Writer's block? Invent non-existent band names....

I dunno if it's neuro-scientifically sound but this works for me sometimes since block seems to be mostly inability to hop out of a pattern. In that state of mind, even useful stuff gets obscured/nixed by the evil inner copy editor. Here's some examples I scribbled as an exercise recently.

Zambezi Arcade
Boltmuffle
Masonic
FluidOz
Cow Pilots
Becker's Analyst
40-second Lloyd
Suenami
Digital Femurs
Harper Tunnel Syndrome
Inflatable Synagogue
Schwamprats
SteamPress
4-Cycle Dildo
Elysian Throw Rugs
Youranium
Thereminium
Silicontinentals
Saltpillow
edison's tuba
Nurse, please

Better than staring at a blank page. Try it. Share your creations..

To we, or not to we, that is the question

Steve Pavlina: Cave-Free Spirituality

...Personal relationships can be a tremendous source of spiritual growth. While it’s possible for us to fall out of touch with reality if we spend too much time alone, that’s less likely with abundant social interaction. If we become too impractical in our thinking, the people around us will tell us we’ve gone off the deep end.

My opinion is that the pursuit of spirituality is really the pursuit of accuracy, where our goal is to develop the most accurate model of reality we can. If we fail to include other human beings in this model, we toss away too much potentially valid information, so our model will be doomed to inaccuracy. Spirituality is really understanding. The more accurate your understanding of reality, the more spiritual I would say you’ve become.

If the pursuit of spirituality causes you to lose the ability to function in the modern world, then I’d say you’ve taken a wrong turn. Genuine spirituality should be immensely practical. If your model of reality is accurate, then you shouldn’t have to escape reality to feel whole and complete. You should be able to function even better than the average person, especially when confronted with modern day challenges.

I like his view and its confident comfort and embrace of the unknown. It made me think of some parallels: The above could easily be an extended metaphor to discuss what many call "cocooning" in marketing and ethnography speak. As our choices have multiplied, the pressures on us to make emphatic statements--to be sure and confident--have also expanded. Media pushes experts and analysts and assorted blowhards to the spotlighted fore on all fronts. That feeds and implies a zeitgeist or way things should be that we all consciously or subconsciously absorb. It's a lot of pressure by example. Of course, many of the experts have an agenda to sell, a master other than truth to serve, which only screws up the quality meter inside our subconscious as it's absorbing all this palaver from TV, meetings, industry papers or whatever.

The answer? Shut down, retreat, say "time out." Believe it or not, that's one reason for SUVs' success. They put distance and mass between me and the other guy in a more and more fluid world. The other reason is that in that world which is often bewildering to "seasoned" grown-ups those outsize SUVs, Hummers for instance, offer a rare chance to feel "tall" and grown-up and "capable." (Yeah, there's more to it than that, but that's another conversation.)

The odd thing is that as we fill our lives with packing peanuts and air bags and Amber Alerts, we still have a subliminal unmet urge: Danger; exploring the unknown. Planting your flag.

Steve's post references a solitary cave-dwelling kind of spirituality (or awareness). He finds it sort of pointless, and I agree. The ability to focus in an empty room with nothing but yourself and perhaps an empty notepad and pen is not so much a talent as it is a necessity: what else is there to do? But, when the cave is filled with others, jabbering, scribbling, humping, moaning, jumping up and down and telling you how they think things oughta be... well, suddenly a nice little walk-up studio cave with kitchenette starts to look good.

But for most, that's not an option and so the communal cave is it. And after a while, you get used to the sounds and smells of your fellow cave-dwellers. You sublimate your curiosity. You begin to breathe the fumes. And you know what they say about huffing:

Images of Organization

The allegory pictures an underground cave with its mouth open toward the light of a blazing fire. Within the cave are people chained so that they cannot move. They can see only the cave wall directly in front of them. This is illuminated by the light of the fire, which throws shadows of people and objects onto the wall. The cave dwellers equate the shadows with reality, naming them, talking about them, and even linking sounds from outside the cave with the movements on the wall. Truth and reality for the prisoners rest in this shadowy world, because they have no knowledge of any other.

However, as Socrates relates, if one of the inhabitants were allowed to leave the cave, he would realize that the shadows are but dark reflections of a more complex reality, and that the knowledge and perceptions of his fellow cave dwellers are distorted and flawed. If he were then to return to the cave, he would never be able to live in the old way, since for him the world would be a very different place. No doubt he would find difficulty in accepting his confinement, and would pity the plight of his fellows. However, if he were to try and share his new knowledge with them, he would probably be ridiculed for his views.

For the cave prisoners, the familiar images of the cave would be much more meaningful than any story about a world they had never seen. Moreover, since the person espousing this new knowledge would now no longer be able to function in the old way, since he would no longer be able to act with conviction in relation to the shadows, his fellow inmates would no doubt view his knowledge as being extremely dangerous. They would probably regard the world outside the cave as a potential source of danger, to be avoided rather than embraced as a source of wisdom and insight. The experience of the person who left the cave could thus actually lead the cave dwellers to tighten their grip on their familiar way of seeing.

