Too XYZ Classic: Screw Cartography

Just over a year ago, I published this post, decrying the rampant need for people, organizations and institutions to put themselves "on the map".

Success, and even fame are one thing. But they ought to be the result of working towards a mission. That mission, I said a year ago, and maintain today, cannot be fame and notoriety in its own right. If being  "put on the map" if the underlying impetus for everything you do, you aren't doing much.

Since I published this I have announced the start of my own theatre company, The Parapet Players. I am currently in the midst of building a new website. I am revising my first novel, and outlining a second. I seek my freelance writing work. And yet in each of these cases my goal is to create a quality product, not to "get on the map".

I'd like to be on the map someday in any and all of these endeavors, of course. But I simply won't rearrange what I have in order to go right for the map. I should get on the map because of what I have done, not because I have pursued a course of action designed to do so.

You wouldn't believe how many times I've seen something that is established go to pot because the decide they need to "expand" and get on this map. And don't even get me started on placed that aren't even established, who decide the answer is to shoot for the map right away.

And my old high school? Their plans to build a new facility which I mentioned in the original post? They have now been totally abandoned. They will instead take over the facility of middle school that has moved out of the area. That just about sums it up as far as they and their "map" are concerned.

How important is "getting on the map" to you?

Too XYZ Classic: Look Before You Melee

In this post, originally published here on the blog on March 18, 2010, I used video game playing as a metaphor. I did so to show how effective it can be at times to go slow and finesse one's way to success. I have to say that in the intervening time since I wrote the post I have become more adept at strategic approaches to certain things. The temptation and inclination to melee, however, is still present. It's something of which I have to remain aware as I go forward with my plans. (Though I still have gone to melee, not without some success, in the nearly two years since I wrote this piece.

What I didn't specifically mention in the post, but which I nonetheless find applicable to same is the notion some people have to be always moving. Always changing. Always rushing into the next big thing. Brand changing, loyalty changing, spend two years creating something only to drop it 4 days after it's official, and move on to something else to build. For something that is "keeping it fresh". To me that is but another form of ill advised melee attack. Blasting your way through life for the sake of blasting and getting to the top of...whatever.

I didn't have a huge readership the first time, and as you can see, little commentary. But I count it as one of my favorite posts because it illuminates one of my favorite lessons over the last few years. A lesson I try to apply each day in some way.

The Silence Between the Notes

Have you ever been to a gathering wherein somebody strikes some kind of humor cord and says/does something that gets the group roaring, but then ruins it by making the story, joke, or stunt go on far longer than it should have? To the point it becomes stale, predictable, annoying, and of course unfunny? Can't you just feel the "entertainer" milking the room for more laughs, more clapping, more attention? Isn't it pathetic? Wouldn't it have been much better if that person had just stopped about five minutes ago, when the laughter was filling the room, instead of now, when half the room has moved on, and the half still laughing is doing so mostly out of nervous politeness?

I think you know this person. And the term "quit while you're ahead" means nothing to them.

Nor do any of the following proverbs which, though slightly different on the surface do in fact advise the same thing:

"Brevity is the soul of wit."

"It is the silence between the notes that makes the music."

"The space between the bars keeps the tiger in."

"Bow out gracefully."

I am sure you sense the pattern now, and can think of even more examples of this sentiment. That sentiment being one of perfectly timed restraint.

Believe it or not, my friends consider me quite a funny person at times. This may come as a shock to some of you, because you may not be able to imagine me working a room for laughs. And you would be correct. I never work a room for laughs. I don't say things that are even intended to be funny or witty every chance I get, and even when I do, I say them and leave it at that. If a whole room is laughing at something I say, I don't feel the need to keep saying it, or adding on to it to get even more laughs. Not that I have never went on a sustained presentation that others found continuously amusing, but in those cases the story or stunt had on obvious beginning, middle and end. People laughed at the journey. But in most cases, I am content with the knowledge that at a given moment, I made several people laugh and that a moment in the future will come when I do so again.

Even though I could probably coax more laughs out of whatever group of people I find laughing at my antics, hitting them over the head with how funny I am being feels like an insult to the wondrous, mysterious honor one receives when they make people laugh on purpose. No, it's the down time of quiet simplicity or quasi-stoicism that takes place between the amusing moments that makes the laughs more special. That goes for professional entertainers as well. Few comedians are more annoying than the ones who are one constant, loud, drilling scream of joke.

Put another way, the secret to being funny is being willing to sometimes not be funny. To have an "off" setting. Even most of the time, I am not funny to most people. And because I embrace the times when nobody is laughing, and I am not trying to make them do so, I get more out of the times when I am going for the occasional laugh.

Not that this applies only to humor and wit. I think one of the essential ingredients to any kind of success is to not be "on" all of the damn time. By that I don't mean making a mistake, or being imperfect in your efforts, which will happen to everyone. I mean a total cessation of effort. Whatever you enjoy, create, or desire cannot take up 100% of your focus. You can't always be selling, advocating, relieving or whatever. Your success in any given endeavor is directly proportional to how willing you are to spend time not being/doing/saying whatever it is that drives you.

Want to be funny? Take time to be serious. Do you want people to be respectful to your position? Throw in some humor sometimes. Want to be generous? You'll have to learn to be selfish at times. 

The list could go on forever, but it doesn't need to in order to make my point, which is to know what you like, work to get it, but be willing to engage in times when you don't have it. Not due to circumstances or luck, but due to your own conscious desire to refrain from that which you seek. You'll be better off for it the next time you actively seek what you want.

Do you ever choose to not engage in something, to create that "space between the bars"? 

Seven Things a Guaranteed Success Wouldn't Care About

Rejection and Failure
If it didn't at all bother us to look stupid, to not accomplish what we set out to do, or to be told we were not good enough for that play, that magazine, that girlfriend, we'd have just as much energy to invest in the 500th attempt at something as we did for the first or second attempt. And with nothing to make us even a bit reluctant, we could get to attempt number 500 in half the time as it would take when we need to pause for a while and recover from the failure.

How Long Something Takes
This is a cousin to rejection and failure, but need not include either one. Sometimes we know that a specific undertaking will be time consuming right from the start. Even as small success is made ever so often, and we have not had particular obstacles thrown in our way, the nature of a mission, goal, or assignment requires so much of our present and our future that the sheer size of the time investment can freeze us, or make us abandon it right away. But if we never cared for a even a moment about how long it took to accomplish something important, even if it took 25 years, we'd be more inclined to take more journeys towards more destinations.

The Status Quo
I myself am already quite well positioned to not give a damn about this one. I am after all, Too XYZ for most conventions. My success has not been anything near where I want it to be in most aspects of my life, and that may or may not be because of the select places wherein I do let convention, have too much influence over what I say and do. But when when we go forward with an idea with not even the slightest consideration for how well it may fit in with what everyone else is doing and has done for decades or centuries, our focus can be 100% dedicated to realizing what we have set out to do, and 0% of our energies are lost to determining how to adjust it to outside expectations.

The Presence of People in Your Life
I have often written of introverts, and by extension have commented on extroverts. How the former sometimes wants nothing more than to be left alone when crowded, and how the latter wants nothing more than to be surrounded by lots of people when left alone. (Except of course, when the opposite is true.) But what if, whether introvert or extrovert you didn't much care one way or the other about who was or was not around for the lion's share of your time? House full of people? Fine. Haven't seen a soul in weeks? Fine. To put it another way, imagine if your own sense of happiness, value and enjoyment remained unchanged by who did or did not come to visit you? Was a constant even in the midst of guests? Sustainable through outward abandonment by friends? It would mean that your entire perception of yourself, and hence your dedication to what is important to you would not in the slightest way be determined by the thoughtfulness of others. The decisions, (often cold, thoughtless and random) to come in and out of your life would have no bearing on same. That's a freedom most people can only imagine.

Sleeping Conditions
One of the things I most envy in any person is not their talent, or their looks, or their money. Those are all sometimes a strong second place, but in truth, I would rather be able to so as a few people I know can do and just "decide" to sleep. My father it seems was one of these people, as are a few of my friends. They find a bed, couch, cot, or if needs be a bathtub, fold their arms, close their eyes and are asleep for the night. I shit you not. Maybe there is a party going on. Maybe a freight train goes by every hour. Barking dog. Could be pitch black or maybe a neon sign from the strip club across the street blinks into the room for the duration of the nighttime hours. It just doesn't matter to such people. When it is time to sleep, they do it.

Imagine the power and convenience of this. You could go on any trip, find yourself in any circumstance, be spontaneous and go an on adventure, or your presence could be required somewhere odd in the case of some kind of emergency. And when the time allowed and you made the choice, you could lie down and decide it was time to sleep, without caring where you are or what was going on. You could recharge your body and mind nearly at will, and be ready to go full blast the following morning, no matter what. It sounds like a minor thing, but imagine the near infinite flexibility of a life wherein you could get the sleep you needed no matter what.

