I visited St. Chappelle in Paris <across the street from Notre Dame>. As I entered the petit chapel and the sunlight filtered through the floor to ceiling stained glass it is the closest I have ever felt to not only believing in God, but actually believing I was in the presence of God. I am still not religious, but I respect religion and I imagine, in some small way, I better understand how God can positively affect someone’s life.

–          Madman Across the Water

The first time I heard Elton John’s Madman Across the Water album I think I immediately stole the lyrics from the album sleeve. The words made me think. The words made me create images in my head. The words inspired me to try and create words of my own that made others think & create images. That album made me a “words guy.” Plus. Every song on that album was just darn good.

–          suicide

I believe anyone who has been impacted by someone close to them committing suicide is never the same again. She was beautiful, kind and a friend. And she left with an entire life ahead of her. I imagine I felt like I did not do my part to show her what great things lay ahead of her. I vowed to never make that mistake again.

–          “I do not really care”

Graduate school. Case study discussion

“Mr. McTague … what would you do?” Me? “Well … I do not really care.”

Flippant careless response. It ended up on the front board for the remainder of the semester. And I should have been hung out to dry. I was technically correct that the point <of which I seemed to have grasped fairly early in business life> is that there are several ‘right’ or even ‘best’ solutions to a challenge, but I should have realized that words and how you articulate an idea & thought are almost as important as the idea itself. I vowed to never make that mistake ever again. A good thought can die if it is not articulated well.

–          “do not go gentle into that good night”

I have a love/hate relationship with poetry. I am fascinated with how words can be put together in ways that make you feel something inside, but all the rules of ‘effective and proper’ poetry drove me nuts. It was so constricting for something that should be so free. And then I came across Dylan Thomas’ “do not go gentle.” Whew. I found my anthem. Some call it ‘bull in a china shop living’ I simply point to ‘do not go gentle into the good night.’ It isn’t about dying it is about living. Rage, rage against the dying of the light. It was a great lesson.

–          Polly

My first boss. A woman in a man’s industry <advertising> who was in a senior position and did it her way, but with the flexibility to permit the next generation to flourish. She didn’t know shit about these new fangled computers that all the young people were talking about <this was in the 80’s>, but she put one on every one of our desks. She could do the same thing by hand faster than we could do it on the computer, but she kept sending us back to our computers. She mentored the youngest, guided the more experienced and managed everyone. She permitted individuality and built a team. Oh. And she set me up with her daughter. Anyway. She taught me how to be a boss and I was straight out of school. Most importantly, she taught me women were essential to progress & productivity in business. Simplistically, I owe everything in my career to a woman.

–          Kiev war museum <although I could have put the Holocaust Museum here>

Perspective. Nothing provides perspective in life than viewing the kind of death inflicted by one human on another human. And not just ordinary death but death in the extreme. I cried in both of these places. I could pound out some horrible numbers on my keyboard that would make your head hurt to express this learning tangibly … but why?

Simply. I cried. Humans can be very cruel if they are not careful.

–          To Kill a Mockingbird

My bookshelves are strewn with books I value and love. It is tempting to list the best of the best because they all made a positive impact and have been reread time and time again. But when one book is simply ‘the one’ why invest energy overthinking. To Kill a Mockingbird is my ‘one.’ I fell in love with Scout – her words and thoughts and questions. I still ask the same questions looking at today’s world and think of Scout’s thoughts daily. Harper Lee showed us that sometimes a child can see clearer than the most brilliant adults in the world. Listening to the young reminds us of things we have forgotten and they can actually teach us many things through the simplicity of youth. Regardless. Everyone should read this book.

That’s it. I had a bunch of other ‘things’ fighting for the 16 thru 20 slots but, frankly, they were just at a different level than 1 thru 15. I believe lists like this should be about quality and not quantity.

This is a worthwhile exercise for everyone. Everyone’s list will look different and some people may actually have 20 worthwhile events/learning moments instead of just 15, but who cares. It isn’t a competition. It is simply reflecting upon who you are as a person. This exercise reminded me we are all architects of our own Life. While many things are out of our control, many things are ours to do … or not do.

Is my list done? Gosh. I hope not. “This I am today … that I will be tomorrow.“

===

“Even as we learn how this happened and who’s responsible, we may never understand what leads anybody to terrorize their fellow human beings like this.

Such violence, such evil is senseless. It’s beyond reason.  But while we will never know fully what causes somebody to take the life of another, we do know what makes life worth living.

The people we lost in Aurora loved, and they were loved.

