Anthony Gatto, arguably the best juggler alive and without doubt one of the most famous, started juggling on television shows like The Tonight Show when he was just a child. Now 40 years old, he holds 11 world records and spent years starring in Cirque du Soleil.
But somewhere in the last years of his career, Gatto decided to get out of performing entirely and now runs his own concrete mixing business instead. In an in-depth piece for Grantland, Jason Fagone looks into what made a talented artist, who was trained and was dedicated to his craft for most of his life, abandon ship entirely:
The fact that juggling audiences can’t tell the difference between hard tricks and easy tricks means they also can’t make any meaningful judgments about jugglers… And jugglers have always taken advantage of audiences’ ignorance. Instead of performing hard tricks, they perform easy tricks that look hard. They lie to delight.
But then came a guy who wasn’t interested in lying, who wanted to do stuff that was hard because he could. This was his power in the world and he wanted to exert it — the basic impulse of any athlete. Yet he never really found his audience, even though he conquered juggling’s demands like no one before him. Gatto learned how to stand calm and straight-backed beneath sick, dizzying multitudes of spinning, arcing objects and conduct them with model-train precision into his hands. He also learned to charm people, even though it didn’t come naturally to him… He also learned to make hard tricks look hard, to pantomime the exertion and self-doubt of a man working at the edge of his ability even though his ability stretched on and on. He learned to entertain, because for some reason, even though we exist in a physical universe defined by the relative attractive powers of massive objects, the mere demonstration of a lush and lovely control of gravity is not enough. He labored to please an audience that could never appreciate his greatness. Then he got older and watched a new wave of jugglers abandon the stage for the flicker of computer screens, sneering at the bright-light mastery he’d worked so hard to gain…
Almost no jugglers get rich. Many work other jobs on the side. Salaries at Cirque start at $50,000, which is decent for the circus world but hardly cozy. I’m sure Gatto is working in concrete because it’s the best thing for his family. Still, the countertop video is jarring, because it represents the perfect inverse of a classic Gatto performance: not a bewildering splay of virtuosity for an audience that will struggle to understand, but a how-to lesson for viewers who will immediately grasp each simple step.
And in the end, Gatto abandoned performing entirely. While there’s no clear answer here (Gatto never agrees to talk with Fagone), it’s well worth the read for anyone who aims to make a life-long a career out of their creative talents.
Read it here.
Conventional wisdom holds that the higher echelons of any industry are populated by people who never quit. But writer and designer Sarah Kathleen Peck suggests that quitting is not only OK, it can be richly constructive.
In a post on Medium, Peck describes what she learned from observing her enduring pattern of enthusiastically starting projects, pausing partway through, and beating herself up for failing to ship:
What was happening? Why was I quitting? Life happened. Things got hard, they got rough: deadlines built up. Real work pulled me in. The need to take a run and take care of my body surfaced. The competing pulls of attention and focus and deadlines wrapped me in their compelling arms. But something else was happening, too. Ten days of paper-crafting…led me to building an entirely new online program of my own.
Skimming the lessons in a business-building mastermind opened up a new way of creating sales pages. Reading half of a book propelled me into my next project. And then it hit me: what if I was getting exactly what I needed?
The idea is that quitting can beneficially lead to embarking on a different project that’s informed and nourished by the abandoned one. Peck suggests that it’s possible the ego is the only part of ourselves that actually cares about finishing, at least when it comes to exploratory creative work:
You don’t have to do everything to get something out of it…. No one said you have to get 100% done and be perfect to enjoy the fruits of your progress.
If you’re working on something that’s not beholden to someone else’s deadline or parameters, don’t finish for the sake of finishing. Quit to see what space you’ve opened up for something even greater.
On the commentary track (around 5:11) for Pixar’s animated film, WALL-E, director and writer Andrew Stanton discusses how the creative process can sometimes lead you to unexpected places and hard decisions:
I always sort of always equate story development to an archaeological dig, in that you kind of know the dinosaur you want to dig up and where it is. You pick a piece on the ground and you start digging and you bring up bones and you start trying to piece together this dinosaur or the story you’re trying to find, but you just don’t have much say about which bones you’re going to get and what bones they are…
Stanton understands that sometimes everything about your dig will point to a tyrannosaurus rex. Then at the last minute you’ll dig up something and realize all your bones were backwards and you actually have a stegosaurus. He asks the hard question: do you shift everything around at the last minute to show a stegosaurus or do you just force it to be a tyrannosaurus rex?
Even if it extends the deadline, it’s better to realign your project then to force it to be something it’s not. When the creative process takes your concept for a spin, go with it. Stanton concludes, “I am very, very lucky that I work for a place that encourages last minutes ideas.”
Jason Norcross, executive creative director at advertising agency 72andSunny, knows that when you have too many ideas or options, it’s easy to overanalyze every option before making a decision. In an interview with Fast Company, he says the best option is just to pick one and see what happens:
The best way to learn, create and move forward is to be decisive. It’s OK to be wrong, but make a decision because then you’ll learn. At least you’ll know you’re wrong and can move on. As opposed to just over-thinking and debating things… If it seems like it’s meeting the brief and it’s the right thing to do, then pursue it. If it doesn’t come to life for whatever reason, then reboot and go in a new direction.
When you spend so much time trying to decide what the best direction is, you burn people out and stop making progress. No one has time for that. Select an idea that fits the solution and leave time to try another idea if it doesn’t work out. If something is going to fail, it’s better to find out sooner than later so you can change direction.