Where You Live
Not unrelated to, but more important than not caring where you sleep is not caring where you live. You will of course do a lot of sleeping where you live, but you will also do a lot of the other mundane everyday things at home. A lot of time, thought an heartache is put into where one should live. (As someone who is hoping to move to another apartment before the end of the year, I am well aware of this.) But supposing you had no living preferences? You could feel at home anywhere outside of a battle zone. (Desert, urban, or otherwise.) You could go where you could afford to go. Whatever was open and available, you'd take. No view? No problem? Third floor, eighth floor, dirt floor, it would all be the same to you.

The ability to imbue any domicile with the trappings and spirit of "home" is indicative of someone who can create their own atmosphere, or more accurately carries one with them wherever they go. Someone such as this would never be homesick, never long to return to someplace they left, and could more quickly feel a part of whatever community in which they found themselves. In so doing they would be able to mine the benefits of blending in far easier than others.

Success
Yes. It is now time for the irony portion of our program today. But consider what sort of freedom one might gain if they were not so much concerned about whether or not they are a success. And I do not just mean financial matters. Imagine someone who could care less if they are seen as a thought leader, spiritual guru, social commentator, or famous anything. What if someone were to be concerns only with being kind, and feeling warmth? not from other people, because that would dip into the previous category of not giving a damn about the company you keep. But warmth of spirit.

Suppose that someone cared only for increasing the amount of light in the world, whether or not it got them a job? What if a person could live in a homeless shelter, or in the proverbial "mother's basement" and gave not a second thought to whether or not his friends, potential mates, society, a particular church, or the blogosphere considered him a success? Would that person not eventually be free to spend his time however he damn well pleased, with whomever the hell he wanted, without having to worry about personal brands, rate races, nailing the interview, pitching the article, or any of that damn noise that keeps most of us up at nights? Would they night eventually find themselves in a place that also valued such an approach, surrounded by like minded people? And what is success but the ability to improve both one's life and somehow the lives of others or even the world through the use of one's unique powers and talents? Success would come to someone who didn't care to look for it.

 ********************

In conclusion, a person who could pay no attention at any time to all seven of these things would, I feel, be nearly bullet proof. I don't think such a person exists as a whole. I am certainly not he, as I can lay claim to apathy for only a portion of what I describe here. I imagine that would be true for most people, as many of these things are very seductive, prevalent, and possibly genetic. Yet as I have thought about it I have determined that although no one person may fit the bill entirely, each person is in fact made better if they can find a way not to care at all about at least one or two of these. If you can do that, you are still far ahead of most people in the Western World, who eat sleep, breath and piss all seven of these things.

Did I miss anything? What would you add to the list?

AuGuest: My Response to Diana

In her AuGuest post on Monday, Diana Antholis uses her experience in graduate school as a backdrop. Having never been to graduate school myself, I can't relate to this aspect of the post. Yet one of the reasons I liked this post so much is that the perspectives she provides in same are applicable to many situations in which one might find themselves overwhelmed, alone, or afraid.

For her it was graduate school. For you it may be a new job. Or you decision to move across the country, or start your own business. Whatever it is that made, or perhaps still makes you feel a bit paralyzed or afraid, let's take a look at the five things Diana mentioned which helped her "avoid insanity" while attending graduate school.

"I had to learn to learn to not become so emotionally involved in school."


Emotions are a wonderful, important and natural thing for a human being to experience. Unlike some success gurus of the current generation, I feel this includes anger, sadness, and fear. We mustn't punish ourselves for feeling emotions. Yet at the same time a large undertaking sometimes cannot proceed if we attach those understandable emotions to them and allow them to define the experience too much. Even when something is very important to us, there is a time and place for the emotion of said experience.

Consider emergency room doctors. Dedicated professionals who obvious have an intense passion for healing and medicine. But emotional investment in each patient, procedure and judgement call is impossible. Such people would be destroyed in short order. To best serve their passion, they must create a certain emotional distance on a day to day basis. Not become robots, but rather stage coach drivers. Holding the reigns and making sure the powerful horses go where they are supposed to go.

"I had to learn to create a balance between school and personal life."


I have learn from my previous conversations with Diana that she is an extrovert, and unless you are visiting Too XYZ for the very first time right now, you know that I am an introvert. Yet it is crucial for both types to maintain a personal life. Diana may have gone out on a Saturday night during grad school whereas I would probably visit a single family and talk for a few hours. Yet the point is we must remember that personal time. Maybe yours would entail swimming laps at the YMCA once a day, or reading a book all by yourself with your cats. Personal time is exactly that; personal. What it consists of is 100% up to you, but the key is you have to honor its value.

Some of the hardest people to get to know, some of the hardest to love are those who are always sacrificing personal time in pursuit of a degree, a job, a house. Or even a spouse. If we are investing so much in an endeavor that we become convinced there is no time to be had away from same, we have already become immersed too deeply. The old Chinese proverb says it is the space between the bars that holds the tiger in. In other words we can offer more to our mission when we remember there is more to our life other than the mission. We step away for a while and come back to it refreshed, and ready to tackle even more. The alternative is burning out, and that suits nobody.

"I had to stay calm."


"Keep calm and carry on" was a phrase on posters plastered all over London during World War II. An exquisite example of British simplicity and determination during some of the most trying time that nation has ever known, the phrase has recently made a bit of a pop-culture resurgence. Possibly it is nostalgia at work here, but I like to think that it is due to a slow but certain realization in our frenzied, uncertain, rapidly changing smart phone culture that remaining calm is more important than ever. Nothing can be accomplished from a state of panic. It may be part of our reptilian brain response to panic, but if we hope to get further than a reptile under attack would get, we must remember we are creatures of higher reasoning. We do this be keeping as calm as we can as often as possible.

You may not be facing the Luftwaffe, but it can feel like it when everything in your world feels like it is blowing up or falling apart around you. But if you keep calm and carry on you are far more likely to find either a solution to the problem, or an escape to another set of circumstances. Remaining calm reminds you that you are still alive, can still exert at least some control, and don't need to surrender to what appears at first to be chaos.

"I had to stay out of the drama."


I don't know if this one, or the previous admonition to stay calm is the most difficult for many of us. "Drama" in this context seems so seductive to so many people. I wonder why. Gossip, personal attacks, making a scene, going nuts. Squabbling. Backbiting and manipulation. Accusations. Even the best of us get sucked in to such a maelstrom at times. I theorize that being the center of such drama is a manifestation of a deep, latent desire for significance and attention we feel we lack. Participating in such drama from the outside I think is an indication that deep down we want to have influence on the world around us. I affect change, and not necessarily for the better.

Or maybe this is also a reptilian thing, and fighting and screaming is in our DNA. I only know this; that drama will happen. It too is a nature part of the human experience. Though some claim they "avoid drama" at all costs, I don't know how practical that is. Yet when we see drama we must be extra careful about becoming a part of it. It saps our energies, wastes our time, and, worse of all it has a bubble effect; when you find yourself in the midst of it your entire universe seems to be confined to the particulars of said drama. It becomes almost impossible to see, contemplate or engage in anything not connected with the drama. And if that happens, how do you move forward? How do you keep calm and carry on?

"I had to stay confident in my goals."


Forget trying to decide whether staying calm or staying out of the drama is more difficult. Staying confident in one's goals has both of them beat. I speak from personal experience.

There are so many expectations placed upon what we do with our time, our money, our talents. Even our love. These expectations come from convention, from society, from our churches, our friends, our families. Even from our television commercials. When we decide we have a goal, (or heaven forbid, a dream) that doesn't conform to any or all of these expectations, we hear about it right away. We here that it isn't traditional. That we need to settle. That the economy is too poor to start a business, or that we are getting too old to not be married. These sentiments can put us off of our personal vision for ourselves. Worse than that, it isolates us and makes us feel alone. All things are more difficult to accomplish when we feel we are alone.

Yet if we don't remain confident in our own goal in spite of all of that, nobody else can do it for us. Lack of focus on our own goals is a form of surrender to what other people determine about our lives. People who do no have the entire story, no matter how well they know us, or think they know the world. Goals change, yes, but that should only happen after deep introspection and revaluation based on what you truly want out of your life, as opposed to pressure from those who say it isn't feasible or goes against the status quo.

I hope I have demonstrated how Diana's approach to surviving graduate school is in reality a usable template for surviving most trials. What she did to keep her sanity in academia you and I can do to keep our sanity in our own lives.

Have you ever used any of these approaches? Would you add to this list? Tell me about it.

There ARE Small Parts. But Avoid Small Thinking.

If you ever check out my other blog, (and history suggests that you never do), you will know that I am currently in yet another play. This time, the play is Tom Stoppard's, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead. It is in a way Shakespeare's Hamlet from a vastly different angle. In fact, it's told from the perspective of the two title characters who, in Hamlet are in fact two minor characters. Only a step above the torch bearers, really. But in this play, they are the focus.