They were mothers and fathers. They were husbands and wives, sisters and brothers, sons and daughters, friends and neighbors. They had hopes for the future, and they had dreams that were not yet fulfilled. And if there’s anything to take away from this tragedy, it’s the reminder that life is very fragile. Our time here is limited, and it is precious. And what matters at the end of the day is not the small things, it’s not the trivial things, which so often consume us and our daily lives.

Ultimately, it’s how we choose to treat one another and how we love one another.”

–

President Obama after Aurora shooting

===

<originally written & posted October 2, 2015 and again on November 5, 2017 and, yet, appears relevant today>

The shooting at the community college in Oregon.

As the president said last night … we seem to be having this conversation far too often in the United States.

Any shooting of innocent people is bad.

Unexplainable shootings seem worse. And because they seem unexplainable we seem to want to go back and reverse engineer information and try and explain the action of someone who does something which seems unexplainable to the everyday schmuck like me <to be clear … reverse engineering is 99% accurate … its predictive engineering that is less accurate>.

The reengineering always seems to offer possible solutions … and yet … offer no solutions at all.

And, yet, moments like this make us want to do something … to say something … to solve whatever this something is. All the while serious looking overly somber news people all over the country, as well as an obviously aggravated President Obama, comment on and lament what can only be called a tragic situation. That is all good … but what none of these people seem to nail down is a cohesive strategy to address fundamental reasons for the amount of gun violence that has somehow seeped into the everyday American Life.

Please note I said ‘cohesive’ because the voices shouting seem anything but aligned:

One shouts ‘its guns!!!’ <gun control issues>.

One shouts ‘its mental health !!!’ <psychological profiling and privacy issues>

One shouts ‘its domestic terrorism !!! <implying it is some thoughtful effort to change something>

<and a few oddly, and slightly absurdly, shout ‘its Obama’s fault !!!’>

How about we put all the ‘ones’ together and think about a common strategy.

McTague hand drawn relationship on Gun Issue

What do all of these events have in common?

There is a gun.

There is an individual.

There is society <the environment in which the gun and the individual reside>.

Gun control.

I get steamed at both sides on the gun control discussion. Freedom to own a gun does not absolve the freedom from ‘responsible gun ownership.’ On the other side … eliminating guns is just not feasible.

While I certainly don’t have all the political answers I do admit that some aspects of calls for more gun control resonate with me <all the while fully understand that Americans are hardly agreed on the issue with less than 50% wanting stricter gun laws but a majority want better background check>.

And I do know that “a feeding frenzy of new gun legislation is not the answer.” What I do know is that I would rip up all gun control legislation <I believe it is something like over 200 things> and start from scratch.

–      I want responsible people who accept the significant responsibility that comes along with owning a gun to be able to own a gun.

It doesn’t seem absurd to demand some level of ‘prove responsibility’ to own a gun. Force registration at police offices or military facilities. Prove you know how to handle a gun <all guns you may have>.

–       Any weapon the military uses for military action shouldn’t be in the hands of the everyday citizen. Period. Full stop.

If someone has military experience, then maybe they have earned the right to own an assault like weapon. But I would also make the Military responsible for military trained people who own these guns.

–       Ammunition used for hunting or ammunition for non military use.

That’s the only kind of ammunition you can have.

–      No more concealed weapons. If you have one, show it.

If I am a non gun owner I want the opportunity to decide to not be near a gun if I want to. If I am a gun owner I want to be fully aware of who else has a gun around me. If I am a police officer I want to be able to see who has what and who doesn’t.

I am sure I am missing something but this whole situation and discussion aggravates my sense so much I leaned in with what I would call the basic common sense thoughts.

The individual <and mental state of mind>.

The flippant “it’s not the gun, it’s the person’ argument is downright silly. Please, PLEASE, everyone just accept it is a symbiotic relationship.

One cannot live without the other.

Next.

The flippant “it’s a mental health issue” … well … suffice it to say “yes” … and then point out if you truly believe we can profile everyone in the entire united states, evaluate them on some set of ‘possibility criteria’ and then track them … well … you are on drugs <which is a completely different issue>.

We cannot institutionalize everyone, or anyone, who has thoughts of suicide, moments of anger at society <or some aspect or group they focus their anger on> or even people with depression and some inclination of some public display of their overall dissatisfaction with Life.

Professional health needs to suck up their pride, and differences, and come up with some basic assessment tool. By the way … has anyone ever heard of ‘social media tracking?’ I can almost guarantee that 90% of all Americans leave an internet footprint … and 99% of the assholes who pick up a gun and shoot some innocent victims certainly do.