Lost productivity is costly. According to multiple research studies, the average person receives more than 304 business emails a week. The average worker checks their inbox 36 times in an hour, and then spends about 16 minutes refocusing after handling incoming email. The studies show that the annual productivity costs per employee are $1250 for spam emails, $1800 for unnecessary emails, and $2100-$4100 just for poorly written ones.
Founder, and the author of Work Simply, Carson Tate, explains:
“We are all bogged down by the sheer volume of email we receive and to which we must respond. That volume grows even more daunting because so much of that communication is unclear, ambiguous and flat out sloppy. These sloppy emails waste your time. And they cost you hours each week. Which means they’re also costing you money.”
She suggests that we can dramatically reduce the volume of email messages we receive by crafting email messages using the key foundations of journalism: who, what, why, and how. It may seem obvious, but utilizing all four in one emails ensures that your message is understood upon the first read, and does not require multiple back and forth emails asking clarifying questions.
Who? This breaks down into two sub-questions: “Who needs to respond to, take action on, or make a decision about this information?” Put their name(s) on the to: line. “Who needs to know this information?” Put their name(s) on the cc: line.
Why? Look back at the names on the to: line and the cc: line. For each name, ask yourself, “Why is this person involved in the project?”…Make sure the tone, style, and content of your email matches up—just as you would choose appropriate words, tone, and body language if you were sitting across a table from them and discussing the topic in person…
What? “What is the purpose of the email?…What are the key facts? What references or research data need to be included?”…
How? Ask yourself, “How do I want recipients to respond?” Describe this explicitly in your email. If there’s a deadline, say so. If you want an email response, say that…Never assume that people will understand what you want—tell them as straightforwardly as possible.
Whereas brands used to push their products and messages out in what was essentially a one-way conversation, the social web has transformed it into a two-way conversation. Which means that we have to learn to speak authentically and honestly to our customers, and that we can’t hide when we make mistakes.
To learn how to deftly navigate this new dynamic, we chatted up one of the most talked-about brands on the social web—Warby Parker, the eyeglasses-cum-lifestyle brand that has been a mad success from day one. Here, co-founder and co-CEO Neil Blumenthal breaks down how to be okay with leading a brand that you can’t totally control:
What’s the best way to go about being “proactive” when something goes wrong?
I think it goes back to transparency. The first thing to do is admit it. Explain what happened and apologize. Your customers can be very understanding provided that you enable them to be understanding, which means that you need to have an honest discussion with them and fess up when you make a mistake.
For instance, think about if you call any of our favorite cell phone carriers. [laughs] It used to be that they were just rude and didn’t solve your problem. Now, they’re often polite, but they still don’t solve your problems. So, they’re getting a little bit better, but you still want to break your phone in half after one of those conversations.
So being polite and friendly and apologizing is part of it. But it’s just the first part. Then you have to actually correct the situation. For us, that might be offering a discount, it might be offering free glasses, it might be doing whatever it takes to get that person a pair of glasses before they go on vacation. It’s the little things that make a brand great. It’s about being diligent with details, keeping your antennae sensitive to what customers want, and responding in a way that’s authentic to your brand. It sounds intuitive, but the fact is that many brands are not treating their customers the way they want to be treated.
Do you think the dynamic of the social web means there’s more of an interplay between customers and brands than there’s been in the past? Can brands still control the conversation?
I was talking to Troy Carter—an investor who also used to be Lady Gaga’s manager—the other day, and he made a really interesting observation. We were discussing Warby Parker, and he said, “It’s not your brand; it’s our brand.” “Our” being the public. And I think he’s right: You do not control your brand anymore. You can influence it and help guide the conversation, but there’s a limit to how precisely you can define your brand on your own.
This idea that a brand will conform to a nice PowerPoint presentation with a strict brand architecture and messaging hierarchy is no longer the case. Your brand is part of conversations that are being had in the streets, on Twitter, and on Instagram. And the best that you can do is help influence that dialogue by giving people reasons to talk positively about it. These days, your community managers are your brand managers.
This is an excerpt from 99U’s new book, Make Your Mark, which features 21 essays and interviews on building a creative business with impact.
Renowned author Stephen King, who has published 49 novels that have sold over 350 million copies, writes at least ten pages each day. As a creative person, you’ve experienced writer’s block, even if you’re not necessarily a writer; software engineers, artists, or anyone that has to create things for a living is susceptible. We also all know the well-worn advice of practicing even for just a little bit, at least once a day — but how does one actually stick to it?
Product Manager at Twitter, Buster Benson, recently created 750words.com to help us break through writer’s block and open up our creative passages. He uses a rewards system to keep on track (much like the famous Jerry Seinfeld calendar-method). The idea is simple:
Every month you get a clean bowling-esque score card. If you write anything at all, you get 1 point. If you write 750 words or more, you get 2 points. If you write two, three or more days in a row, you get even more points. How I see it, points can motivate. It’s fun to try to stay on streaks and the points are a way to play around with that. You can also see how others are doing points-wise if you’re at all competitive that way.
Benson shares his inspiration:
I’ve long been inspired by an idea I first learned about in The Artist’s Way called morning pages. Morning pages are three pages of writing done every day, typically encouraged to be in “long hand”, typically done in the morning, that can be about anything and everything that comes into your head. It’s about getting it all out of your head, and is not supposed to be edited or censored in any way.
The idea is that if you can get in the habit of writing three pages a day, that it will help clear your mind and get the ideas flowing for the rest of the day. Unlike many of the other exercises in that book, I found that this one actually worked and was really really useful.
By writing 750 words a day, or 50 lines of code, or drawing a page of illustrations every morning, you’re turning the act of creating into a habit. A creative block isn’t worn down by worrying or procrastinating; it can only be broken by trying.