In an ironic absurdist way, that is. The play is not at all linear or plot driven, but rather an existential examination of the randomness of life, by way of linguistic gymnastics. However at various points throughout the action, these two gentleman find themselves in the midst of scenes from the actual Hamlet. Hamlet, Ophelia, Claudius, Gertrude, Polonious, The Player, all come in and out in what is essentially mere background for this story. And when they do appear those characters speak their actual Shakespearean lines. I myself play Hamlet.

I have always wanted to play Hamlet, though I admit, not in this particular capacity. While I do intend to play Hamlet in the actual Hamlet some day, this experience has been an interesting spring training for the character if you will. For you see, he is still Hamlet, with all of the depth, dimensions and complications associated with the character. And for my brief time on stage, I must play him as such. (And I am doing a fairly good job at that, if I may say so.)

If my infrequently seen Hamlet were to be phoned in or otherwise be terrible, people would know. Would it deep six the whole production? It would not have to, but a palpable sense of the play being off somehow would, I surmise, permeate the production. Hamlet, though a small role in the play itself, is not a small presence at all within his own head. As far as he is concerned, he is the Prince of Denmark, with all of the importance and burdens that come with that. For me to do little work because he is not seen much would be not only unfair to the rest of the play, but lazy. And it would miss the point.

I apply this approach to my acting whenever I play a smaller role, or need to perform a scene in the background. I work hard to be totally present in whatever part of the story I am telling. My commitment to good theatre necessitates this.

Yet I have tried to apply this notion to other aspects of my life as well. And it is not easy. But if I am lower on the totem pole for something, or if I am contributing only small bits and pieces to a conversation, or appear only on the outskirts of a project, I make every effort to remember that whatever I am doing, (if I have bothered to do participate) deserves my full attention and effort at the time of my doing so. Perhaps it will not change my life, or improve my lot, but if I choose to do something, I do it right. Or opt not to do it in the first place.

Don't shrink your universe. Despite what the success gurus say, you don't have to always be out there leading some kind of Gen-Y, "go get 'em!" type of charge in order to be fully engaged in something. When you have a small job to do, it is still a job, and it is still yours. Everything behind what you do, and everything you bring to a table should be relevant. Not just for the sake of the job you are doing but for your own sake, so you don't allow yourself to feel insignificant between the big moments.

For me it's much more difficult to do this off stage than on stage. But I recognize the wisdom of it.

How do you feel when you are in the background, or the edges, as opposed to the forefront of something? Does your effort ever slack at those times?

Think "Best" Not "Impress"

It's human nature to want to impress people sometimes. I find it hard to believe that there is anybody anywhere who has never at some point tried to impress someone for any number of reasons. And some of those reasons seem legitimate. Yet we tend to conflate doing our best work for someone with impressing them. Yet these are two very different goals.

A goal is something which defines the way we think, act, and react in any given situation. It determines how we move forward. If our goals are misguided, all actions that spring from it will also be so. Setting a goal to impress somebody will in most cases lead to failure because everything becomes about them. Our energies are  focused upon making our selves look good to only one individual. (Sometimes a group.) Which means we will try to alter our approach every few moments to match what we perceive they want. Our desire to be held in personal esteem by the other person dictates our choices. When that happens, we open ourselves up to feelings of inadequacy, doubt, and diminished confidence.

Instead of impressing people, our goal should be to offer our best at any given time. We need to present our best selves via behavior, ideas, attitudes, etc. We need to give our best audition to a director, present ourselves in the most effective manner at a job interview, put our best products on display when we meet potential clients. It only makes sense to do so.

When our goal is to produce our best work, (within  whatever guidelines apply to the situation), we make it about us. Our mental energies are directed toward engaging our talents, and tapping our passion. Improving who and what we are. We become confident in our ability to bring something forth that deserves to have our names attached to it. Such creations have the best chance of attracting the right attention. And though we may be disappointed if we don't get the part or the job, we come away from the attempt knowing that in the very least we produced something worthy of our own admiration. We don't come away with even that much when we bend over backwards merely to impress.

Take pride in your work. Your observations. Your being. Let what someone else thinks of  it take care of itself. You'll have nothing that either you, or other people can take pride in if your entire purpose is to impress, impress, impress.

When have you been tempted to impress someone, as opposed to just living your best, and allowing the consequences of same?

Working Hard or Hardly Working: Do We Care?

"So what do you do for a living?"

I hate this question. Not just when I am asked. I hate the deeply embedded need we have in this country to begin conversations in this manner. The reason I hate it is that the question is indicative of a certain hypocrisy. 

Let's keep in mind the difference between working hard and making a living. Let's also remember its twin distinction: the difference between being lazy and not making a living.

There are plenty of people out there who work hard at something. And for whatever reason are unable to make a living directly through that hard work. Or they make less of a living than they need. Sometimes this is because their job doesn't pay enough. Sometimes it is because that despite of all of their hard work, they cannot get hired at all no matter what they do.

And at what do people work hard if they are not making a living? It depends of course. Some work hard at trying to find employment. Driving and walking around until they are exhausted trying to scrape something together. Others who are not making a living work hard each day at domestic chores. Cleaning, cooking. Sometimes child rearing. Some unemployed expel a great deal of energy volunteering. In many cases, volunteering to take on some rather labor intensive projects which  in a just world, they would be paid to do.

Let's not forget those who create. Artists. Musicians. Writers. If they are serious about their craft, they are working hard at the act of creation each day, whether or not they have found a way to make a living off of it.

Then there are those that are "making a living" who wouldn't choose to break a sweat in fear of staining their shirt or hurting themselves. Some of the laziest people I have ever met are those lucky enough to find a job.

Let's look at two people.

The first guy makes no money and lives in the proverbial "mother's basement", but spends all morning mowing her lawn, tending her garden and cleaning her house before driving 30 minutes to the local shelter where he spends the next four hours in a hot soup kitchen serving meals to the hungry and homeless. (Those also not making a living, but not lucky enough to have family with whom to live.) In the evening he blogs of his experience at the soup kitchen as he does each night, meticulously editing his content before publishing. Before bed he spends an hour with his guitar, both to unwind, and to stay in practice for the band with whom he sometimes gets to perform for peanuts at local dives. These are his days.

The second guy loves to talk. He's got some funny jokes and stories, and doesn't mind sharing them with anyone. One such time of story telling was with an older gentleman at Starbucks. The subject? The internet. This lands him a job with the stranger's company as a community manager. A job which gives him a desk, an office, and a secretary. A job which is safe for him so long as he appears busy because the company is so far behind on social media practices they will believe whatever he says.

Once an hour or so he'll send an official company Tweet out to Twitter with some half-assed question he got from someone else. Between hours long sessions of World of Warcraft on company time he will put together a few emails and send them out, and cut and paste blog content from his own abandoned personal blog, and edit them just enough to put on the company blog. Anytime he hears of an after hours meeting that somebody needs to have with him, he finds a way to be "out on call" that day, and leaves the office an hour early. For this, he pulls down 60K a year.

Now answer this question honestly: On which of these people does society tend to place more value? The hardworking jobless man contributing to the world, or the clod with the office?

It's the clod, and we all know it.

In our society we pay a lot of lip service to the idea of rewarding hard work, and looking up to those who put in a day's worth of labor. We claim to abhor laziness and group think. Yet in many cases as a collective we don't actually seem to be admiring the level of labor and creativity a person displays. What we are in reality admiring is the amount of money they have found a way to be given, and what material possessions they can obtain with same.

My question is, if we value people who work hard and try their best to be creative and solve problems and move and influence for the better, what's it to us what they are paid, or even if they are paid? Why should we care if that guy lives in his mother's basement? Isn't that between him and his mother? We know the effort he puts into service to others and into creating things.  Why is he less deserving of admiration, or friendship, or a woman's love?

Can't we all just respect hard work and concentrated effort when we see it? Whether that's in a corner office, a McDonald's kitchen, or a mother's basement. If hard work were the positive character attribute we claim it is in this country, far more people would earn respect and admiration, (and perhaps even a job) than currently do.

What is hard work to you? Do you value anyone who works hard at something positive, or do you value those who make a living only?

No, I'm Not Happy for Jane.

I am Too XYZ to be inspired by the success of my peers.

The easy explanation would be jealousy. I want what they have. I cannot deny some of that may be at work. To some being jealous of other people is a sin. To others it is a motivation. To me, however, it is neither. It just sits there, in whatever quantity it decides to show up in for any given person or situation. It has zero effect on what I am capable of doing, one way or the other. It neither holds me back nor spurs me forward. My movement is my movement.

Which to me the bigger part of it is frustration and/or confusion. I see people who started blogging after I did, who are now making money doing so. People are are getting noticed and becoming quasi-famous. The social expectation is that I rejoice.