I would subjugate one of my privacy freedoms, as a citizen, if the professional health industry said ‘we have a specific assessment tool which will be scanning all online activity which reflects indicators of mental health issues tied with possibility to pick up a gun and kill innocent people.’

C’mon. I have probably met a half dozen social media tracking companies with some technology that tracks words and clicks and even your breathing <it seems> to such a point I am pretty sure they can accurately tell me when I will need to go to the bathroom.

For fuck’s sake. Amazon knows what I want before I want it … certainly we can come up with a tool like this.

Beyond the professionals … there is … well … people … uhm … you & I <and their relationship with potential ‘tragedy creators>. I don’t want to go back to Soviet communism where neighbors reported on neighbors to the KGB … but … for cryin’ out loud … if we simply raised our hands for the people we were 80% sure needed some help … at minimum … they get help … and even better … we cut down on these tragic events by 80%.

To be clear on that last point … perfection may be sought … but will never be attained. Evil does win on occasion <whether we like it or not>.

Society.

Let me begin with …

The picture emerging of Mercer is of a killer who had an interest in mass shootings, having reportedly recently posted on a blog about a gunman who killed two US journalists live on air in August.

He described Vester Flanagan as a man who “wanted the world to see his actions” before adding: “Seems the more people you kill, the more you’re in the limelight.”

Oh. Let me add …

In the usual rush to offer up some breaking information, news reports were embellished with unconfirmed details about the massacre and the assailant that did little but fuel a contagion of fear.

Sigh.

I sometimes think we are our own worst enemy. Regardless. Let me tell ya one thing I know for sure … if someone wants to commit suicide and leave a legacy <be in the limelight> that people will remember forever … just do it, or something, in front of today’s media <and then the entertainment industry will run with it from there with TV specials, movies, docudramas, whatever>.

The core of much of the entertainment industry in America – movies, TV shows and, yes, I consider today’s cable news as entertainment <albeit disturbing entertainment> – is based on killing and violence. We glorify the violence & the violent at the same time as we are saddened by it.

In addition … while we depict the violent as ‘evil’ we just as much showcase them as misguided or ‘faults of society’ <not forcing any accountability or personal responsibility for actions on the asshole who actually pulled the trigger>.

The consequences of this is that our society breeds a sense of ‘victim’ even for the purveyor of the tragedy.

Society?

Shit. Well … we just need to be better dammit.

<sigh>

If not us then who?

Look. The champions for gun ownership point out that the Constitution of the country gives people the right to own guns. I would suggest those people think contextually with regard to that thought … at the time America had no standing army … just citizen militia. Everyone was expected to pick up their gun in defense of this new nation we had just created.

Basically, at that time, everyone served in the military.

I would suggest to the people who suggest ‘more guns’ that maybe if we had a mandatory one year military service <or community service if you do not want military> for everyone then everyone would be properly trained as well as properly assessed.

–

note:

The Swiss require part-time military service from each male citizen between the ages of 18 to 34. Women may serve voluntarily. In a nation of eight million people, about 20,000 soldiers a year attend basic training for 18 to 21 weeks

–

Do I truly want that? No.

Do I truly believe it would resolve a shitload of the issues we have now with regard to guns and violence? Yes.

I am all for maintaining our constitutional rights, but, please, PLEASE, could gun rights people think about the context in which the constitution was crafted.

In the end.

I am all for responsible people owning hand guns. That is their choice and, as a country, we deemed that as one of our inviolate rights.

I am all for responsible mental health profiling.

I am all for a responsible society.

What I am NOT for is irresponsible quibbling and inaction after a shooting tragedy. It is a complex issue that demands something more than a pithy simple solution soundbite. It is a complex issue that demands we do something because that is what adults do to protect their children.

I am sure I am missing something and I am relatively sure I will come back and rewrite portions of this but this topic makes me so angry and so sad at the exact same time I just gotta stop for now.

========================

“A tapestry is being stitched

story by story,

step by step, thread by thread

Pictures of her life come alive

with threads of gold,

of silver, of royal purple,

of hope, of faith, of love

her story unfolding

in the fabric, the knitted

tapestry of her life”

–

Raymond Foss: threads of her journey

==============

Well.

All women should think of their lives this way.

I have no idea where I found this … nor why I was anywhere where I would find this poem.

But I am glad I did.

It is nice. And it is positive … not dark … but colorful in its hopefulness. And it captures the essence of personal stories & storytelling.

In today’s world we have a nasty tendency to rush our ways through stories trying to showcase a tapestry instead of showing the weave & the threads. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know. Everyone says “time is the new currency” and “shorter attention spans.” That’s … well … bullshit. People will pay attention, for as long as it takes, if it is a good story.

