Choices, balance, creativity
AutismAwareness: Pressing through the crowds
Art: Trade offs in art, creativity for all
Art: Great English modernist poet, JH Prynne
Hard decisions: Is the Carnival worth it?
Economics: UBI assessment, somewhat mediocre?
Women: Why they are telling more of their own stories?
Education: When the Naughty Step Makes Things Worse (Naomi Fisher/Eliza Fricker
Arts Impact: Figurative Launches (UK arts impact investing)
Links: GLP1s (obesity), VC tech books, brain plastic skepticism
AutismAwareness. I made a mistake. I thought we could go from Westbourne Grove to Ladbroke Grove during the carnival.
We ended up at Westbourne Grove underground station because JP insisted that we could not go to Latimer Road. Latimer Road station was the better choice in every way except that one day many moons ago he had to get off there when he didn’t want to and so he bears an almost-phobic grudge.
Press of bodies. Half the people barely swaying with a stoned-eyed gaze. The other half begrudging our need to press through. JP his hands over his ears, releasing screechy yelps to compete with the carnival blare.
We are running our own Olympics. Hugging him from behind and slowly pushing him forward, creating gaps with our screeches. The minutes seems like hours as we make it past the sound system. Now we have to wait for a bus to pass. The bus is out of place and JP must photograph this curiosity. Perhaps this is our medal. It feels like we are in a different world, playing a different game and dancing a tune few people hear.
Trade-offs in arts. Everyone can be creative. On two separate occasions I sat next to a dapper man wearing an orange tie and a velvet jacket. I did not know it at the time but this man is considered one of Britain’s greatest Modernist poets.
I first read his work in 2020 as I studied and wrote poetry under Forrest Gander (a great American poet) at Harvard. The man with the orange tie is J. H. Prynne. I’ve dipped into his work from time to time over the last decades.
Howard Davies writes on Prynne:
Love him or loathe him, Prynne represents the cutting edge of current British poetry. Like Magritte, he possesses a uniquely witty and idiosyncratic voice that is at once polarizing and perplexing. Hermetic and baffling, abstruse and rebarbative, dry and even downright incomprehensible are just some of the adjectives that have been used to describe his work.
Prynne for most of his working life was a lecturer at Cambridge (where I met him through Gonville & Caius friends and theatre). Davies has a detailed dive on his work.
I recall Prynne because he made little money from poetry despite being the equivalent of an Olympic medalist.
My friend the poet and/ copywriter Rishi Dastidar (podcast here) told me poets have always been poet/job. A poet can never expect to make a living from poetry. Money needs to flow from another activity.
Nick Cave in a recent letter was asked:
I’ve had the same job for nearly twenty years. I’m fifty-three years old. I feel like packing the whole thing in and doing something completely different. I’d like to write songs. Paint pictures. Do something artistic. Any advice?
And Cave replies:
‘Outstanding!’ you may say, Fletch. ‘That’s for me!’ ‘I’m gonna quit my fucking job!’ ‘I’m gonna tell my boss to shove it!’ But, before you rush into anything, remember that creating art, like many things of value, comes at a cost – and confronting one’s own self can be the most challenging and fearful thing you’ll ever do. Fletch, I wish you luck in whatever you choose to do.
My photographer professor (Chirs Kilip) taught me a similar idea. He made us assess many great photographers, and he commented on those who made money and those who were struggling. He suggested there were many other factors that went into making money from photos, and it was not all about the greatness of the photographs.
I came to understand that – at least for me – and I don’t have thoughts beyond my own experiences – there was a trade-off between the type of art (eg writing odd performance pieces that help create my own funeral) I wanted to create, and the type of money people were likely to give me.
This has been a small shift somewhat in the world via Patreon, and YouTube, and substacks and Kindle etc but it’s still tough. (The lowering of entry barriers to monetizing creativity is an incredible positive for certain types of social media, IMO and may outweigh other polarising harms esp. if you don’t believe Haidt cf Peter Grey).
However, for me, it was not only the money trade-offs between arts and investing. At the first order, society values my pension investing skills much more than my writing skills. But more the trade-offs within my own arts practice.
My last few theatre works, I doubt I would have written if I thought of being commercial. My prize winning play was an adaptation of a Japanese Noh play – a niche form itself. My recent performance lecture shows about climate; about death and shaping my own funeral. These shows play to 50 odd people a time. People told me they have been moving and impactful. But they don’t make money.
I think about this when considering what to write or what to podcast. I can attempt the stories and ideas of lesser known, or unknown popularity as I don’t fight to be popular. (Although I would still like an audience.)
My podcast is available to have such a wide ranging no theme style because I am not looking to monetise and so I am unconcerned. For myself, I traded the ability to create whatever I want to create and not worry about money. I think it has lead to better art. I may have become better simply via more practice but a freedom to create has helped.
I think people can do a few things well. Even really well. Perhaps not in all things. But certainly poetry and some other creative areas can live alongside other work. We have Prynne and other poets showing this.
So what do I think? I think you can be highly creative and also work on another type of career. I also think there will be trade-offs in whatever career you choose and an arts career does have money trade-offs for many.