The cave stands for the world of appearances and the journey outside stands for the ascent to knowledge. People in everyday life are trapped by illusions, hence the way they understand reality is limited and flawed. By appreciating this, and by making a determined effort to see beyond the superficial, people have an ability to free themselves from imperfect ways of seeing. However, as the allegory suggests, many of us often resist or ridicule efforts at enlightenment, preferring to remain in the dark rather than to risk exposure to a new world and its threat to the old ways.

Come to think of it, "You really should get out more" is very good advice. I'm off to [breakfast]. Hope it's a busy place.

[original post 02-03-06 ]

Pixar U on Learning and Working in the Collaborative Age

We're at week four with our MindGamers, pictured right. Just passing the point where individual competitiveness starts to yield to trust - to actual curiosity and openness to the ideas of your team-mates. A great time to post the above from Pixar University on Improvisational Collaboration (via George Lucas' Edutopia.org). As always, examples from one industry, like Randy Nelson's, have application in others. That is, if you let them, if you don't insist that ideas must come from you (or your industry) before you'll give them grace inside your head.

Actually, that's a goofy conundrum for all ages, eh? -- I want to succeed, but on my terms, earning full credit. But I also want a safety net--blame insurance or cover--if I fail. The default position is not to try, because pain of failure, be it embarrassment, proven mediocrity or just choking, can seem that much more real and fear inducing than the far-off chance of success and its benefits. And that's kids and grownups. Hmm. Elizabeth Gilbert has some very cool thoughts on that part too. From TED...



Pretty good stuff. You de-mythologize and depressurize the "Creative Genius" or auteur trap by going back to the mythic root of the idea and the word. A "Genius" was what they called the Daemon whispering in your ear, not you, the creator. Saying "I admire your 'Genius'" was like saying "I admire your muse, 'Clio.'" You were just the channel, as cool and lucrative as that might have been.

As much as creative types (such as me from time to time) bemoan the John Wayne-ism or Jack-Welch-as-Oracle worship of the Business set, there's quite parallel types in action on the creative side of the fence: the tortured artiste of singular vision, the enfant terrible.

S&K Menswear, shirtless. And avoidable?

Founded in 1967, Richmond's venerable S&K Menswear joins the list (CFO Mag) of meltdown victims. But was it the meltdown? Maybe it goes back much further to an inflection point they missed, say, 10 years after their founding.

Let's start with a few graphs. (open in new window for bigger) The nosedive one at left shows that being well-dressed for 2009 jobs that just aren't there may not be the best of business models for a struggling business attire company.

The second graph at right shows that S&K's model of dress and business casual is up against a compensation/productivity mismatch akin to stripes and plaids.

What's that mean? Let's look at some history to set up our story of S&K, a company trapped in the 80s.

Casual Fridays showed a loosening of formality in businesses as the Boomer/Levis/Dockers generation took over. But, as dress codes lost their luster, another directive kicked in to match the other 60s-induced self-destruction-prone revamps of American life: Kill organized labor and it's wage negotiating power. Looks like this:

The anti-labor idea had broad appeal thanks to crappy Detroit cars and loose threads on expensive American-made clothing. (Yes, ironically, the same kind of slackness, unaccountability and entitlement mirrored in today's Wall Street and Davos-level management class.) But divorcing labor had specific appeal to American management because they knew a boatload of new technical and procedural efficiencies were creating that higher productivity track in graph two. Notice that the trend logarithm never changes much.

That's because it's the cultural and social perception that changes. Even Rolling Stone magazine grasped this shift in the early 80s with their Perception v. Reality advertising. See:



Indeed, from bra burning to Victoria's Secret, penniless hippies to Amex's "Membership has its priveleges," that 40 degree logarithmic productivity slope meant Money! The gap between it and the compensation trackline means company balance sheets got to keep more, or less, of that made money.

Since executives are paid according to the money they "find" or preserve within that costs/productivity accounting structure (laugh loudly--mua-ha-ha-ha!--when someone tells you management "creates" value), those executives had very personal reasons to de-link and de-leverage the effectiveness of business from the compensation of those doing the effecting.

And there you go, S&K. The guys making money/wages would never shop your store. And the guys losing money/wages needed more than clothes from you to hold their ground.

Which brings us to Hip Siegel's and Abe Kaminsky's creation, S&K Famous Brands, circa 2009.

Go look at their website. Besides the heavy couponing and gift-card offers that are great for S&K banking as much future business as possible to today's balance sheet, where are the VALUE PROPOSITIONS that a working male cares about in 2009? The same place they were when S&K got delisted by NASDAQ in 2005 -- nowhere.

Click around and you find this:

As we celebrate 40 years in business, we remain true to our vision:



We will be the nation's premier menswear retailer, selling quality, stylish merchandise at prices that represent the best value proposition in the market. We will operate attractive stores in high traffic areas that customers aspire to visit, staffed by enthusiastic associates, thereby creating a great shopping experince that helps our customers feel good about how they look.