"Jane, I am so happy for you! You started off, worked hard, paid your dues, and now you are finally being rewarded for it!"

And sometimes I really do feel that happy for someone getting somewhere. Especially if it is somewhere I am not trying to go. But as often as not, I silently shake my head and say, "Here we go again."

Here we go again with someone else I know making good with a formula I busted my ass over to no avail. Here we go with the endless congratulatory tweets flooding our mutual Twitter feed. Here come the guest posts, the notoriety, the money. And worse of them all, the "you can do it too!" affirmations and the "aren't you so happy for Jane?" gushings that come from our mutual connections.

No, I am not happy for Jane. Why should I be happy for Jane, exactly? Her success does not bring me any success. Nothing I did was in any way related to her attaining her success. And frankly, if my history over the last two years in social media is any indication, Jane will very quickly find little time to speak to me, or return my emails anymore because she has gotten really busy with all of the phone calls and new work that has just flooded in her direction since her blog was mentioned on BigImportant.Com. In other words, a cost/benefit analysis of me has dropped my value in Jane's eyes significantly because I am still sitting here struggling with Too XYX on Blogger (how dare I?) and an average of 30 views per post. (On a good day.) I sometimes express doubt and fear on top of that. I am therefore not a positive energy flow for her, and should be avoided.

Or perhaps I am not kissing her ass enough, I don't know. It may amount to the same thing.

No, I don't especially feel happy for Jane. Nor am I in the mood to be told that I should. That her success doesn't mean I cannot also succeed if I do what she did.

That's part of the problem. I don't want to do what Jane did. I am not built to do it Jane's way, or your way. And though Jane and a lot of other people would rather cut their own throats on a live web-feed than admit this, they are lucky. At least at some point in time they got flat out stupid lucky, and nothing you say will ever convince me otherwise. And no matter how XYZ you are, you cannot replicate somebody elses luck.

I'm a student of history, so I am 23 steps ahead of all of you readers who are about to quote Thomas Jefferson's view of luck to me. The fact is, I do work at things. Hard. And I think it is the impression the Jane worked hard, and I do not which really makes it most difficult for me to celebrate along with the whole world as Jane sails. The impression that her advancement is due to work and positive thinking, so my stagnation must be due to me negativitiy and laziness. I have few trophies, so there is little reason for Twitter to be all aglow about how much work I have done to keep my head above water, or do the things with which I am uncomfortable.

My hard work may not be your hard work, but for the resources I have, it is just as hard if not harder, because the fruits of my labor are much smaller. Yet my hard work is easily dismissed by the vast majority of Janes out there, along with her cyber-sycophants. They refuse to believe that a person can be Too XYZ for cocktail parties and blog conventions and business card exchanges. They are literally under the impression that with a few select tough love stances they can reverse within me an entire lifetime worth of introversion and poor luck. They feel they can make me a superstar just by telling me to get out there, read a million books (all of which are the same), and start living. And yes, the first step is being happy for Jane when she makes it by doing half as much as I have done. To do otherwise is to be bitter, and bitter people never succeed.

What I am doing is my best at writing good content, marketing that content, meeting as many new people as I can in the manner that I am capable, asking people for help, offering mine, being persistent, and...getting absolutely nowhere in the process.

And then, when Jane and all of the others like her have exhausted all of their advice (assuming they bother to give me any), they eventually do one of two things. They tell me, "well, you are just going to have to change. I don't know what to tell you." Or they flat out dismiss me as some sort of log thrown in the way of their happy road to stardom which they think will taint their new road to success if approached. Fuck you too, Jane.

Let Jane continue to win by doing all of the ass kissing, story telling, cookie cutting life style choices she wants to make. That's all marketing, and that it works as often as it does is a testament to how dull and pointless much of the online world is. Where originality is punished and caution is seen as weakness. Where bad luck is a heresy and being in poverty is impossible. Let her and others like her soar to the heights that so many others "friends" of mine have soard before due to knowing the right person, or being a pain in the ass long enough to get a guest post somewhere or just otherwise whoring themselves up online. If they can live with themselves, so can I. But I will be damned if I am going to go out of my way and pretend that I am happy for them, just so that I can attract the allegedly helpful people out there who respond most to "hard working, positive thinkers."

Do I not believe that honest, hard working people, who do not sell themselves in the way I have described can get ahead? I do think it happens sometimes. If I am permitted to believe in a lucky break then yes, sometimes very agreeable, honest, and most of all authentic people do get to where they want to get, and beyond. I do believe their hard work can bring them some of those breaks. However if I must dismiss dumb luck from the equation 100%, then no, I don't believe such success stories exist, even for people I like.

But in the end, whether it be luck, or skill, good people or bad ones, authentic folks or media whores, my reaction is the same; their stories do not inspire me. They do not make me think that I can do it, and they do not give me a better view of the world simply because someone who deserved it got someplace they wanted to be. Maybe it is because I am spinning my wheels. Maybe it is because the nature of such people's lives and personalities are so far removed from my own that I simply cannot relate. But the moral of the story is that it can get really difficult hearing all of these success stories on all of these blogs and in all of these Twitter feeds. They serve as a discouragement to me, not an encouragement. And they are everywhere.

Do you in your heart and soul truly feel that happy for colleagues and friends when they succeed while you struggle? Or are your congratulations just the lip service you feel society and the internet expect you to pay in order to make you more apt to receive a bone of your own some day? If you can't answer that here, take some time and answer the question for yourself. Will the answer be what you think it is?

Still Too XYZ After All These Years

This post is angry. With reason. Yet, if you are one of those who feel anger is not an acceptable emotion, do me a favor and simply opt not to read this. For today I am angry. Tomorrow I won't be. Today I am weary. I one day will not be. My life is complicated, and if yours is not, or if you feel mine need not be, read no further. And certainly click away now if you judge an entire person by the days, weeks, or sometimes months of unhappiness with which they must sometimes deal as they try to find meaning in anything.

Too XYZ continues to be a very apt name for this blog, as the concept continues to very much apply to me in just about everything I do. There are very specific elements to my psyche that prevent me from doing specific things. Like the color blind attempting to interior decorate, or the tone deaf opting to offer singing lessons, there are things which no matter how valuable, I cannot do.

And I cannot do them because I am either missing something, or something is damaged, or atrophied within my being. Now former friends and supporters of my work have often climbed upon the highest of horses and declared from their lofty position that unless I suffer from a disease that is documented somewhere in the annals of either psychology or medicine, I have no right to claim occasional crippling difficulties with my life. That in the absence of such a diagnosis, any problems, difficulties, or obstacles I have faced as I try ferociously to succeed in a contrary world are 100% my own making. And hence unless I can prove otherwise, I can and must fix everything all by myself.

It is as though they were the principal in the school of life demanding from me a note from my doctor proving to them that I cannot come into school that day (a rather condescending requirement if you ask me).

Yet in some ways, Too XYZ  has been my attempt at such a letter. Addressed not to the individual, but to the world, and ideally, those who share my view of same. Those with the same issues, whether or not there is a Latin term out there to describe them.

This blog is a place for me to be frank about my obstacles, internal and external.  A place to express perceptions, plans, strategies and simple observations. A place to seek advice, and gain perspective.

Yet, as I have oft written about in previous posts, I usually just get the same perspective over and over again. And that perspective can be summed up in one tidy sentence.

Change what you are and what you do, because it currently isn't good enough.

The type of blog this is. My content. The way I market. The questions I ask. The help I seek, and the people from which I seek it. The problems I face and the solutions I offer. Even down to the font of my business cards, the nature of my profile picture, and the articles on which I choose to comment. No matter what I share with people, or no matter what of other people's advice I observe passively (by going to their blog, or reading their articles), it can just about all be summed up by that italicized sentence I posted above.

I guess if I had a response it would be "Easy for you to say."

Because to tell you the truth, whether it be the big gurus like Godin, or the CopyBlogger guy, or some of the people I have encountered personally in my social media travels over the last two years, I have noticed a pattern; basically none of them had to start what they are doing from Absolute Zero. I don't mean the lowest temperature in the universe, but having zero resources, zero friends, zero experience and zero money when they set off. That is the place I am coming from, and still struggling to get out of. I have not yet succeeded. That isn't to say I won't. Just that I haven't, and that I still don't know how. 

Oh I know. Each of the people I am thinking of, whether familiar or famous, (and I am sick to realize that some of the people with which I am familiar are becoming famous by being great at being fake) will quickly point out just how hard it was when they started out. They had to have a big scary cry over quitting their 80K a year job when they started freelancing. "Could this work? What was I doing? Am I crazy?" But their 100K a year spouse reminded them to believe in themselves, and they pressed on. And they will tell you the horror stories of just how dumb they were at first. How they didn't know code, but learned it quickly because they had to. Or hated the idea of marketing but learned to love it. How they were introverted once, but became extroverted, and now can work the room with the best of them and make their fucking millions.

