Never Give Up

From http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/efficacynotgiveup.html:

After Fred Astaire's first screen test, the memo from the testing director of MGM, dated 1933, read, "Can't act. Can't sing. Slightly bald. Can dance a little." He kept that memo over the fire place in his Beverly Hills home. Astaire once observed that "when you're experimenting, you have to try so many things before you choose what you want, that you may go days getting nothing but exhaustion." And here is the reward for perseverance: "The higher up you go, the more mistakes you are allowed. Right at the top, if you make enough of them, it's considered to be your style."

Some days it feels as though nothing is easy. It feels as though you have to fight with a million more talented, richer, more attractive, more graceful people for a little bit of recognition. Some days it feels like nothing matters. Even if you can eke out a little slice of the proverbial pie, it couldn't possible EVER be worth the amount of work you put into it. Nobody cares, nobody notices the work you do, so you might as well do the bare minimum, right?

I think some people actually live by that philosophy, but not the really memorable people. Great thinkers, great athletes, memorable performers, and other mentionables perhaps aren't really that different than 85-90% of the population except for in one thing. They never gave up, even when they were told repeatedly to.

Sometimes it takes a million tries to get something right. Sometimes you have to write a million posts before someone reads your blog.

I can't dance, and I'll probably never be Fred Astaire, but I can learn efficacy, and I can remind myself to keep going, even when my confidence is at its lowest. Because it's never worth doing only the bare minimum, even in a world where nobody else will notice the difference.

Being Busy vs. Leisure Time

I've noticed that by and large, my friends fall under one of two categories: There are those who are always busy, seem to be taking on all kinds of new projects all the time, and doing each project to the best of their abilities, and there are those who spend every night and weekend hanging out, having leisure time, and wonder why the other ones are never around.

I don't feel like I'm in any position to pass judgment on either choice. The first category is an interesting, yet very stressful way to live. It can also be lonely. If you opt for new experiences over spending time with those who love you, you may find yourself without people to spend time with. On the other hand, the second choice, while more relaxing, seems to offer less in the way of living. Life is so short, that if you spend too much time just hanging out, you may miss the opportunity to try one of the "one day I want to..."s on your life list.

Personally, I fall into the first category. I like to be busy and usually am. In my case this results in the occasional feeling of exhaustion, burnout, periodic loneliness, and anger when I take on more than I should and lash out at those around me. I feel I gain from my choice, a richer life, more interesting experiences, a chance to continually grow, and opportunities to discover myself. Some would argue with me on this last point though, saying that I will only be able to fully know myself when I stop being busy, and start staying still. Maybe they're right, but if staying still doesn't feel like "me", am I not neglecting my own needs by doing it?