Sunday, 15 March 2009
Sunday, 8 March 2009
do I believe in Kondratiev Waves?
Further to my recent blog entry, do I believe in Kondratiev Waves?
Yes and no.
I have however used it as an aid to thinking about investing. See the attached diagram, literally on the back of an envelope.
Assuming that
If you buy at point A, the top of the market, then you will have to wait for nearly fifty years, according to the Kondratiev wave, until you can sell again at a profit! If you buy at the bottom of the market point B, then you will never lose money when you sell.
I believe that we are at a point between A and B, probably on the early stages of the fall. On that theory, now is not a time to buy shares if you want capital growth. The situation is likely to change when;
My view is that investors should continue to invest, but for the time being put your money into the bank. The time to move back into shares is some time away, but the relationship between inflation and interest rates could make it worthwhile to invest sooner. The current emphasis should be on retaining value, and caution, against the background of a falling market.
The small investor is exceedingly unlikely to make money in the current market, but they should continue to set aside money for when the situation becomes less unfavourable and keep monitoring individual and overall share values.
Yes and no.
- I believe they are a useful descriptive tool, and as good a model as any,
- however they clearly have little or no predictive power. Recent history suggests that the wave has a period of around fifty years, but it is exceedingly difficult to fit postwar economic history to the model, and intuitively it seems unlikely that the model would hold true for both the nineteenth and twenty first century.
I have however used it as an aid to thinking about investing. See the attached diagram, literally on the back of an envelope.
Assuming that
- you buy only for capital value, not for dividends,
- value is global world value, individual shares, markets and countries, could contradict trends.
- shares increase in value over the economic cycle - the cycle is around fifty years long
- you want the cash value of your shares to increase over time
- smaller bull and bear markets will operate against these overall trends
- any action you take is infinitessimal and will not affect markets
If you buy at point A, the top of the market, then you will have to wait for nearly fifty years, according to the Kondratiev wave, until you can sell again at a profit! If you buy at the bottom of the market point B, then you will never lose money when you sell.
I believe that we are at a point between A and B, probably on the early stages of the fall. On that theory, now is not a time to buy shares if you want capital growth. The situation is likely to change when;
- we near the bottom of the dip
- share purchase becomes the most advantageous asset class because other asset classes become even less attractive. For example if interest rates are substantially less than inflation, then investing in shares might be worthwhile, even if you still expect them to fall in value. You can always get a dividend from shares and you have not lost value until you actually sell them. If you can control when you sell, then you can recoup money. Investing in a bank, unless interest rates exceed inflation, you are losing money. There is no equivalent scope to recoup losses by timing withdrawl from a bank. At the moment though, you would be losing money faster by buying shares, and you might need to invest for circa fifty years to see a profit on current share purchases.
My view is that investors should continue to invest, but for the time being put your money into the bank. The time to move back into shares is some time away, but the relationship between inflation and interest rates could make it worthwhile to invest sooner. The current emphasis should be on retaining value, and caution, against the background of a falling market.
The small investor is exceedingly unlikely to make money in the current market, but they should continue to set aside money for when the situation becomes less unfavourable and keep monitoring individual and overall share values.
Saturday, 7 March 2009
Making good decisions in difficult situations
Making good decisions in difficult situations
People do not like making decisions, that is why we all have our routines, and little personal rules and foibles, so we already have default options for all the decisions we expect to face.
This works well, you are not reinventing the world every day, that would be exhausting, you are following your routine, free to focus on performing to your best.
However there are difficult situations;
To throw in some examples:
Hopefully you can identify that you face a difficult decision, and the elements that make it difficult. You are in an unfamiliar environment and cannot rely on experience, your judgement is likely to be impaired, you are under pressure to make a decision that suits others, or others are already making.
But what is right for the long term.
Consider risk, balance the short term cost/benefit to you, against the long term cost/benefit.
So humiliating your colleague would be gratifying now, but the long term consequences might not be great. So investigating that smell of smoke is tiresome, but it could save your life. It is well worth enduring small short term costs, if there is any risk of a serious long term downside. If inaction could cost you your life, you need to do something.
Where possible do early research, and decide on key issues in advance, even if they are quite arbitrary, pay no more than X for a car, wait an extra fifteen minutes for you date, then try phoning.
Always distrust being pressured to make a decision, either by others, or by your own emotional investment in your previous decisions, or your self image. So if you are being time pressured, often it is to make a bad decision. If you are getting the hard sell, then often it is not a good decision for you. You always need to be willing to walk away, no matter how much you have invested. So you have spent a morning chatting to that car salesman, but he cannot offer you the car you want. Be willing to walk away. You are a savvy investor but you have lost lots of money on a share that has fallen in value, do you invest in more, to reduce your average purchase price, or is that throwing good money after bad.