I have called it before, and I will again. Bullshit.

In each of the cases I am thinking of, the "rock star" in question, (whose ass everyone on the internet is happy to kiss in hopes of the magic rubbing off on their lips) had some kind of lucky break, or some kind of helping hand. And I don't mean advice, or a referral.

I am talking about, nobody surviving was based on their need to freelance. They were not in the poor house when they started up their business. They didn't deal with people who viewed them as unpleasant, cold, mean, or not worth the investment at every turn. They didn't have difficulty making people interested in them. Something within them or something about their situation over which they had no control put them ahead.

Now they don't like to think about it that way, because that means god forbid that perhaps they are not ninjas after all. That their own powers might not have brought the world to its knees before them. That they may not be quite as charming or "epic" as they need to believe they are to get through the day.

No, they may not say it, because they may not believe it on the inside, but they had some form of luck or circumstances to help them along. And for good measure they'll throw in an officially diagnosed eating disorder as the grand Deschapelles Coup of their own magnificence.

It is why I have all but stopped reading the blogs I used to read when I first entered the social media landscape on a regular basis. I was at one time subscribed to about 15 blog feeds or so, each of them it seems packed with advice for the freelance writer, the self improvement minded, the spiritually bent and the artistic. I have since canceled all of these feeds. Not just because they became boring (they did), but because I finally realized that despite the language used, such sites really are rather elitist in nature. They are for the most part not worried about helping you, so much as they are interested in making sure people succeed in the same way that they did. (Or at least the version of the way they did that they entertain in their own heads.)

In short, if you don't think you can do it their way, the advice is, "You have to. That's the world, bub."

And when you try to learn from them by asking them how you can be more like what they are, without changing what you are? When you get any response at all, (which I usually do not, regardless of how humble my approach), you get bitchy emails back that mock they very audacity you have shown in even suggesting that you are coming anywhere near their own level of commitment. Arrogant, bile ridden correspondence which made it clear that after reading the first three questions you asked them, they had no desire to even read the rest of your email until you "grow up and learn the ways of the world".

That's networking, to me, folks. Happens all the time. And the previous example is culled from my actual life, not hyperbole. It really happened in much the way I describe. And this wasn't even one of the gurus. Not yet anyway. This ass was a "friend" of mine. But like so many before her in this social media misadventure of mine, she was high on talk and low on action when it came to helping people. Very much willing to bend over backward to take what I had to offer her, but was too busy making her millions and rubbing elbows with the other internet elite to take a moment to offer me something of which I was in desperate need when I came to her.

Typical one-sided "what have you done for me lately" networking hypocrisy. And all because, as far as I can tell, I couldn't do what she had done. Or he. Or they. Or perhaps you? Because to tell you the truth, I shy away from advice these days. Even when I seek it, it is almost out of reflex. Because there is only so much of that sort of "tough love" a person like me can take. And if people only really want to reach out and help those that can in some way help them, that isn't help. That's bartering services.

Whether it be marketing, social media, freelance writing, contracts, fiction, networking, I can't do what everyone says I must. Why? Because I don't have the resources, the knowledge, or the resources to obtain the knowledge. So I seek to do it my own way. That is the message I have gotten from all the big wigs and self help types, and positive thinkers and creative visualizers, and the friendly extroverts. That I just don't have enough of whatever it takes to become whatever it is they say I need to become. And since there is only one narrow way they can think of that can bring about success, (their own), they just don't bother to reply to my questions in a prompt fashion, as they would for people who do it their way. Or they throw up their hands and say, "Don't know what to tell you. You are on your own." You're damn right I am.

I am not inspired by the success of other people, and I am baffled by those who are. This sharing in the joy song and dance is a front. My life is not improved because someone who started blogging a year after I started is already making 5,000 dollars a month blogging, when I make zero. I am not happy when "friends" become famous, because I know what it is they had to do in order to become so. Deep inside, I can't replicate it. Not because I am afraid. But because I simply am not built that way. I was, am, and shall remain, Too XYZ forthat narrow definition of "going after your dream."

I don't know how to do what all of you do. And I was fine with not knowing. And fine with learning what I could learn, and adapting to the rest. But that gets very lonely, and who wants to do everything alone? And if people can't advise those that are Too XYZ, must they spend their energy criticizing us too? Don't take out your obvious frustrations on not knowing the answers to any of my unique questions by scolding me for asking them in the first place. Stop assuming that my obstacles and handicaps make me less of a person, less deserving of success, simply because I don't have a note from the doctor.

I am trying to start this from nothing people. And I am probably not the only one. Take a minute out of your hardworking, successful, Seth Godin reading, friend cheering, article tweeting, extroverted networking, walking on sunshine sort of lives and remember that. We, the ones in the storm need help too. And if you can't provide it, at least have the decency to get the hell out of the way while we try to outrun the lightening.

Pulling Back on Pushing the Envelope

I have written some posts here and other places that have gotten a lot of readers and comments. Pushed a lot of buttons and pissed people off. (At least based on said comments.)

And I have written a lot of posts that hardly get read at all. Posts that illicit zero comments. I won't pretend it doesn't bother me sometimes to be a part of the conversation for a while, and then suddenly to no longer be a part of it, as seems to have happened during the course of Too XYZ. But I have a feeling I know why it may happen like that.

Because it seems to me there are two types of blogs (or websites or podcasts, or Tweets) that get the most consistent attention. The Envelope Pushers and the Pollyannas. I am neither.

Pollyannas you know. Those who always write about how wonderful it is to be alive, and that all we need to succeed is a positive attitude, a willingness to learn and a dream. And those that have not succeeded just don't know how to dream. If you read this blog, you know my general response to that sort of cotton candy already. So I'll move on to the problem with envelope pushing.

I don't believe in it. To some it is the very foundation on which they build their whole presence. They follow people who push envelopes and lament any given blog, movie, TV show, or song that doesn't push an envelope. (As though pushing an envelope is synonymous with quality.) As a result, you have entire personalities based solely on the idea of pushing the envelope. It doesn't matter to where the envelope is pushed, as long as it is making somebody uncomfortable or at least confused. Lady Gaga comes to mind. (Arriving in an egg. That's so edgy.) So does that Ricky Gervais character at the Golden Globes.

Both are examples of people that h ave been made into heroes because they push envelopes and test the limits of propriety. But it seems to me they do it only for the purpose of doing so. Actions of people like that practically scream, "This will be seen as unacceptable to a whole bunch of people!" And in the end, that is a pyramid scheme waiting to collapse all around you.

When you push an envelope just because it is there to be pushed, you actually become just as predictable as those who do not push the envelope. That's right, you become just as common as those whom you think you are skewering. Because passed a certain point being unpredictable IS predictable.

Gervais and Lady Gaga are popular game changers in a way for the moment, because a large portion of the population believes that the very act of pushing an envelop in and of itself is a noble practice. That no matter how many people are offended, and no matter how low quality the result is, pushing the envelope is an end unto itself that you can only reject if you are unhip, old, or afraid.

But being an envelope pusher doesn't keep you at the top forever. And there is the problem with it. When you whole goal is merely to push, that becomes your focus. Not how good, clever, well written, well presented or valuable your product is in its own right. You become instead the producers of the cultural equivalent of the disposable razor. Gets the job done once, and maybe twice. But fundamentally it is a poorly made temporary piece of garbage dump filling, environment strangling trash.

That's not saying people won't buy disposable razors. Look at South Park. The cartoon on Comedy Central. It's still on, and is still one of the biggest money makers for that network. You can't deny it's popularity within a certain demographic. But when is the last time anybody had anything at all significant to say about it's impact? Does anybody really care what Parker and Stone are thinking these days? Are they "game changers" now? No.

That is because they painted themselves, quite voluntarily into a corner of "envelope pushing". They became known as those who would push the envelope and challenge what we call "decent". And after about 3 years, instead of creating a good product they believed in and found clever while ignoring certain boundaries, they made their stated goal to push that envelope. So they dedicate entire episodes to menstruating statues. Funny for a lot of people, but how ground breaking is it? It's just trash to which most people have become numb by now. Same could be said for people like Howard Stern. Still popular, but his whole shtick is to piss people off and push whatever envelope is left to be pushed. And millions of fans, (the same people who have always followed him) doesn't change his overall staleness.

I don't do this when I blog, or Tweet. What I do is say what I feel needs to be said. I talk about the things in which I am interested. I share that about which I am passionate at any given time. Put more simply, I write as me all the time. And like many people, some of the things I believe are not going to go over well with the establishment. Other things I believe are not going to spark a lot of interest either way. Some things I believe are so mundane I guess people don't feel they need to comment. Different responses for different posts.

