Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Copy What You Like (2006)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–48 of 48 posts

Re: Copy What You Like (2006)

#41

Post by 6stringmerc »

coldtea wrote: post #23
6stringmerc wrote: post #5

It's kind of funny to see such a profound and important lesson distilled in to such a kitsch cross-stitch type musing. That might sound harsh but look closely - it took Graham 10+ years of following the wrong mental path before finally finding the right one. It's not about "copying what you like" it's about "finding yourself first" - and, even then, there's no guarantee self-actualization will put food on the table o…

> It's kind of funny to see such a profound and important lesson distilled in to such a kitsch cross-stitch type musing. And it's funny to see such a pompous comment with almost zero substance. "Kitsch cross-stitch"? Please. It's a simple personal blog post, nothing more, nothing less. It's not meant to be some peer reviewed paper, or some kind of refined George Steiner essay. You can find way more kitschy stuff in "…

Pompous? Sure, but I'm the one with the English degree who doesn't go telling other people it was a waste of time, effort, or intellect to use the journey constructively. The point of the personal essay was to elevate his experience as some sort of ideal, off-hand, and I think that's incredibly insulting to people who grind day in and day out on what they love and can barely eat. It's one thing to talk about self-actualization when living hand-to-mouth, it's another when sitting on financial security.

"The only difference between crazy and eccentric is the size of the bank account."

Re: Copy What You Like (2006)

#42

Post by 6stringmerc »

Jimmy wrote: post #8
6stringmerc wrote: post #5

It's kind of funny to see such a profound and important lesson distilled in to such a kitsch cross-stitch type musing. That might sound harsh but look closely - it took Graham 10+ years of following the wrong mental path before finally finding the right one. It's not about "copying what you like" it's about "finding yourself first" - and, even then, there's no guarantee self-actualization will put food on the table o…

>It's kind of funny to see such a profound and important lesson distilled in to such a kitsch cross-stitch type musing. Yeah, this is definitely one of the aspects of PG's writing that I enjoy and admire the most. Though there is a danger that that kind of simplicity can become misleading. Regardless, I think that there really is an important lesson to be learned here. I work in an artistic field and have been having…

Thanks for understanding what I was going for, and I'd like to offer just a slight bit of additional encouragement as another creative artist. Just pursue what you want to make, work on it, grow, and either the world will take notice, or, at worst, simply ignore it (baseline result). You're right that being "in the canon" is really a luck-of-circumstance type of thing. Just ask all those dead black guitarists that Jimmy Page of Led Zeppelin ripped off over the years. He's in the canon, very few of them are, but what does that mean? It means do what you do, do it the best you can, and when you die, it's something that will live on after you forever. Not a lot of CEOs or Founders can say the same about their life's work.

Re: Copy What You Like (2006)

#43

Post by voidhorse »

Jimmy wrote: post #34
voidhorse wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The three philosophers you cite are among those commonly cited as good writers! I cited Nietzsche myself above. I suppose it depends on how you define 'good' writing. In the case of literary style I think for most people it boils down to there being some amount of creativity and play on the level of language itself (i.e. see Nietzsche) which is disconnected from the content. e.g. I'm sure Bertrand Russell was capable…

>You'd essentially be stating that a whole domain of tradition, practice, and procedure which organically grows and evolves, and I might add, in almost logical progressions at times, was ousted by the whims of one foppish professor who gamed everyone into liking something he liked simply because he liked it and was impassioned enough about it. I mean, take this argument and apply it to something like theology. "Are y…

Great stuff Jimmy. I appreciate your response, and your willingness to address the lengthy post--most would give up! You've clearly got an intellect.

I know before you said you weren't totally advocating aesthetic relativism, but I think you should go ahead and take the plunge! I think you're most of the way there, and why not commit to the position? Why not elucidate it? Examine it, explore it? I think you'd be a fine proponent.

Anyway, I'd love to continue this discussion, but I don't want to clog the thread here since we are getting a bit far away from PGs essay at this point--my email is in my profile. Shoot me one if you're interested. Otherwise, you can be certain I'll be mulling over your reply for the next few days.

Re: Copy What You Like (2006)

#44

Post by baby »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #13
voidhorse wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, it would have been clearer, and grammatically correct, if he had used a colon instead of a period. Though it also would have been less stylish. The fine essay is a delicate balance between style and clarity.

Paul mentioned he reads his essays out loud. In that context, it flows nicely.

Because he understands how to read it. Punctuation is here to help the reader, not the writer, to read his texts.

BTW it reminds me of Flaubert who did shout out loud every sentences he would write.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=mPpydgyUSKQC&pg=PA244&lp...