I’ve been reflecting on this in part because of my conversation with philosopher Ruth Chang. I mentioned this earlier podcast here.
In decision making about hard choices, she posits something different from utilitarian, or consequentialist expected value ways of thinking about the choice. (The ends justify the means, or only think about the consequences).
I don’t believe I entirely understand her framework, but I think it’s important to consider. And to consider other decision making frameworks as well that are not only expected value or utilitarian. And not only those around duty or honour.
Tyler Cowen has suggested being two thirds utilitarian. I am unsure of the split. I would not reject cost/benefit analysis applied to many choices, in many situations (perhaps situations that are not hard) we may not apply rigorous thinking enough but for our hard choices I think we could do with appealing to something more. I think that’s an area Chang is appealing to.
It strikes me in the choices of what art to create, or whether to create art at all. Or in mixed ways where you can create art and do other things too. Pluralist.
But I don’t think Chang’s framework gives you any easy answers either. It might help you feel better about committing to a choice.
I think back to the Notting Hill Carnival. There have 7-10 stabbings each year for the last few years. Some times even a death. Many local residents leave for the weekend as a million other people descend. Some people make money, and many people - say a million people - have fun. On the other side, there are a few stabbings, an occasional death and local disruption (and one boy and one father lost in a crowd).
There would be second order impacts of banning the carnival. Certain people would likely feel persecuted, perhaps social cohesion would lessen. I guess decision makers weigh up some of the consequences and then also take into account notions of community wishes and ideals. Perhaps Ruth Chang’s framework may give a different insight it probably puts a little less weight on consequences.
I am unsure what an alien would make of our decision making processes.
I had a chat recently with the head of sustainability of one of the largest biopharma companies in the world. Biopharma has some unique challenges (access to medicines and health equity) that challenge society in a way that other sectors eg technology does not. Many people believe some form of healthcare is a human right, and that unfettered pricing for biopharma drugs is wrong but also do not typically believe that access to a mobile phone is a human right, or that phone pricing should not be free. The dividing line being - in essence - that biopharma drugs save lives.
Our conversation was pretty detailed. You will find the large companies in the world have dedicated, hard working thoughtful teams working on sustainability.
Many companies are trying pretty to hard to play their part in solving complex problems from Scope 3 carbon climate impacts to recyciling of plastic syringes. And that this too is a product of capitalism to all those suggestings it is always capitalism’s fault.
In this my later life, I have come to appreciate the premium give to hotel restaurants and hotel receptions. Accessible toilets, very hospitable and often spacious. The better hotel also have very good restaurants at equivalent premium prices at least for big cities. But, if you have confidence you can lounge around very comfortably with good wifi all day and normally very good air conditioning/heating. Hotels seem to give reasonable leeway to the quirkiness of their guests.
Links:
Would a universal basic income (UBI) work? What would it do?
Many people agree July’s RCT on giving people a guaranteed income, and its paper from Eva Vivalt, Elizabeth Rhodes, Alexander W. Bartik, David E. Broockman and Sarah Miller was, despite whatever flaws it might have, the best data we have so far on the potential impact of UBI. … Zvi on UBI: I see essentially four responses.
The first group says this shows UBI doesn’t work….
The second group says this was a disappointing result for UBI. That UBI could still make sense as a form of progressive redistribution, but likely at a cost of less productivity so long as people impacted are still productive. I agree.
The third group did its best to spin this into a positive result. …
The fourth group was some mix of ‘if brute force (aka money) doesn’t solve your problem you’re not using enough’ and also ‘but work is bad, actually, and leisure is good.’...
This essay is about how economic development, technological change and growing demand for creative industries has enabled women to tell their own stories.
(Alice Evans, paid substack) This is behind a paywall, but I think the trend is true and Alice puts weight on the econ development ideas behind this.
Eliza Fricker and Naomi Fisher have a new book coming out…
…and this webinar based on the book. Sometimes these children are called demand avoidant, or sometimes they are called naughty, defiant or oppositional. We call them pressure sensitive. Whatever you call them, they need a different approach.
Fran Sanderson spins out and launches Figurative.
“It is with great excitement that I introduce you to Figurative, a bold new organisation driving new ideas for a thriving cultural and creative sector. Figurative incorporates two existing teams – Arts & Culture Finance (ACF), who previously operated as a division of Nesta, and the New Philanthropy for Arts & Culture (NPAC) group – with a huge range of experience in the fields of social investment, philanthropy and fundraising, programme design, impact measurement and more.
And we will be even greater than the sum of our parts. We aim to become the leading impact, investment and innovation agency for the cultural and creative sector (CCS), offering a full spectrum of support for inspiring organisations, and building strong new networks and links into philanthropic and social investment circles.” More here. Looking for investees and partners.
Why do GLP-1s [Obesity, diabetes, addiction, Ozempic] (Star-slate Codex) work so well?
The blogs and books underlying VC and silicon valley technology culture canon (Patrick Collison, HT Tyler Cowen); I note these are fairly different from stock investment books / blogs.
Thanks for reading. Next time my podcast with Julian Gough on the evolution of the universe and sustainability UnConference.