Which is why many marketing geniuses would say I don't get the traffic I could get here. Or on Twitter. Because I don't work double time to piss people off like some of my more popular posts have. I don't seek out the chink in the armor of everyone everywhere and jab my sword into it. I may at first attract attention with a controversial post, but lose readers very quickly once it becomes clear I'm no longer writing the stuff that eviscerates.

But I don't keep this blog in order to eviscerate. Or to anger. Or to push that envelope. Yes, those things often happen in the course of me expressing what is within me that needs expressed. But I write this blog in order to present my interpretations and perceptions on common (and some not so common) situations in which we find ourselves as people. My life has informed said perceptions, and I want my voice heard.

But there is a difference between making my voice heard and making my noise heard. If I have to go out of my way to find something controversial to say in order to keep people reading, than I am just making my noise heard, and am not much of a writer. My writings serve the authentic me, and that is why my writings are my voice as opposed to my noise. Authenticity.

Now, I am still Too XYZ for this world. I will piss people off again. It is bound to happen. That is because while I will not go out of my way to piss people off, I am not going to go out of my way to avoid it either. I express through writing that which I am moved to express. And my readers will respond accordingly. Sometimes they won't respond at all. But if I keep using my voice to serve the authentic me, someone will notice, as they have noticed before.

To hell with the envelope.

Not Looking for a Hero

What happens if you don't have any heroes?

Depending on who you ask, especially amongst the current generation, the answer could be anything from a life without satisfaction to impending global annihilation. Yet when I am asked who my heroes are, (and it is a very popular assessment tool) I don't  have a ready answer. Hand to God, I am not sure I know who my heroes are or if I even have any.

I suppose like with so many things it depends a great deal on how one defines "hero". If by hero all that is meant is someone whose accomplishments and attitude I find worthy of praise, then maybe I have a few heroes. But even then the word leaves a bit of a bad taste in my mouth, because it would seem to indicate a certain element of awe.

I don't think I can say anybody on any level has ever held me in "awe" of what they are doing. It is not easy to impress me in any field, let alone put me in a state of awe about who you are and what you do.

"She's my hero because I am just in awe of what she has accomplished given her circumstances."

A common testimonial that you will not see me propagate any time soon.

Not that I take anything away from people and their accomplishments. But those that succeed, even in fields in which I wish to succeed are so different in their approach, their abilities, their luck and their overall presence that to emulate them as a hero would seem a bit foolhardy. We all have strengths and we all have weaknesses. While advice can be useful, and following an example may pay a dividend here and there, we are, in the end, each different. Different struggles, different help, different luck to help us get where we end up, (or keep us from getting anywhere.) Is a "hero" really that different from me? Or you?

Leaders I can understand. The can bring order out of chaos, or shatter the status quo. A leader is necessary at time to bring a movement into focus so that the greater good can be accomplished. Yet in ideal circumstances they are a first among equals. (Heaven knows we are often far from that ideal, though.)

The supposed importance of heroes lie in aspirations to self improvement. We are told how important it is to want to be better than what we are right now. Society attaches future demonstrable success on a seemingly endless cycle of reinventing ourselves as more productive, powerful and marketable versions of ourselves. Ty 3.0, then Ty 4.0 and so on. This constant striving for a better you requires a template. A template that has already gone through the same processes and struggles on their way to their success as we are right now. We can then fixate on what they did, and motivate ourselves to do the same.

Hero worship in a sense, is a worship of that we wish we were, and hope to some day be. Therefore some degree of being in awe of a hero is often attributable to a lack of respect and acceptance of where we are at present if we are not careful.

Some of the same people who view heroes in this fashion would consider a lack of heroes equal to a lack of ambition and self awareness. Or on the opposite end, an indication that a person feels they are already of such value and worth, who is left that is worthy of being their hero?

In both cases, the judgment is unfair. At least it is for me. For as I said, I lack heroes as most define them, because the only battle I really need to be winning is my own, and the fact that someone else won their own battle, though admirable and worthy of respect, does not make them heroic per se.

Olivier. JFK. Emily Dickinson. Cal Ripken Jr. Each of them for various reasons and at various points in my life have exemplified certain qualities and perceptions that I share, or even aspire to. But as amazing as I found some of their accomplishments, and as satisfying as it is to know that my opinions on certain issues are not that different from those of some of these highly influential and important people, I still don't consider them heroes.

And I don't feel adrift because of it.

How do you define "hero"? Do you have any? What does your relationship to the concept of heroes say about you? About society?

Missed Anniversary

Six days ago, Too XYZ turned a year old. Yes, it was on February 1, 2010 that I first introduced this blog to the world, as part of my new social media presence. And the day went by with nary a mention from me.

Why didn't I make a big to-do about it then? It's often part of my personality to be sentimental. Is it because I no longer care about this blog? That's not it at all. The truth is, I didn't really think about it. I suppose I had a vague sense that somewhere around this time last year I launched Too XYZ, but I was never motivated to find the exact date.

I should, I suppose, have written an assessment of what I learned during the first year of doing this blog. What could improve and what is good about it. Thank people who made it happen. Compare the reality with what my aspirations were. Express my goals and visions for the second year of the blog.

But in the end, I didn't, nor do I plan to. I don't feel it would serve a purpose.

For one thing, the excitement of milestones may not be novel enough for me as a blogger and writer. I experienced, and have celebrated the chronological milestones of my other, older blog, Always Off Book. That blog was five years old by the time I even started this one, and so I had already proven to myself and others that I do have it in me to sustain and regularly update a blog for an extended period of time. Doing so for this one is something of which I am proud to a certain degree, but I have in a sense already been there and done that.

Not to mention the fact that I think it would be somewhat ironic if not hypocritical  for me to celebrate the one year anniversary of this blog, which is dedicated to those who do not fit into the mold, by rolling out one of the most conventional, status quo driven types of posts. This blog hasn't been conventional from the start, why make it so now?

However I feel the biggest reason I didn't consciously think of celebrating this milestone is that that my views on social media, as well as the nature of using it for personal gain have changed in the year this blog has been up. Not everything is different, but I have come to realize that it is only by embracing the status quo, kissing a little ass, and following all of the trends, suggestions, fads, and conventional wisdom that a blog can actually become the sort of idea depot on the scale I had envisioned a year ago. A very well meaning friend once actually suggestted to me that perhaps it was time for me to make the blog "more conventional" in tone, not realizing how that would counter act the raison d'etre of Too XYZ.

You see, I am still a content driven minimalist with little to no desire to hire outside consultants to "whip this blog into shape". I'd still rather spend my time writing and coming up with content to share with others then learning code, taking classes in marketing, and buying the latest e-book from "Super Blog Guy!" It isn't that I have no desire to work hard, (a sin of which many have accused me). It's that I have come to realize that taking these steps emphasize style over substance too much.

It isn't that this has to be so, as many stylish blogs have decent content. The balance is there. But I find the slope to be a slippery one.

Several blogs that started out at about the same time as this one, or even later, have gone on to become, or at least are on their way to becoming semi-famous. Perhaps even bringing in a passive income for their writers. I know some of these writers, and even advised some of them early on. I follow them on Twitter and are their fans on Brazen Careerist. And when they first started out I was drawn to the up-start, personal, passionate nature of their posts. Blogging from the gut on a minimalist platform. Granted, few were as minimalist as Too XYZ, but they were small time web sites with big time ideas and attitude.

I am sad to report that more than a few of them have hopped on that "blogging rockstar" train. They have spruced up their templates. They have hired web designers and marketing people. Their Google reader feeds are stuffed to the brim with subscriptions to the Seth Godins and Chris Gui...(what's his name?) and that ilk. They are in constant search for bigger blogs to which they can guest post. All in the name of spreading their ideas to a wider audience. To get on the map, as it were.

They have met with varying degrees of success. I won't lie and say there is no envy on my part. It is particularly aggravating because they are getting picked up by bigger blogs for guest posts, winning awards, and generally being far luckier than I am, even though in the end what they do isn't that different from what I do. Forgive me if I don't fall into, "you should be happy for the success of everyone around you, even if you are not succeeding" crowd.

Yet that occasional envy is tempered by a realization that came to me in this last year. I've come to realize that a lot of steps that these contemporaries took were in some ways selling out. There, I said it. I would never name names, especially since I think they are all decent people. And I can't blame them for wanting to be famous sooner as opposed to later. Maybe they really can help more people that way. But as far as the gritty, personal, passionate and original, content driven nature of their blogs...the very things that drew me to read their work in the first place? It is in many cases decreased. I won't say eliminated totally, because some originality is still there in a few of them. But it has become clear that marketing, presence and social proof won out the day with them, as opposed to allowing content to speak for itself. All of it made sadder by the fact that once upon a time they, like me, were satisfied with content being the focus. They seemed like my kindred spirits in the blogosphere. Perhaps at the time they were.