A great story is built thread by thread and time is only driven by how quickly, or how slowly, you showcase the beauty & intrigue of each thread and how it fits into the greater weave.

I see gobs of people talking about storytelling online, on twitter, most talking about brands & brand heroes and authenticity and … well … a lot of mumbo jumbo that suggests there is some formula.

Yeah.

Sure.

I know there are effective ways of telling a story but … well … if you just took some care to build the story step by step, thread by thread, permitting the pictures come to life in rich & vivid colors … wouldn’t that beat any formula or “should do’s” that some marketing storyteller expert tells you?

People are inherently storytellers … maybe we should just get out of their way and let them tell stories.

Regardless.

Yeah.

All women should think of their lives this way.

——

I googled and found Foss has a site called Poetry Where You Live: http://raymondafoss.blogspot.com/ .

It has over 13,000 of his poems and almost 1000 of his photographs if you are interested.

====================

“We miss out on the value of the message itself as a vehicle for driving virality.”

–

Jonah Berger

==================

“Say something meaningful in an interesting way.”  

–

Bruce McTague

<author of “the shortest business book ever written”>

===================

So.

This is about how we have a simplification crisis.

Ok.

This is actually about how we have an oversimplification crisis.

This crisis is making us … well … stupid.

Ok.

This crisis is actually making us stupider.

Look.

What I mean is that in a world in which we know that everything is complex, and more often than not, more complex than our own pea like brains can handle, we unerringly swerve toward simplistic headline conclusions and oversimplifications and absurd bullet point conclusions. We have hollowed out communication of the truly meaningful parts.

This surface skating intellectualism just makes us stupider.

Now.

We may convince ourselves we do this simply as a mental survival technique but I would argue, and I do, that it actually is the opposite of a survival technique … it is destructive behavior. It is destructive in that it destroys the overall thinking of what is actually a population quite capable of being intelligent, if not intellectual.

Yeah.

It makes us stupider.

I thought about this the other day because I have conversations with some incredibly smart and talented people who know a shitload more about more things than I could ever imagine and this topic came up. I note the smartness of these people to highlight how unusual it is that I can say something that actually can make a group of these people stop, be silent and then go “hmmmmmmmmmm.”

It is a rare thing.

And, yet, it happened the other day.

How did it happen? After some extensive conversation on North Korea, global trade challenges, Trump <of course> & foreign policy we opened the discussion to “what is the biggest challenge facing us …”

I spoke up & my thought drew some <thoughtful> silence.

I said “oversimplification.” <insert group silence afterwards>

To me … oversimplification misleads and creates bad decisions and, worse, creates bad thinking <which leads to bad opinions, attitudes and thoughts>. To me we have created this oversimplification shithole we currently reside in. And I offered a couple reasons why I believe this is happening <I did this because if you can identify the issues you can find solutions>:

We have convinced ourselves we do not have time for complex

Going back to the ‘destructive behavior’ thought I shared earlier …  oversimplification is anything but efficient. It actually demands more time in a variety of ways. The two simplest ways it does so is <1> the time we over invest attempting to isolate the simplest version of what is anything but simple and <2> the amount of time & energy we have to invest explain everything beyond the simplistic tripe initially offered, to thwart misguided behavior & reactions to the oversimplified offering & to redefine the oversimplification into bifurcated parts of the oversimplified whole.

We do this destructive behavior because we have convinced ourselves that we all have shorter, and shortened, attention spans.

We do this destructive behavior because we have convinced ourselves that people best retain “one thing.”

We do this destructive behavior because we have convinced ourselves in our perceived “never enough time” world we have to topline everything <to fit everything in>.

We do this destructive behavior because we have convinced ourselves that in a blizzard of nonstop things constantly vying for our attention the only way to capture someone’s attention is in some pithy soundbite.

Basically we have convinced ourselves that hollowing out an idea and a thought actually benefits not only the idea and the thought … but us! This is fucking nuts. Absolutely crazy.

Unfortunately, and truthfully, some things are just too complex to communicate in a sound bite or in 3 seconds or less. No matter how brief and simple you want to make it … well … it is neither brief nor simple. It is complex and sometimes the opposite of brief.

It isn’t just about telling a story.

Nor is it just about finding influencers to broker the story.

Nor is it just about practical value.

Nor is it just about emotion.

Unfortunately … it is a combination of those things. Yeah. Effective communication is … uhm … complex.

We have convinced ourselves that simple & simplicity is reflective of common sense.

I admit.

I have never been shy about calling bullshit on the simplistic tripe being spewed under the guise of ‘expert advice’ or ‘common sense.’