If you don't understand something, insist that it is explained in terms you do understand. It is their job to communicate effectively and clearly, it is not your job to speculate what jargon and technical terms might mean. Just because something seems familiar, does not mean you really understand it, if it is important, get it explained, don't stop asking until you understand. Agreeing to things you do not understand is never the smart option.
Give yourself time to make a decision, presented with a big decision, ask for time to sleep on it, or discuss it with your partner. Ask them to explain again anything you do not understand. Distrust evasiveness and pressure. Walk away from people you do not trust or respect. Don't spend time or money on incompetent people, businesses, products, or processes, walk away.
Create a mechanism to get a wider perspective. Often these situations trade on you not being able to step back. A five minute break in a difficult meeting can make the world of difference, a walk at lunch time, walking the dog, chatting to some people about something completely different.
Listen to other views, especially if they contradict your own. Think about what they say.
Be willing to do some research if you don't know enough. Offered your dream job, check out with some people working there what it is actually like. Check out reviews for that new computer you have your eye on, do the people that own one, really rate it so much.
At the start of this posting I outlined how people avoid making decisions, but I omitted the biggest single way that people avoid making decisions. People just copy what everyone else does. We all do it all the time. But making good decisions in difficult times relies on being awkward, putting in the research, asking difficult decisions, being willing to swim against the tide. Better to be the first person on the lifeboat when the boat is not sinking, than arriving just in time to see the last lifeboat leaving.
Be prepared to stand out from the crowd on occasion, honestly being slightly embarrassed is not the biggest risk we face.
People do not like making decisions, that is why we all have our routines, and little personal rules and foibles, so we already have default options for all the decisions we expect to face.
This works well, you are not reinventing the world every day, that would be exhausting, you are following your routine, free to focus on performing to your best.
However there are difficult situations;
- boiling frog situations - it is said that if you put a frog in a cold pan of water, then slowly bring it to the boil, the frog will never jump out, because the change is too gradual.
- radically new situations - situations that are clearly out of the ordinary, where you have no precedents, or personal experience of what is likely to be a good decision, or what will be a bad one. Most emergencies contain an element of this.
- time pressured decisions - these are where you are given less time that you are comfortable with to make a decision. Salesmen use this technique to pressure you into making a decision.
- peer pressure situations - when everyone else apparently behaves in a certain way, it is very difficult to make a contrary decision.
- inability to understand - you are being presented with information, you don't understand it but you don't know how significant it is.
- stressed times - stress, extreme emotion, tiredness, drink, extreme recent events, all these can alter the prism through which we view the world, and make it difficult to think as you normally would. We tend to over emphasize the significance of recent events.
To throw in some examples:
- it is the middle of the night, you smell smoke, do you investigate or go back to sleep.
- you have been working steadily increasing hours, and are offered some extra work that might get you promoted. Do you say yes or no? Is there another option?
- the policeman quickly explains your rights and is keen to get on with the interview, did you understand them, or do you ask him to explain them to you again slowly?
- after a morning of negotiating the salesman can offer you a deal today, only, on the car you were looking at, but it is not quite the model you wanted. Do you buy it, or do you walk away?
- everyone says buy housing, you would be mad not to. Do you buy a house you cannot really afford?
- your boss has just given you a reprimand, then a colleague asks you for some help with something that they have left to the last minute. Do you give them a piece of you mind, it will make you feel better?
Hopefully you can identify that you face a difficult decision, and the elements that make it difficult. You are in an unfamiliar environment and cannot rely on experience, your judgement is likely to be impaired, you are under pressure to make a decision that suits others, or others are already making.
But what is right for the long term.
Consider risk, balance the short term cost/benefit to you, against the long term cost/benefit.
So humiliating your colleague would be gratifying now, but the long term consequences might not be great. So investigating that smell of smoke is tiresome, but it could save your life. It is well worth enduring small short term costs, if there is any risk of a serious long term downside. If inaction could cost you your life, you need to do something.
Where possible do early research, and decide on key issues in advance, even if they are quite arbitrary, pay no more than X for a car, wait an extra fifteen minutes for you date, then try phoning.