Which is probably why this blog is not huge after a year. And probably why it shall never be so, barring some other unexpected event. My posts have been mentioned by some pretty big name people off and on, but never with a lasting impact on the popularity and influence of this blog, or my web presence. Probably because, in the end such things had no influence on the nature of this blog either. I just didn't do what the majority told me to do with such moments. I continued to just do what I did, both then, when it caught the eye of the movers and shakers early on, and now, as it seems to catch fewer and fewer eyes as time goes on.

Conclusion? It shouldn't surprise you to hear me word it thus, but (personally) I am Too XYZ to turn Too XYZ (the blog) into some marketer's wet dream. I know what most people would do, because I hear people chew me out pretty regularly for not doing it. I basically lost a friend because of how pissed they were I wasn't being more conventional. So I can repeat the advice back to all the world quite well by now.

Every time I hit on an idea or position that people comment on passionately, I am supposed to write an e-book. Every time a post of mine is mentioned somewhere, I am supposed to mention it somewhere else. I am supposed to go out and find umpteen million followers so that when I ask the so called "big dogs" for a chance to guest post, they can perform a cost benefit analysis on me and see a reason to combine the notoriety with Too XYZ, with the notoriety of their own blog. And my own obscurity is based on my being lazy, and...oh lord you get the idea. So the cycle goes, as oft this blog hath shown.

My alternative is to keep saying what I say, in the manner in which I say it. Sharing these posts with people, and hoping they will start reading. Or start reading again as the case may be. Commenting on the blogs that have the sort of spirit I admire, and going else where when I find they no longer speak to me. Accepting that my ideas based, content driven, CW defying modes operandi is in all likelihood just not going to ever be anything that sets the more visible section of the internet world on fire.

That's because I don't work in fire. I don't have a torch. Or a gun, or a knife. I am no ninja, guru, or rockstar. What I am is a guy with a hammer, beating his way in slow, laborious fashion through many things: The mountainous rocks of collective bullshit. The iron gates of pre-determined privilege and influence. The accumulative barnacles of the status quo encrusted on the bow of my humble skiff as it inefficiently wades through a somewhat turbulent ocean of sameness. A skiff which may or may not one day catch a wave that takes me to the gleaming but fickle shores of internet fame.

A year (and six days) into this experiment, it is still my hope that my ideas, my thoughts, and yes even my controversies have made people think. Given them ideas. Inspired them in some way. And most of all, encouraged those who fit into no mold to go form a mold of their own, either online or offline. My desire to somehow achieve this service on a larger scale remains. But if it cannot be done by continuing to operate according to my own sense of style and marketing, I suppose in the end I don't want to do it.

My main thrust here at Too XYZ is to keep swinging that hammer. And if you've ever done such work before, you know that stopping what you are doing can kill your progress. You must keep up the momentum of the swinging, swinging, swinging, so that inertia doesn't take over and stop you. I can't stop that work to take time to make myself a rock star. I have to keep going.

Which in the end is why I have ignored my latest milestone.

Where is fancy bread? In the heart, or in the head?

Networking With Consultants: The Sound of One Hand Clapping

Online platforms have been good to me in regards to networking. I am not where I want to be in my career yet, but I get the impression that when I do get there, it will have a lot to do with the relationships I built starting online, as opposed to the ones in person.

Such platforms, despite their pitfalls are valuable to me because they eliminate all the bullshit. (And no matter what anybody tells you, 80% of traditional networking is nothing but bullshitting, end of story.) If I see a blog post I like, I leave a comment on it. It's self contained and obvious what the blog is about, and it is clear that the author is expecting people to approach them about it. They respond to my wonderfully specific initial contact, and in many cases, instant new network connections result. I can right away start opening up my highly inquisitive mind and ask all sort of questions about what they do, who they are, how they arrived at their opinion. Right to Final Jeopardy without the pointless cocktail party small talk for warm up.

But when it comes to learning about specific topics and discussing the nature of one's field, there are certain types that are very difficult for me to engage online or offline. One such group that often puts up barriers to my preferred method of exploring a new relationship are consultants. To be more specific, consultants in such categories as social media, public relations, marketing, and other mostly intangible fields.

What follows is a professional, not a personal assessment. It has nothing to do with how wonderful a person you may be if you are a consultant. But I do continue to hit a snag professionally whenever I try to get to know one. Try to network with them, as it were.

The difficulty I have with establishing a relationship with these people is that one can't really explore the nature of their work, aside from the basics. They can talk about previous accomplishments, and perhaps show me a portfolio of their work which I suppose is sort of okay. It tends to get boring after a while, though, as I like to talk to people not resumes. But many consultants passed a certain point won't discuss ideas or brainstorm with you because they "don't work for free." Given the nature of their work this barricade is often thrown up even in social situations that would otherwise be unconnected with career advancement. It is an understandable but very unfortunate defense mechanism that consultants throw up, which tends to discourage people like me.

And therein lies the problem with networking, or sometimes even socializing with consultants. Unlike other occupations, they have to place a limit on how many questions they can answer about what they do. What is worse, they have to place a serious cap on answering questions pertaining to what they would do in any given situation. And that type of conversational limitation can really dump cool water on a developing idea exchange with me, because I love asking people, "if this happened, how would you handle it in your position?"

Not to mention it tends to sound the slightest bit smug when somebody says, "I can't offer anymore on that unless you pay me," during a conversation. Fair as it may be to one's personal bottom line, taking this position is going to sound unfriendly and rude to a lot of people.

I'll illustrate my frustrations.

Let's say I encounter a nature photographer on Twitter. I can ask her what sort of camera she uses. The type of photos she takes. She can actually show me some of her pictures. I can ask her, without feeling under threat of taking food out of her mouth, "I always have a hard time taking pictures of moving objects, what shutter speed do you suggest?" Matters of her art, her science skills, how she picks subjects, what she would do in that tasty hypothetical situation I mentioned. The answers to these questions often determine how interested I am in establishing a relationship. And unless she has other reasons, she is perfectly at liberty to answer all of them. Because she is paid to take photographs, not to talk about photography. Ergo, by talking about what she does, and what she can do, she isn't robbing herself. She and I can feel free to brainstorm about taking pictures. (And if she reciprocates, I can brainstorm with her about, say, writing a novel.)

Ask that same set of questions to an internet marketing consultant. The conversation would be much shorter. Because they are paid to brainstorm. They make money by assessing a situation and coming up with solutions. The exploration of photography I had with the photographer would be something for which I would have to be charged by the hour with the marketing consultant. That is because the exploration of the ideas is the very thing for which the consultant gets paid. And whether I opt to pay the consultant for her hour's worth of suggestions and ideas, or if I opt to bid them good day and discontinue the conversation, I'm bound to feel let down by the whole experience.

"You'd never ask your photography friend to take pictures for your magazine for free would you? So why the hell should I as a consultant offer my services for free? Answer me that, Mr. XYZ Guy."

Okay, here is your answer. No, I wouldn't ask a photographer to take pictures for free. And I wouldn't expect a consultant to work for free either. The issue isn't the legitimacy of charging people. I could charge people for the right to shake my hand. There is nothing stopping me. But it would certainly put a damper on my social life.

The difference between the photographer and the consultant is I am free to explore the expertise of the photographer through the most basic of human functions; by speaking to them. And by being directly exposed to the artistry, the acumen, the aspirations and advice of the photographer, even if I don't have a prayer of matching her in skill and accomplishment, I am improved. Inspired. With a consultant, I am warned I may be on the clock. Makes it tricky.

Look, many consultants do great work. Like any profession, kind, generous, helpful, brilliant people consult for a living. And they naturally have passions outside of their chosen field. People are more than what they do for a living. God knows I shout that truth every chance I get. But in professional as opposed to the personal arena, where our toehold is often established through conversation about our contributions and why we make them, I think consultants are at a bit of a disadvantage. They are when it comes tome, anyway.

Maybe if they eased up somewhat on what they will and won't talk about off of the clock. In order to network effectively they may have to actually give away some of their products and services for free during the course of regular conversation. After all, to an extent even the photographer does so. I may not own the photo, but once I see it, it's in my mind and in my heart wherever I go. If photographers attempted to charge for every time that happened, they'd be out of business.

10 Common Online Assessments Applied Offline

What if the metrics used online to determine the value of a person were applied to our offline interactions and relationships? The following assessments would not be uncommon:

-A natural brunette who opts to dye her hair blond, and feels comfortable walking along the beach in a bikini will not fit into our corporate culture, because she is clearly a slut.

-The man we see writing things into a notebook in the public library will not allow me to read over his shoulder. He must have something to hide, or else why wouldn't he be showing me what he has written? What is he hiding? He should have no expectation of personal privacy if he is going to sit down in a public library and write.

-After scouring every local newspaper, watching every local television news broadcast, and listening to every local radio station for over a week, I have not heard this applicant's name come up a single time, anywhere. I won't investigate him further, because if he had any talent, motivation, or value to offer, his name would be all over the place. Why would we want a nobody like that working in our company? 