That said. I will suggest no topic has  been tortured more by common sense than simplicity.

Common sense suggests the simplest thing is the best.

Common sense suggests it is easier for a person to remember one thing and one word.

Common sense suggests in a complex world we humans crave simplicity.

Common sense suggests in a busy world we only have time for simplicity.

Common sense suggests a lot of nonsensical bullshit.

I will not argue that making something as simple as it can be is good but … well … simplistically … oversimplification is misleading and ultimately creates bad less-than-informed decision making AND thinking.

We have used this common sense simplicity bullshit for one simple reason — it serves us well in challenging the most established legitimate rule of Life & things. And that rule is “the world is complex.”

We embrace simplistic solution after simplistic solution, all labeled as ‘common sense ideas’, which are often counter to what an expert would suggest <which is often deemed “too complex”>…  only to find 90% of the time common sense was not only just simply wrong but also made us stupider.

I have written about simplicity and the complexity of finding the simplest way to communicate the complex many times and as I do so today I would remind everyone of what Jonah Berger offered us for a nifty sound bite compilation of sound bites to create a sound bite philosophy:

Here are his STEPPS for making anything go viral:

–          Social Currency: We share things that make us look good (even if that means pictures of our cat).

–          Triggers: Easily memorable information means its top of mind and tip of the tongue.

–          Emotion: When we care, we share.

–          Public: Built to show, built to grow.

–          Practical Value: News people can use.

–          Stories: People are inherent storytellers, and all great brands also learn to tell stories. Information travels under the guise of idle chatter.

And while this Berger thought is about “making things go viral” it is actually about finding the simplest way to communicate complex shit in a way that it is actually retained in a cognitive way.

I would also note that this dos not reflect “one simple thing”, it does reflect the complexity of reality and the mind and it reflects how to … well … help make us less stupider.

Ah.

Cognitive way.

As in “we actually understand what it is we heard, saw or read.” That is an important thing to ponder because over simplification cheats cognitive value as well as the value of whatever it is you have to offer people. Simplicity may be “memorable” but it doesn’t really lodge itself in anyone’s mind & memory in any meaningful way.

In fact.

The less depth you offer in your oversimplification the more you are at the mercy of the mind that decides to remember you. What I mean by that is if you don’t provide the depth the mind will create some perceptions around whatever it lodges in the pea like brain.

Uhm.

This means the pea like brain lodges only what is actually the brain’s perceptions of what to remember and not what you <a> know to be true, <b> think it may be important for that mind to know or <c> want the brain to store away in its mind.

I imagine what I am talking about is some wacky version of awareness versus engagement … but that shit is bullshit too.

It’s all bullshit because we should be turning away from simplification and engagement and connection and simply focus on “say what you need to say to persuade someone to think or do what you want them to think or do.”

All the other bullshit just confuses things.

If I tell someone that ‘being noticed ‘ is the most important thing, than some asshat is gonna come up with some zany oversimplified shit that gets noticed but doesn’t effectively communicate one thing <let alone all the things you may have deemed truly important in the beginning>.

I admit … I balk at a lot of the bullshit offered online about simplification <and the importance thereof> because … well … it is an oversimplification which diminishes the importance of ‘communicating depth’ and increases the importance of ‘being noticed.’

I do not like that equation. Effective communication is not a binary choice.

Effective communication, as with almost everything, is a complex challenge in communicating a complex thing well – because if you can communicate a couple things well it actually increases the perceived value <which then inevitably creates a stronger “memory stamp” … with value attached!>.

Which brings me back to our oversimplification crisis.

I could clearly argue that in today’s fragmented messaging world where information multiplies at light speed and a day still remains 24 hours that we humans are constantly honing our “incoming thoughts” filtering mechanisms.

I could also argue that our filtering system, as it exists today, sucks. We have dumbed down our communication and thinking behavior to such a hollowed out status the majority of time we skate along the superficial irrelevant surface of reality.

If we are lucky, the ice doesn’t crack.

But the truth is that oversimplification only offers the thinnest of ice to skate on and inevitably we fall thru the ice … over and over and over again.

Uhm.

And in the business world falling through the ice is bad. It is, metaphorically, making a bad decision based on shallow thinking and paying for it.

Yeah.

I did say the biggest issue we face is oversimplification.

I said that because if I can solve this, if I can have smarter people communicating complex things more smartly and I can have more everyday schmucks understanding that simple solutions are more often like trying to place a square peg in a round hole … well … I think it unravels a shitload of other problems we face in today’s world.

I imagine I am arguing that if more people are less stupid and more aware of the reality of things the more effective & efficient we will be in addressing the difficulties reality tends to place in front of us.