Re: Copy What You Like (2006)

#45

Post by coldtea »

6stringmerc wrote: post #41
coldtea wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's kind of funny to see such a profound and important lesson distilled in to such a kitsch cross-stitch type musing. And it's funny to see such a pompous comment with almost zero substance. "Kitsch cross-stitch"? Please. It's a simple personal blog post, nothing more, nothing less. It's not meant to be some peer reviewed paper, or some kind of refined George Steiner essay. You can find way more kitschy stuff in "…

Pompous? Sure, but I'm the one with the English degree who doesn't go telling other people it was a waste of time, effort, or intellect to use the journey constructively. The point of the personal essay was to elevate his experience as some sort of ideal, off-hand, and I think that's incredibly insulting to people who grind day in and day out on what they love and can barely eat. It's one thing to talk about self-act…

Self-actualisation doesn't have much to do with being rich or not (riches might even be an impediment as much as being poor -- "slave to money", "golden handcuffs", etc.).

Besides, PG is not lecturing some third world sneaker factory workers. His audience is startup founders and/or developers, that, as a rule, don't live "hand to mouth".

And the particular advice (whether right or wrong) applies to all income levels. Even if you're a starving artist It can be good to "copy what you genuinely like" as a way to progress (artistically, if not financially).

Re: Copy What You Like (2006)

#46

Post by logfromblammo »

Jimmy wrote: post #37
logfromblammo wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An author, as the spigot through which art flows into the world, is allowed to attempt such a thing, but their editor is supposed to coax them back 'round to something readable--or at least to something that won't wake the typesetter in the middle of the night, screaming.

I mean, I know this conversation is all about railing against the snobbish "you just don't understand fine art" attitude, but I find the stubborn "he really needs to reign it in and not be so crazy" attitude to be unfortunate too. It's good for artists to experiment. A lot of those experiments can be very fun and enjoyable for the readers, if you're willing to give them a chance.

No, the artist is supposed to experiment. Someone on the business side is supposed to rein it in when the experiment turns to rubbish. Sometimes this quashes something great, but mostly it ensures that artistic professionals can be supported by their own work.

But it is particularly unfortunate when such an experiment escapes into the wild, and a clique seizes upon it as a test for tribal identification.

It's okay to dislike "great literature" and enjoy "pablum for the lowest common denominator" or "escapism for immature minds". I don't really find a whole lot of value in critiquing other people's preferences. If you don't like a specific artwork, you should just keep sampling until you find something you do enjoy, no matter who else likes it. You're not going to make yourself happy by forcing yourself to like something just to fit in to a social group; you're far better off being honest with yourself. After all, you never really know if it's an Emperor's New Clothes situation until someone speaks up and says "I hated every word of this book, and I have no idea why anyone would think it's a masterpiece."

It may well be that will be followed up by "I only said I liked it so that you guys would think I was intelligent and cultured", "I read it in bed because it was such a reliable way to make me fall asleep", "I only read like a third of Gravity's Rainbow, and faked the rest of the way through for book club".

Re: Copy What You Like (2006)

#47

Post by baxtr »

coldtea wrote: post #23
6stringmerc wrote: post #5

It's kind of funny to see such a profound and important lesson distilled in to such a kitsch cross-stitch type musing. That might sound harsh but look closely - it took Graham 10+ years of following the wrong mental path before finally finding the right one. It's not about "copying what you like" it's about "finding yourself first" - and, even then, there's no guarantee self-actualization will put food on the table o…

> It's kind of funny to see such a profound and important lesson distilled in to such a kitsch cross-stitch type musing. And it's funny to see such a pompous comment with almost zero substance. "Kitsch cross-stitch"? Please. It's a simple personal blog post, nothing more, nothing less. It's not meant to be some peer reviewed paper, or some kind of refined George Steiner essay. You can find way more kitschy stuff in "…

"Finding yourself" is not an end goal for me. It's a journey towards using the time I have on this planet to a) have (great) impact b) doing what I'm passionate about

In other words, it is the quest to "find a mission" and not just your live on a day-to-day basis. I think this is what most of us strive for, but don't have the guts to pursue, because it means taking time of your day job, reading books, talking to people etc. And even if you find your mission there is no guarantee that you'll fulfill another necessary condition: earning enough money for you and your family.

I truly believe that if more of us would start a journey to "find themselves", find a mission and drive the human race forward with their skills we'd be better off. However, the opportunity cost for this approach can be quite high, which is probably the reason just a few follow their heart and instead spend 1/3 of their lifetime (8 hrs per day) working for soulless corporates with no (or prentened) mission.

Re: Copy What You Like (2006)

#48

Post by omilu »

fenwick67 wrote: post #21
samirillian wrote: post #16

> It was so clearly a choice of doing good work xor being an insider that I was forced to see the distinction. Not sure I get this. Doing good work would seem to go along with being an outsider in a corrupt economy.

XOR meaning exclusively one or the other. He's saying it was apparent that if you're an insider, you won't do good work. And if you're doing good work, you're not an insider.

I didn't get this either even though I understand XOR. I get it now.
Post reply on HN