-No doctor that drives a 1991 Ford Taurus is going to be allowed to treat me. If he doesn't care enough about how he looks when he pulls into the parking lot of the hospital, how could he possibly care about his patients, or be intelligent enough to heal them?

-Even though she expressed an interest in what we are trying to accomplish, I refuse to listen to or acknowledge the opinion of the girl who sits by herself in the college lunch room at meal times and never comes to any of the dances or the parties. How could someone with no social life have anything worthwhile to contribute to the conversation?

-That gentleman has obvious talent as a painter, but he is barely making ends meet at his gas station job. Given that he hasn't parleyed his artistic traits into a career that would allow him and his family to live comfortably for the rest of their lives, he is either lazy, or a coward. The only reason he is struggling is that he hasn't done his homework.

-After a cost-benefit analysis I determined I really have no particular use for a botanist in my network at this time, nor do I think I have anything to offer the world of botany. So I opted not to shake his offered hand at the party last night. I prefer to preserve that energy for connections from which I can gain something while simultaneously contributing something in return.

-I came very close to hiring that electrician for my house. But she wasn't smiling when I first saw her. How professional could she be? 

-Don't hire any consultant who goes to a library to read magazines. If they cannot commit their time and money into subscribing to all of them personally, they won't put the proper time or energy into your project.

-Over the weekend, four people left voice-mails on his office phone. But 14 people left voice-mails on her office phone. Clearly she is leadership material, and should be promoted over him as soon as possible. 

Sound ridiculous? That's because they are. Until of course people sign onto the internet.

   

Screw Cartography

"When we get this project going, it's gonna put this place on the map!"

"It's a problem now, but it's going to put us on the map."

"We need to get this place on the map."

I've heard it all before. Sometimes from people or institutions that end up in some way, on the map. Other times from people who couldn't even read a map, let alone get themselves on one.

My response? What the hell is so important about being on this proverbial map? You always hear people wanting to get there, but a small percentage of such people ever seem worried about producing a quality product, providing a valuable service, or just being a decent presence. Those things are viewed, if at all, as means to the map.

It has been my odd and unfortunate lot to stumble into organizations just as they are deciding to place themselves on the map. Or, as I like to think, just at the very moment they decide that the community they have been serving just isn't good enough. (Which is really, when you think about it, what "getting on the map" is all about. Escaping from a community that has been the heart and soul of what you do, but can no longer keep up with the greed, or thirst for power, or influence sought by the institution in question.)

My high school was a rather elite but small private high school in Maryland. For decades, it had established itself as one of the premiere private high schools in all of Maryland. Some out of state people attended as well, of course. Word of mouth being what it is. Not to mention the draw of the place's history. Yet once you got out of say the Maryland/Virginia/West Virginia tri-state area, my tiny high school, (population of less than 200 students at the time) was little known.

Until the year I, having been impressed by their pedigree, chose to enroll there after much thought. For it was that very year that somebody in the power structure decided that it was time to put this already highly regarded, rather elite, and solidly established private high school "on the map." They hired one of the nation's most famous and successful varsity basketball coaches. Hoping to increase the school profile.

Increase it, it did. By the end of my first year, the school was winning all kinds of tournaments. It was regularly featured on ESPN, Sports Illustrated and other such places. Indeed, more people became aware of our little high school by the end of that year, than in the previous 50, I dare say. And the term, "putting us on the map" was almost a rallying cry. Surely, this could only be beneficial to the alumni. The staff. The students, as well as impressive to prospectives.

That depends on how you look at it. Because while the school's name was becoming well known, things within the school itself suffered. Suddenly everything was channeled in one direction. Given the cartography of the basketball program, the sport, previously just one extra curricular activity offered within this academic mecca, became the pervasive theme of everything we did. Instead of academically minded students with an athletic interest, athletic powerhouse players from literally all around the world were now recruited to attend our high school, simply for the basketball program. (The means of which were always of questionable ethics to some.)

Pep rallies took place only for that team. The other teams received little to no official school recognition, and as a result, little to no attendance. Whether you played or not, basketball was part of your identity. Class pictures always included someone holding a basketball. Seniors, upon graduating, regardless of their reasons for being in the school, were asked to sign basketballs for the trophy room. An effort, at times rather forced, was made to equate being proud of attending that school with being proud of the team. And people who are proud of the team attend games.

For newer people, or people that were into this whole "map" thing, it worked. Enrollment increased. Portables went up like weeds, and more money poured in. But for a good portion of the last remnant of the "old guard", it meant that the mission of the school, its very founding principles which had served it, and students very well during their 100 years of semi-obscurity, were being abandoned. The very reasons I chose to go there were being pushed aside in order to gain fame. And resentment against athletes, who through no fault of their own were participants in a destructive program, built up over they years. But hey, as the waterboy wanna-be player in my class would always remind me when I complained, "Coach is putting this school on the map."

Thanks a lot, coach.

"Coach" is long gone, and the school now has 4 times as many portables, and has a population at last check of about 500 students now. Still small, but huge compared to what it was. Their plans to build a new facility have been put on hold three times since I left. There's your map.

The same thing happened when I went to college. When I arrived as a transfer student, it was a small, little known but locally renowned private college of about 1,100 students. Charming in its own way. Gorgeous old brick buildings. Wonderful mall area in the middle of campus. You could feel the history.

The second semester I was there, the announcement went out that that "Revitalization Plan" had been approved, and would be completed hopefully over ten years, starting right away. By the next year, ground was being dug up for a new ten million dollar sporting facility. (Not a sports school at all before then.) Half of the mall and walking area would be torn up a few years later for a huge, hulking 20 million dollar biology lab. Two new dorms as well, to house the proposed increase in the student population to about 2,500 when all was said and done. And with these mostly non-academic expenditures came of course, increases in student bills. The music program was cut, in part, in order to help save some money for all of this.

"A school is no more than the amount of students that come to it," a professor told me once. "And I want more resources for myself and you." She said that can only happen if we (say it with me) "put this school on the map".

Mind you, this school had been around in some form on that spot since the 1840's. That's the 1840's.

With this came the predictable results over time, not unlike what I mentioned for my high school. Getting on the map became a priority instead of being content to serve an academic mission that had remained in tact for generations. (Including two previous generations within my own family, whom I never met.)

Even the theatre department, one of the few things about this quaint, smaller, but changing college that I loved, underwent a bit of this change. The theatre, unchanged for many years, started to focus more on community relevance and spectacle, than on intimate and personal in-house instruction in the theatre arts.

Not that this was the only theatre program to suffer this fate in my presence. A local community theatre around here, with an excellent facility had been under the stewardship of a much beloved and still praised man for years. My first show there, however, happened to be during the first year after this man left. The new guy was quiet for a while. But soon everything became about expanding the brand, or getting corporate sponsorship, or raising thus and so amount of money by the end of the year. All in an effort to convert it into a professional, for-profit theatre one day. (This leaving those of us who for years had volunteered our time and energy to the place feeling as though our days were numbered.) Many regulars have over the years been driven away. Including myself. And of course the overall goal of this terrible, artless and talentless new manager was simple. "Put this place on the map." (Casting his own wife in every show being a major part of the strategy it would seem.)

You get the idea.

So my luck in showing up at places just as they are trying to "put themselves on the map" has not been good. I will concede it may have just been the manner in which these places went about putting themselves on the map that I found distasteful. But speaking from my personal experience I have yet to encounter a single example of "putting something on the map" resulting in something better.

Just once, I would like to find an institution, an organization, a company, or a group which is small, effective, special, steeped in tradition, not particularly well known, but content to be so. I long to be part of a community that doesn't fall into the first grade mindset of "whoever has the most toys wins". That making something bigger, by default, makes it better. (A lesson small towns with urban sprawl could, but have never learned.) That contributions to society are directly proportional to the number of people who have heard of you.

Not that I am against making money. (Though non-profits of course should not make a profit, though many act like they should.) Money is needed to keep things running. I am however against the idea of expanding just for the sake of making more of it. It's lazy thinking, and only partially effective. I'm against not opting to find a way to improve the budget in-house. I'm against selling off the earned reputation in order to purchase a flashier, emptier one. Why is everyone more worried about "getting on the map" than they are preserving what made them great in the first place?

Greed. Keeping up with the Joneses. A mistaken notion of keeping up with modern times. Lack of internal vision. (As opposed to external.) Who knows why? But if I were a school or a theatre company, I would much rather have my reputation proceed me, than have my reputation thrown in the faces of anyone who happens to pass by. I'd rather establish a mission that doesn't include expansion as a primary goal. Lighthouses, after all, don't move. They stay right where they are. And thank god they do. How many people would be lost without them? I'd much rather be a part of a light house, than have my name in bold print on a map.