In the end.

I will go back to where I began … “say something meaningful in an interesting way.”

There are no rules nor boundaries in this statement.

You use as many words, or as few, as you need to say … to say something meaningful in an interesting way with the intent for it to be understood … and, ultimately, persuade someone to think something. I would say that the hollower the communication the less true persuasion engagement occurs and, conversely, the fuller the communication the more true persuasion engagement occurs.

Period.

==============

“The thing you are most afraid to write.

Write that.”

—-

Nayyirah Waheed

=========================

“I’m not going to censor myself to comfort your ignorance.”

—-

Unknown

==================

I get knocked down, but I get up again.

You’re never gonna keep me me down.

–

Chumbawamba

=========================

Well.

Ok.

I am an online contrarian blogger.

Ok.

I am a contrarian in general <blogging, online and offline>.

The difference with writing online is that … well … whatever you are, or are not, becomes part of the public domain and public opinion.

I have been called a pseudo intellectual <I am not>.

My writing has been called a “painful read” <it is on occasion>.

I have been told I am wrong <when I actually used research and facts>.

I have been told I am right <when I was actually being sarcastic>.

I have inspired a number of ‘contrarian to my contrarian’ rebuttal articles written <basically suggesting my contrarianism was stupid>.

Heck.

I have even been called stupid <of which I will gladly wear that badge on occasion>.

I admit … I am not a writer I simply play one online.

And you know what? So do … well … everyone who writes anything online. And, yes, some are actual writers but without doing any research let me suggest that 95% of what you read online is created by a non-writer.

I will also suggest, without doing any research, 94.9% of everyone online is a critic <the other 5.1% are trying to make some money by publishing meaningless crap>.

To be clear.

Being a contrarian does not means doing and thinking in unconventional ways.

It just means you have a tendency to challenge the accepted, the status quo and the lazy thinking that is inherent and often seen as harmless.

Being a contrarian is more about challenging thinking … your own and everyone else’s. It is more about tearing apart what is known and unknown … your own and everyone else’s.

This point is really important … the truest of true contrarians aren’t stubborn with regard to their own views … rather … stubbornly challenging what they knew yesterday today.

I tend to believe we stubbornly challenge yesterday because, inherent in our weird ‘being a contrarian’ view of things & Life, we never underestimate the importance of abandoning the unnecessary shit. It is also quite possible we abandon some things before their true life expectancy.

This is sometimes a challenging way of life.

Let’s face it … a shitload of people don’t like a reality in which everything created can be logically torn apart.

And a shitload more of those people don’t like an online reality where they can read and see it all being torn apart.

I certainly have found, as a generalization, that most people don’t really think about shit.

Now.

It isn’t that people don’t know how to think <although lazy logic is fairly common> it is just easier to not have to think. It is quicker to not invest a lot of energy thinking about shit … and seemingly makes everyday life look a lot more efficient.

And, yeah, even when people do think … they, actually … almost all of us, myself included, tend to go with the path of least resistance thinking through things in ways that takes the least effort and ultimately reach a conclusion.

I believe contrarians may fight this natural impulse a little bit better than the majority of people.

Regardless.

The one thing I know for sure as a contrarian is that you get a response from other people.

And, I admit, as long as whatever I am thinking seems to make sense to myself … well … I can live with whatever response I may get.

And … whew … the responses certainly vary.

Some commenters love me, some hate me and some just want to send me to some gulag and never be heard from ever again <by the way … that is different than hating … because haters like to come along for the ride and hate on a continuous basis>.

I do note that one of the aligning features of haters and ‘hate ideology’ appears to be a relatively unhealthy relationship with their ‘caps lock’ key.

Anyway.

I will not bore you with a sampling of comments but suffice it to say they either think you are <a> full of shit, <b> a shit, <c> dumb as shit, or — interestingly — <d> look like shit.

I will admit.

I do not solicit comments … and a part of me wants to say …“if I wanted your opinion, I’d call the nuthouse and ask to speak with you.”

But I understand that contrarianism is annoying.

And I understand that not all annoying is created equal <and not all contrarians apply their contrianism as I do>.

Generally speaking … there are two basic types of contrarianism:

• There is “shut down” contrarianism.

• There is “enlightenment” contrarianism.

Although contrarians may behave in similar ways an American psychologist, Robert Sternberg, points out that not all contrarians are the same:

There’s a spectrum of behaviour, ranging from the person who’s irritated by consensus and bureaucracy, to the type who thinks rules are made to be broken and the counter-intuitive thinker whose intelligence gives them a different perspective on life.

