culture

Six Further Thoughts On Not Being Serious

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, Steve’s Tumblr, and Pillowfort.  Find out more at my newsletter, and all my social media at my linktr.ee)

I’m still processing my thoughts over Ted Giola’s post about how the US and maybe Western society isn’t serious anymore. It’s all watered down, performative, targeted, and just weirdly empty. When I posted my own blog post on the subject, my friends and readers had feedback. I figure I’d round that up – and these might become columns on their own.

So to reiterate, Giola felt our culture lacked seriousness, and I agreed – we’re doing things that aren’t what they say we are, in a performative existence. Combined with capitalism which rewards knowing how to Push The Money Button, and it’s a toxic mix.

So here’s a few things I wanted to explore after hearing from people:

Good Unseriousness: Is it always good to be serious, can’t we be funny or have fun? I’d say that you can be funny and serious (George Carlin, Terry Pratchett), and sometimes the best funny is one with a grounding that is serious and all-too real. I’d also add that FUN might not be serious but it’s also not a lack of seriousness – what Giola targets is a deliberate unseriousness.

Lack of Agency: How often do we lack Agency, so why be serious in the first place? This is a fascinating thought because I “get it” instinctively – and I think there’s something true here. If you feel helpless, all the “serious people” are screwing around and lying, does anything matter? Then you end up with a kind of toxic, spreading, unseriousness.

Curation: We’re not trained in curating, checking facts, and so on. This leaves us to an onslaught of bullshit from politicians, mediocre media, and more. Even if we want to deal with things seriously, it’s hard to sort it out – and exhausting. Which leads to Lack of Agency . . .

Speed: Our culture and time move so fast that it’s hard to keep up with anything. We’ve not just got a lot of media and news, it’s all coming fast. It’s easy to get caught up in something unserious, it keeps us from cultivating, and maybe at some point we just give up. It’s also hard to pay attention to what’s right in front of us.

Misuse of Unseriousness: We’re also used to a very bullying culture that chides people for not being able to take jokes that are just disguised abuse. “Can’t you take a joke” is endemic in our culture, and horrible things can be both serious and not at the same time. This just distorts what’s serious and not – and maybe even the manipulators aren’t sure anymore. The Serious and Unserious become harder to separate.

Fear: This is a conclusion of my own – unseriousness for all its problems also can be due to fear. People are afraid to confront our climate issues. A second generation millionaire faces the fact they might only be there due to birth, not any skill. Politics is insanely complex. Confronting the world we live in is hard and unseriousness is both a tool to cover up your failings but also a possible reaction. Many a political figure has a crackling fear running beneath their worlds, you can feel it, but it seems they can’t.

So those are a few thoughts from some great dialog with friends and readers – and hopefully food for thought for you. I honestly do think we’re in a crisis of seriousness in the world, and its making everything worse. But it’s not as simple as it may seem, so exploring it, well, is serious business.

Steven Savage

Channeling Innovation

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, Steve’s Tumblr, and Pillowfort.  Find out more at my newsletter, and all my social media at my linktr.ee)

I came across this fascinating paper that suggests innovation is the result of collective interaction (shared knowledge, exchange of ideas, etc.). Think of it this way – we’ve got all this stored knowledge, cultural interactions, kind of a shared brain, that leads to innovation. People may carry it out, but it doesn’t come from them – a bit like channeling or “being ridden” in spiritual terminology.

Having worked in everything from medical research to tech to writing, I find the paper compelling not just for its citations, but how it fits my own experiences. I’ve watched creatives – including myself – “come up” with ideas that are the results of inputs and experiences, evolving into something. I’ve seen tech changed over the years, watching interaction across time and space result in great – and stupid – things that can’t be really traced to a single “cause.” The ideas may appear in people, but it doesn’t arise from anyone, but the time itself.