Always distrust being pressured to make a decision, either by others, or by your own emotional investment in your previous decisions, or your self image. So if you are being time pressured, often it is to make a bad decision. If you are getting the hard sell, then often it is not a good decision for you. You always need to be willing to walk away, no matter how much you have invested. So you have spent a morning chatting to that car salesman, but he cannot offer you the car you want. Be willing to walk away. You are a savvy investor but you have lost lots of money on a share that has fallen in value, do you invest in more, to reduce your average purchase price, or is that throwing good money after bad.
If you don't understand something, insist that it is explained in terms you do understand. It is their job to communicate effectively and clearly, it is not your job to speculate what jargon and technical terms might mean. Just because something seems familiar, does not mean you really understand it, if it is important, get it explained, don't stop asking until you understand. Agreeing to things you do not understand is never the smart option.
Give yourself time to make a decision, presented with a big decision, ask for time to sleep on it, or discuss it with your partner. Ask them to explain again anything you do not understand. Distrust evasiveness and pressure. Walk away from people you do not trust or respect. Don't spend time or money on incompetent people, businesses, products, or processes, walk away.
Create a mechanism to get a wider perspective. Often these situations trade on you not being able to step back. A five minute break in a difficult meeting can make the world of difference, a walk at lunch time, walking the dog, chatting to some people about something completely different.
Listen to other views, especially if they contradict your own. Think about what they say.
Be willing to do some research if you don't know enough. Offered your dream job, check out with some people working there what it is actually like. Check out reviews for that new computer you have your eye on, do the people that own one, really rate it so much.
At the start of this posting I outlined how people avoid making decisions, but I omitted the biggest single way that people avoid making decisions. People just copy what everyone else does. We all do it all the time. But making good decisions in difficult times relies on being awkward, putting in the research, asking difficult decisions, being willing to swim against the tide. Better to be the first person on the lifeboat when the boat is not sinking, than arriving just in time to see the last lifeboat leaving.
Be prepared to stand out from the crowd on occasion, honestly being slightly embarrassed is not the biggest risk we face.
Sunday, 1 March 2009
Kondratiev Waves and Joseph Schumpeter
I have been doing a little reading up on Kondratiev Waves and Joseph Schumpeter.
If you are willing to accept that our current economic situation is more akin to the 1929 Wall Street crash, than more recent booms and busts, or bulls and bears, then the theory of Kondratiev Waves, and the work of Joseph Schumpeter will be of interest.
Nikolai Kondratiev was that most thankless of creatures a Soviet Economist, in fact so thankless was his role that he was sentenced to the Russian Gulag and received the death penalty. He put forward a theory of Major Economic Cycles, in his book of the same name in 1925. It was the subsequent European economist Joseph Schumpeter, who proposed calling these cycles Kondratiev waves in his honour.
These are the familiar theoretical sine waves, smoothly going up and down, but over a period of fifty years, or more.
These are long terms trends, trends that are beyond the means of individuals, or individual businesses, or countries to counteract. So the 1929 Wall Street crash was an inevitability, better decisions might have smoothed off some rough edges but it was still an inevitability.
Using Kondratiev as a prism to consider the twentieth century, the economy rose steadily from the turn of the century, slowing from 1921 to 1929, before it tipped into full scale depression. The next cycle started around 1950, with the economy rising steadily until 1980, when it tipped into recession, this continued, until the recent banking failures led to our dip into depression.
In theory these cycles are not just economic, they also reflect what the economy was about,
the Industrial Revolution starting in 1771
the age of steam and railways starting in 1829
the age of steel, electricity, and heavy engineering starting in 1875
the age of oil , the automobile and mass production starting in 1908
the age of information and telecommunications, starting in the 1950's.
Kondratiev waves are not accepted economic theory, nor are they the only economic wave proposed, there are
Kitchin inventory 3-5 years
Juglar fixed investment 7-11 years
Kuznets 15-21 years
Bronson asset allocation 30 years
Also if you are familiar with the principles of waves, if waves operate to independent timings, they will amplify or cancel each other out. So if you were to propose that only a couple of theoretical waves operate, then their interaction could easily provide an interesting pattern over a longer time period. Like the perfect storm, peaks could coincide to create once in a lifetime events.
One of the conditions for a scientific theory is that it should have some predictive ability. On the one hand it is possible to fit evidence into Kondratiev waves, but on the other it is impossible to use the theory to predict when different stages will take place. The holy grail for investors is to be able to call the top of the market, or the bottom. Kondratiev does not let you do this. It is arguable that the predictions are banal, things will get better for a while, then they won't, then they will get worse.