Umm. That's not vision, that's a squint through goulash-colored glasses. Let's parse it a bit. They do acknowledge the term Value Proposition. That's nice. But we start with an anchor, tied to a cinderblock and chained to a safe: The "nation's premier" anything tends to value camouflage over ideas. Leaders don't talk that way--they do, they challenge, they offer clarity and salvation from something or directions to something. In this case, the directions are to stylish merchandise. Okayyy, then. The rest of the statement is just as, umm, premier. Male customers, especially at this value price point, aspire to a great shopping experince? (Yeah, that's their typo.) Nope.

Now, we'll grant that even Ralph Kramden wanted to feel good about how he looked. But S&K's customer is no metrosexual. He wants shortcuts, secrets, a way to minimize the pain of the premier "shopping experience." Joe Smith or Ralph Kramden need more than enthusiastic associates. In fact, there's many a Honeymooner's episode built around Kramden's eternal search for specialness--shares in a dodgy gold mine, producing a Broadway play, real estate bets, get-rich-quick inventions and even, yes, a clothing line. As brands go in the archetypal library, Kramden was the Everyman, the Regular Guy or Gal.

S&K died because it forgot this, forgot it's own place, as the approachable Sage, provider of Wisdom in that everymans's struggle to survive and get ahead.

I bought my first suit from S&K in 1985, as a newbie copier salesman fresh out of school looking to not appear as lame and nervous as I felt facing all those cold calls. At the same time, I was also enduring sales training and reading whatever I could to make the inside of my head as well-heeled and semi-savvy as the the rest of the body was supposed to look.

Clothes are the avenue to many things. They communicate and cover. Grown-upness. Rebel. Wallflower. Risk or conservatism. In S&K's case, in their particular price band, they also fill a gap between confidence and ability, courage and competence. Clothes don't make the man. They give hope to the man who doesn't believe he's made it. Maybe wonders if he can make it.

S&K ceded this vital ground of professional guidance, the Retail John Malloy/Tom Hopkins partnership back in the late 80s. Jos A. Bank and others such as Men's Wearhouse were already working it to varying degrees of success. Didn't matter. (You don't abandon the appeal of hearty meals because Campbell is pitching Chunky soup.)

That others understood this realm better (but not by much) than S&K was no excuse to wander aimlessly for the next 20 years of workplace change and Everyman wage depression. The options for them were many. Where was their thinking and experimentation? Where was Hip and Abe's Salesman ethic and polish, made real for rubes like me at 23 years of age? And for today's rubes? Wandering through that store, I was a pigeon for new ideas, for a pedestal, or a toolkit, on my journey to becoming a Master of the Universe™. (Young and naive, remember?)

Stylish? Feel good about how they look? Sure. But what S&K's customer really wanted, then as now, was the means to feel good about what they could achieve. And their balance sheet shows how widely they've failed to understand this. S&K isn't selling clothes. They're mentoring Everyman Heroes. And clothes are only one aspect of that training offering.

S&K is in the tank for many reasons, but today's economy is not the reason they're shirtless. In fact, given the above explanations, maybe shirtless is inaccurate. They have one left, the Nessus brand. Too bad. Didn't have to be.

Love is in the air. And all over my new carpet, dammit!

As I speak with more and more anxious folks, the virtues of diversification really do ring true. Farmers do it, multi-national conglomerates do it. And, as Robert Heinlein said, "Specialization is for insects." (Gotta find that quote.) So, here's Fouroboros Worldwide's February offering, available in card, mug and t-shirt form.

"Love is in the air. And all over my new carpet, dammit!" on Hammermill #94 Bright Copy paper, with Heinz Ketchup and a Kingsford briquette.

Shovels? Try Stencil-ready: Arts as overlooked Stimulus

The Atlantic - Business Channel

The money for artistic projects is almost by definition ready to be injected into the economy. It may take years to draw up a plan for a highway, obtain the right of way and fend off legal challenges before the bulldozers start rolling. But to buy a canvass and some paintbrushes, or even some metal for a public sculpture, is comparatively straightforward. That puts quick money into the pockets of the companies that build, sell and ship those artistic materials as well.

"The money goes straight into the economy," says Janet Echelman, a sculptor whose giant metallic nets have revitalized public parks and downtowns from Texas to Portugal. "I pay two full-time assistants in my studio, plus consultants who are architects, engineers, and landscape architects, as well as lighting designers. A very large portion goes into fabrication, which is funding workers at a steel factory." Echelman currently has a commission from Phoenix to build a centerpiece for a new downtown park that may face funding shortfalls. There are "shovel-ready" arts projects like hers throughout the country.

The piece goes on to point out that public art, taken seriously at street-level and viewed as street-scape enhancing, goes a long way to increasing real estate values, encouraging foot traffic and sense of neighborood/community pride. For those who view things through a more law and order prism, well-considered and -executed public art initiatives (ongoing programs, not install and forget) are great at establishing a 'barrier' to the vices that unattended and disregarded public spaces devolve to. Bottom line, if you don't own and claim spaces with your icons and messages, you won't like the messages of those who take advantage of your disinterest.