I recently received a text message from a friend with a screenshot of a Rick Rubin quote:
“Making music is like fishing – You can go out fishing, but you can’t say I’m going to catch three fish today. You have very little control over this process. It’s magic, really.”
This reminded me of the book “Catching The Big Fish” by David Lynch, which uses the same comparison between fishing and creative work. In the book, Lynch claims that creative people “fish” for the really great ideas that are hidden deep in the subconscious. Lynch believes that the best way to approach this kind of fishing is a form of neoliberal mindfulness called TM – Transcendental Meditation (which just happens to be his biggest source of income besides his filmmaking)
This analogy has its flaws. It exotifies one’s own creative process and puts a lot of focus on the “good ideas” which, according to these two men, are of course directly transferable to commercial success.
But the parable also kind of works, because it illustrates an important aspect of creative work: the relationship between knowing and not-knowing, control and non-control. A writer can sit down at his desk with a strong ambition to come up with a new and exciting idea for a screenplay, but the will is not enough – you have to have a starting point, an idea, a … fish.
Most creators with years of experience can probably agree that a large part of the practice is simply getting up and going to work every day. You have to be in the studio for something to happen. You can’t predict exactly when the big fish will bite – but you can create the best conditions for it to happen: get up early (fish are more active then), make sure you have warm and waterproof clothes, avoid tangling your fishing rod and use the right bait for the right fish. It’s nice to have coffee with you too.
The myth of productivity
As a creator, you often need both analog and digital tools of some kind. If not to create, at least to communicate and plan your time. I’ve tried a variety of different sets of digital services and apps to increase my focus and productivity; Todoist, Notion, Things, Omnifocus etc — all in hopes of streamlining the creative process and ultimately making more and better projects. The problem is that these tools capitalize on their users, not the other way around. To quote Goodhart’s law:
When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.
Society is obsessed with productivity and measurable results, quantifiable actions that can be translated into data. Society’s fetish for data creates systems that place more emphasis on measurability than the actual product or activity in question. Spending large parts of your workday in an ecosystem of apps and services produces a large amount of data that these companies can use (in the quantification of their work!) but it does not necessarily create a better output for you.
There are a number of similarities between many of these productivity tools, they often use gamification – you get points and achievements for completed tasks, and they often try to integrate AI in the process. Getting the users to spend time inside the app is what is important for the companies behind these services.
It is easy to confuse one with the other: Planning vs doing the work. Completed to-dos vs results that you are actually happy with. But, as the good Alan Watts once said: Don’t eat the menu instead of the meal.
Shadows in the cave
The Weird Studies podcast recently discussed the ever-present and eternally debated issue of artificial intelligence and art. The episode raised an important point: the real dangers of AI are not necessarily that they will take our jobs, but that they will make us stupid. ChatGPT can spit out compelling passages of text on a range of topics, but >language< is not the same thing as >intelligence<. In a future where we rely more and more on AI, there is a great risk that we will make these confusions. Only when AI reaches a level where it >cannot< explain what it feels in written language, can we start talking about intelligence.
Language itself is a form of abstraction and mental discrimination, a way of simplifying the complex, ever-changing and interconnected nature of reality. Language is of course completely necessary for our existence and also fun and valuable. But the more layers of abstraction we use as an explanatory model for reality, the greater the risk that we become lost, confused and destructive in our actions.
Less is less (and less is not that bad)
In his popular book Digital Minimalism, Cal Newport writes in a chapter about the Amish and their relationship with technology and tools. You might think that Amish society is frozen in time, stuck in some distant past, but really it’s just their outlook that differs from ours. Technology is allowed but it must contribute to making society sustainable. Otherwise it is banned, or modified to do new tasks instead. The Amish people are actually hackers in its truest sense. They let technology work for them, not the other way around.
When we reason in the following way; “Here is a new and exciting technology, how can I find a way to make room for this in my practice?” Instead, the Amish community asks: “Is this technology in line with our values? Is this tool the best way for me to reach my goal and at the same time contribute to a healthy society?” – Of course, the Amish community has a lot of dubious values when it comes to gender equality, for example, but as creators we can probably all feel better by becoming a little more Amish in our relationship with our tools.
Your fishing rod does not need Bluetooth
The term attention economy is used to explain the phenomenon when global digital platforms make their consumers their product by trying to get them to spend time on the platform that generates valuable data. As previously mentioned, this also applies to the tools and services we use as creators.
One way to rebel is therefore to instead actively avoid distraction by not using services that trick you into believing that the menu is the meal, that the gameification of productivity is actual work. And guess what? It will make it easier for you to work creatively.
After my many experiments with different productivity tools, I have found that the one that causes the least distraction creates the best conditions for my work. Like the fisherman who needs a fishing rod and a boat, we often only need a number of tools that are good at doing only one thing. In my case; a pen, a notepad and the Simplenote software. I’ve removed all the apps and services that I don’t use, or that don’t inspire me, or that distract me or give me anxiety. Everyone’s needs look different to do their work. But fishing rods probably don’t need Bluetooth, no matter what you’re working on.
A more mindful approach to technology is not only good for our mental health, it is also good for creativity. The single most powerful thing you can do to enhance your creative practice is to experience reality, and the feeling of expressing yourself within it, with as few abstractions and barriers as possible.
Happy fishing.