The more creative a person is, the more contrarian they are likely to be.

‘There are also, though, contrarians who aren’t creative, they’re just disagreeable. And there are those who get their self-esteem from being contrary.’

Anyway.

Let me explain my two versions.

Shut down.

Some people reflexively take the contrarian view. They simply say “no” to whatever idea they are countering.

If you say white, the reflexively contrarian says black. If you say up, the reflexively contrarian says down. It doesn’t matter what you say or believe, the contrarian has to inform you (and anyone else who will listen) that there is another–opposite–view.

Oh.

And they like to do this ALL THE FRICKIN’ TIME.

Suffice it to say … there is nothing to be gained by always taking the contrarian view.

This person almost feels like it is an obligation to be contrarian and to always be the devils advocate.

Yes.

Some stupid shit needs to be clearly debunked and … well … shut down.

But.

No one likes their thoughts simply shut down.

I will admit.

Contrarians who rely on ‘shut down contrianism’ are most likely assholes.

They do not seek to inform or enlighten … just to make themselves looks as smart as possible.

That is the definition of ‘asshole.’

enlighten

Personally … I tend to like to use my contrarianism to make myself useful as a problem solver or to enhance thinking <make an idea ‘fuller & more robust’> rather than simply being disagreeable.

This sometimes comes to life in pointing out an exception <but if you do that you are also responsible for saying what that exception means to the idea & thinking rather than using it solely to puncture someone else’s thought> and sometimes it comes to Life in a “have you thought about …?” type thought.

I tend to believe this is more of a troublemaker than an asshole. But good trouble in general.

Anyway.

Whether I am a ‘shut down’ or an ‘enlighten’ contrarian … most people just lump me in with all the other irascible contrarians.

Therefore.

I am kind of used to being berated & criticized by strangers as a contrarian. And being online and doing it simply means a greater depth & breadth of beration <I made that word up> and criticism.

I imagine if you were not used to it … well … it could take your breath away.

People sometimes write shit with such deranged passion & intensity you sometimes sit back and think “are they fucking sane?”

And, yet, these are the same people who, if you hunted them down on Iinstagram or facebook or tumblr, are these smiling milquetoast people with families, pets and inspirational quotes.

======

“I am constantly trying to communicate something incommunicable, to explain something inexplicable, to tell about something I only feel in my bones and which can only be experienced in those bones.”

—

Franz Kafka

======

Look.

Everyone utilizes whatever intelligence they have to the best of their ability and most likely in some different way than you … and me. I would like to think contrarianism is simply a different version of using whatever intelligence resides in my pea like brain.

What I do know is that contrarianism is always stimulating and threaded with some conflict.

While many people want to avoid conflict, there are braver we happy few who merrily can’t help but disagree with friends, colleagues or experts. We can’t help it because thinking is our drug — some good and some bad..

Ok.

Maybe it is our oxygen.

Being an online contrarian I certainly cannot be accused of exploiting my contrarianism <although several people have suggested I am a troll being paid by some unidentified cabal>.

and while i have been tempted to exploit my contrianism by writing a book i realized one day that my most successful book idea is … well either a 2 page book or an index card:

“Say something meaningful in an interesting way.”

–

Me

<author of “the shortest business book ever written”>

And I certainly don’t think I should be paid attention to as well as I am not sure what I write should be paid attention to. I am relatively sure, in most cases, I and my thoughts are kind of beside the point. My thoughts wander aimlessly online bumping into people here & there.

Therefore, I imagine my only measure of success is if any contrarian thing I wrote actually inspires even one person to think … well … that’s all that matters.

The rest is all kind of irrelevant.

I imagine I am really not different from many other contrarians. I also imagine that the following three thoughts which seem to encapsulate me and my contrarianism would be embraced by any and all contrarians:

“always looks ahead and don’t dwell on the past, the best is yet to come.”

“do not go gentle into the good night.”

“I had a lover’s quarrel with the world.”

In the rough & tumble world of thinking contrarians are fairly resilient.

We write things that some people are a little afraid to write.

We censor ourselves a little less.

We see ignorance as the enemy … our own as well as others.

And, in the infamous words of Chumbawumba, we get knocked down and just get back up again.

Well.

Contrarians need to stick together … or … well … stick up for each other.

My newest contrarian hero is a guy named Jonah Berger … for several reasons.

First. Because not only has he mastered the statement of the obvious:

“We miss out on the value of the message itself as a vehicle for driving virality.”

–

Jonah Berger

 

… secondly, he also supports it with research <albeit some of us have been stating it, or something similar to it, for years> … and third, and most importantly, he is using all those trite ‘here is the secret to success’ business books as his foil.