The most obvious point in the whole cycle would appear to be the 1929 Wall Street Crash, 2008 Banking crisis moment, where slowing down, tilts into a undisputed nose dive. In the theory of Kondratiev this is the transition from the Autumn Recession, into the Winter depression. Or the top of the sine curve, and the downward slope.
I also like to test any theory with the intuitive, does it seem plausible that it might be true. Not exactly scientific, more common sense. I suppose I can see that economic cycles might exist, stages within the economic cycle will create their own environment, create their own perceptions of risk, on appropriate reward, on appropriate strategies. Our attention is swamped by recent events, more distant events are easily discounted. So we are easily persuaded by talk that there is no more economic boom and bust, or that house prices can only go up. Such views seem to be validated as people make money out of them.
It could be that rather than this rather too straightforward explanation, what is really at play is a variety of variables, which were we sufficiently wise we could isolate, understand and use to predict economic activity. However I do feel that human nature is at play in these things, rather than technical variables. We are talking about how confident people are, and how they behave, experience teaches us that human behaviour is more predictable than it is rational.
It may be that Kondratiev waves capture the underlying paradigms of the economic cycle. The economy is based on an expanding railway network until the cost of building railways exceeds any possible return on them. Old industries are driven out, new ones are driven up.
The economy is based on an expanding internet and knowledge economy until the cost of knowledge and the internet exceeds any possible return. Do we really need so many university graduates, so many social networking sites, so many server farms, so much wifi connectivity, so much always on, connectable, contactable, super loquacious, pundit driven, never stopping 24/7 information? Having we truly tested the knowledge is power paradigm to breaking point?
If there is a perfect economic theory out there, then whoever figures it out, certainly won't be publishing it in a peer reviewed journal. They will be keeping it to themself, while they make lots of money.
I'm not convinced that Kondratiev Waves actually have much predictive power, but on an intuitive level they do seem to encapsulate much of our recent capitalist history. As an investor, I should consider the theory, and its characterisation of our current economic stage as being the Winter of the economic cycle, a time of fear, panic, and despair. Falling inflation turning into outright deflation, and a lack of credit.
The theory predicts the best investments are gold, cash, and bonds after the credit crunch.
As an investor, the theory does raise the very real possibility that we are caught in a falling market, one that might continue to fall for the next decade. You will need to be incredibly smart to be able to make the sort of profits that even unsophisticated investors were recently making.
If you invest, because that is part of what you do, then you will probably continue to do so, and if you are lucky you will make modest returns. If you are a fairweather investor then the market is not for you, when Kondratiev says it is Winter, the market is a cold and merciless place for the unwitting investor to be.
Further reading
wikipedia on Kondratiev Waves
wikipedia on Joseph Schumpeter
the best charts I have come across
If you are willing to accept that our current economic situation is more akin to the 1929 Wall Street crash, than more recent booms and busts, or bulls and bears, then the theory of Kondratiev Waves, and the work of Joseph Schumpeter will be of interest.
Nikolai Kondratiev was that most thankless of creatures a Soviet Economist, in fact so thankless was his role that he was sentenced to the Russian Gulag and received the death penalty. He put forward a theory of Major Economic Cycles, in his book of the same name in 1925. It was the subsequent European economist Joseph Schumpeter, who proposed calling these cycles Kondratiev waves in his honour.
These are the familiar theoretical sine waves, smoothly going up and down, but over a period of fifty years, or more.
These are long terms trends, trends that are beyond the means of individuals, or individual businesses, or countries to counteract. So the 1929 Wall Street crash was an inevitability, better decisions might have smoothed off some rough edges but it was still an inevitability.
Using Kondratiev as a prism to consider the twentieth century, the economy rose steadily from the turn of the century, slowing from 1921 to 1929, before it tipped into full scale depression. The next cycle started around 1950, with the economy rising steadily until 1980, when it tipped into recession, this continued, until the recent banking failures led to our dip into depression.
In theory these cycles are not just economic, they also reflect what the economy was about,
the Industrial Revolution starting in 1771
the age of steam and railways starting in 1829
the age of steel, electricity, and heavy engineering starting in 1875
the age of oil , the automobile and mass production starting in 1908
the age of information and telecommunications, starting in the 1950's.
Kondratiev waves are not accepted economic theory, nor are they the only economic wave proposed, there are
Kitchin inventory 3-5 years
Juglar fixed investment 7-11 years
Kuznets 15-21 years
Bronson asset allocation 30 years
Also if you are familiar with the principles of waves, if waves operate to independent timings, they will amplify or cancel each other out. So if you were to propose that only a couple of theoretical waves operate, then their interaction could easily provide an interesting pattern over a longer time period. Like the perfect storm, peaks could coincide to create once in a lifetime events.