I’ve often been skeptical of people who think they’re some kind of linchpin of history. I know what goes on in my own head when I get inspired, and so much “isn’t me.” I know many people get where they are due to wealth, luck, the time, and so on. I know where my own luck and privilege has benefited me.

We may be the carriers of innovation, or where it finally manifests, but we’re not its owners – nor its masters as many a person possessed by an idea knows.

With this idea in mind (ha!), I’d like to take a look at something I’ve oft complained about – the lack of innovation and anything interesting in the tech industry in, well, the last ten or fifteen years.

Consider what happens if we believe that some Great Innovators are the source or all good things. We will seek these Great Innovators, pay attention to them, and then rely on them even if they aren’t producing good ideas. Because we seek them, anyone who fits the idea in their head is someone we listen to and assume they know what they’re doing. This of course leaves room for plenty of liars and grifters – maybe most of them.

Do that long enough and you not only lack innovation, you have a kind of anti-innovation. People with fame and money are not innovating, but now have the fame, money, and regard to propagate non-innovative ideas. The non-innovators can buy technology and access and even crush places where innovation originates.

Meanwhile, we’re not working on a culture and a world that increases innovation. We’re too busy looking for the Big Heroic Idea Person as opposed to a society where innovation can be realized. Everything becomes about finding heroes – which don’t exist – and things get less innovative and interesting.

It seems awful familiar, doesn’t it?

Steven Savage

Marketing Is An Infection

by

(This column is posted at www.StevenSavage.com, Steve’s Tumblr, and Pillowfort.  Find out more at my newsletter, and all my social media at my linktr.ee)

Being a creative person who hangs out with creatives, we often discuss marketing – and it’s a popular subject among us as of late. Our reactions have not been, shall we say, civil towards marketing creative work in 2024. Or probably the past decade. Or three. Or our lifetimes.

Something disturbing that has come to mind from these discussions is how marketing isn’t how we sell writing, but how we THINK of writing. If you at all try to market your work, thoughts of marketing will doubtlessly infect your work as you create it. There’s always that voice in your head that takes the books, seminars, and suggestions you’ve experienced and whispers on how to do your writing or art or whatever.

You’re not writing you’re marketing

That voice is actually a constant drumbeat in our culture and we miss how widespread it is. Personal Branding seminars, amazon marketing lessons, endless books on how to write what sells, etc. are everywhere. There’s also blatant how-to-write-for-market books like “Save The Cat” and so on. I’ve even seen it well argued that the Joseph Campbell’s contrived “momonmyth” has so intertwined in culture that it affects our media and in turn our way of promoting it.

As I’ve changed my writing to be more personal columns (like this), art (under a pen name) and small press (under a pen name, look I have many) I’ve been doing more work for myself. To not think about marketing (as much) is not only liberating, but made me see how it infected way too much of my work (and that’s a wide body of work).

It’s a subtle thing, of course. Write an extra career book to help people in the thoughts it’ll help sell my others. Way With Worlds went through many experiments, including one that made me wonder if it was easier as a promotional – when it became my flagship. I vacillated on the plots of my novels to fit various desires, patterns, etc. (honestly, probably why they weren’t quite what I wanted).

How much of my writing has been me and how much has been marketing thoughts? Marketing is an infection that we’re all suffering from.

The ads you’re sick of in your browser are just the blatant, resource-consuming, questionably-targeted, most visible manifestation of marketing Over Everything. Do so many things seem empty? Well part of that is because they’re meant to be sold not experienced. Does your own work feel like checking boxes to it sells?

Now that I’ve stepped into some more for-me creative works it’s fairly obvious how widespread the Marketing Infection is. It also makes me mourn all the things that could have been and may not be but for someone trying to write/paint by the numbers of a marketing guide.

I don’t cast aspersions on people that want to make money at creative work. In fact, trying to “figure out the system” can be its own fun challenge! But we do have to ask if it’s become too much of a driver that shapes our lives and work. We also have to ask how it shapes our choices of what we consume and do.

Because the infection is widespread.

Steven Savage