Jonah has a new business book called “Contagious” which I will admit I will never buy but I will also admit probably does as nice a job of outlining some basics of effective communication.

<Contagious: Why Things Catch On by Jonah Berger. At 32, the assistant professor of marketing at University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business is carving out a corner of academia for himself in the study of social epidemics, or how products, ideas, and behaviors become popular>

He even has a nifty sound bite compilation of sound bites to create a sound bite philosophy:

Here are his STEPPS for making anything go viral:

–          Social Currency: We share things that make us look good (even if that means pictures of our cat).

–          Triggers: Easily memorable information means it’s top of mind and tip of the tongue.

–          Emotion: When we care, we share.

–          Public: Built to show, built to grow.

–          Practical Value: News people can use.

–          Stories: People are inherent storytellers, and all great brands also learn to tell stories. Information travels under the guise of idle chatter.

Catchy isn’t it?

Basically he has used aspects from what every one of the top advertising agencies currently teach, utilize and suggest on their own websites <albeit they do it in mini sound bites> and compiled them into a list.

But.

Here is the real genius.

This is nothing new.

Story, Emotion, and Practical Value have been the mainstay of the communications business for years … nope … decades. Let’s even say for a century.

It was the cornerstone of everything I was taught in the advertising business beginning in the 1980’s.

Don’t believe that?

You can visit the advertising archives at Duke University and find this same information in archival information from the 1930’s, 40’s and 50’s <in some nifty in house advertising>.

Anyway.

All that said … what makes him a bigger genius? <the part that makes him my newest hero>.

He is deflating all the tripe ‘The Tipping Point’ and ‘Made to Stick’ and all those other bestselling business books have been peddling to us and the stuff I know I have been kicked out of boardrooms for suggesting is sound bite tripe.

His book actually seems to also in a contrarian way attack what businesses have been battling for several years now … how to handle what Napoleon first suggested …

“un croquis vaut mieux qu’un long discours.”

<a sketch is better than a long discourse>

Now.

Sketch <or brevity>. The business world has gone wacko over this thought … going to absurd lengths to create the ultimate soundbite under the belief “a person will only remember one thing” or “all people have the attention span of a gnat so tell them what you need to tell them in 3 seconds or less.”

Well.

Unfortunately, and truthfully, some things are just too complex to communicate in a sound bite or in 3 seconds or less. Effective communication <or ‘contagious communication’> would be one of those topics.

No matter how brief and simple you want to make it … well … it is neither brief nor simple. It is complex and sometimes the opposite of brief.

It isn’t just about telling a story.

Nor is it just about finding influencers to broker the story.

Nor is it just about practical value.

Nor is it just about emotion.

Unfortunately it is a combination of those things.

Regardless.

I have been tempted to write several business books … one even on simplicity and effective communications. And I just saw some of the high falutin’ folk with high falutin’ titles at SiegalGale <one of the top branding companies in the universe … yes … almost solar system-esque in their expertise> are publishing something about Simplicity … Simple: Conquering the Crisis of Complexity <I am hoping they cite me from one of my simplicity posts … but not holding my breath>.

They could have used something from any of these …

simple complicated complicated simple

simplicity

simplicity: the project brief

By the way … it is probably a ‘simple truth’ with regard to simplicity but the main issue is not trying to find the simple within a crisis of complexity but rather not making something that is extremely simply into something complicated <or complex>.

Anyway.

Let me explain the trouble I ran into writing my business book on ‘effective simplicity.’

It was a short book.

Two pages <on index cards in fact>.

Page 1:

say something meaningful.

Page 2:

say that something in an interesting way.

And then because about the only additional advice I give someone is to be ruthless editors with regard to communication and words <sketch instead of discourse Napoleon thing> … well … I simplified it into one index card:

“Say something meaningful in an interesting way.” – Me <author of “the shortest business book ever written”>

Shit.

There is my book.

Save yourself a boatload of money on all those business books.

There it is.

Do that and you have as much of a chance of creating something contagious <or drive ‘message virality’ to use a Jonah term>, or made to stick or tipping cows or points or people or whatever.

There are no formulas nor are there any checklists.

It isn’t really about telling a story <although you can if it is interesting> and it really isn’t about simplified in a short sweet concise way <although you can if a long type driven story isn’t meaningful or compelling>. It is just about doing what is right at that time in that place.

You can use lots of words or few words.

You can use white space or little space.

You can use a great compelling visual or no visual at all.

You cannot use words or pictures or stories that say something meaningless.

You cannot be uninteresting.

Oh. If only it were all this simple.