One of the conditions for a scientific theory is that it should have some predictive ability. On the one hand it is possible to fit evidence into Kondratiev waves, but on the other it is impossible to use the theory to predict when different stages will take place. The holy grail for investors is to be able to call the top of the market, or the bottom. Kondratiev does not let you do this. It is arguable that the predictions are banal, things will get better for a while, then they won't, then they will get worse.
The most obvious point in the whole cycle would appear to be the 1929 Wall Street Crash, 2008 Banking crisis moment, where slowing down, tilts into a undisputed nose dive. In the theory of Kondratiev this is the transition from the Autumn Recession, into the Winter depression. Or the top of the sine curve, and the downward slope.
I also like to test any theory with the intuitive, does it seem plausible that it might be true. Not exactly scientific, more common sense. I suppose I can see that economic cycles might exist, stages within the economic cycle will create their own environment, create their own perceptions of risk, on appropriate reward, on appropriate strategies. Our attention is swamped by recent events, more distant events are easily discounted. So we are easily persuaded by talk that there is no more economic boom and bust, or that house prices can only go up. Such views seem to be validated as people make money out of them.
It could be that rather than this rather too straightforward explanation, what is really at play is a variety of variables, which were we sufficiently wise we could isolate, understand and use to predict economic activity. However I do feel that human nature is at play in these things, rather than technical variables. We are talking about how confident people are, and how they behave, experience teaches us that human behaviour is more predictable than it is rational.
It may be that Kondratiev waves capture the underlying paradigms of the economic cycle. The economy is based on an expanding railway network until the cost of building railways exceeds any possible return on them. Old industries are driven out, new ones are driven up.
The economy is based on an expanding internet and knowledge economy until the cost of knowledge and the internet exceeds any possible return. Do we really need so many university graduates, so many social networking sites, so many server farms, so much wifi connectivity, so much always on, connectable, contactable, super loquacious, pundit driven, never stopping 24/7 information? Having we truly tested the knowledge is power paradigm to breaking point?
If there is a perfect economic theory out there, then whoever figures it out, certainly won't be publishing it in a peer reviewed journal. They will be keeping it to themself, while they make lots of money.
I'm not convinced that Kondratiev Waves actually have much predictive power, but on an intuitive level they do seem to encapsulate much of our recent capitalist history. As an investor, I should consider the theory, and its characterisation of our current economic stage as being the Winter of the economic cycle, a time of fear, panic, and despair. Falling inflation turning into outright deflation, and a lack of credit.
The theory predicts the best investments are gold, cash, and bonds after the credit crunch.
As an investor, the theory does raise the very real possibility that we are caught in a falling market, one that might continue to fall for the next decade. You will need to be incredibly smart to be able to make the sort of profits that even unsophisticated investors were recently making.
If you invest, because that is part of what you do, then you will probably continue to do so, and if you are lucky you will make modest returns. If you are a fairweather investor then the market is not for you, when Kondratiev says it is Winter, the market is a cold and merciless place for the unwitting investor to be.
Further reading
wikipedia on Kondratiev Waves
wikipedia on Joseph Schumpeter
the best charts I have come across
Blogging - we are all pundits now
The internet means that our attention is swamped with the views of pundits. A pundit being someone who has little real depth of expertise in a subject.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, but we need to remember to seek out pundits that challenge our thinking, and introduce us to new ideas, rather than sticking to pundits who just tell us what we want to hear. The difference between a pundit and an expert, is that the pundit has never had to study the whole of a subject, just the bits that interested them.
An expert at least knows what he is not telling you, often a pundit only knows what he is telling you.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, but we need to remember to seek out pundits that challenge our thinking, and introduce us to new ideas, rather than sticking to pundits who just tell us what we want to hear. The difference between a pundit and an expert, is that the pundit has never had to study the whole of a subject, just the bits that interested them.
An expert at least knows what he is not telling you, often a pundit only knows what he is telling you.
Sunday, 22 February 2009
No Safety - a Mountain Goats' tribute album
I have lately been enjoying listening to No Safety, a tribute album to one of my favourite bands, the Mountain Goats.
The full story is available within a thread on the Mountain Goats' website, most of the tracks are on a single file for download, although there were a couple that missed the compilation that are appended to postings, and are well worth seeking out.
Someone started off the forum thread with a suggestion that people each contribute their own cover of the track Going to Georgia for a tribute album. Going to Georgia is one of the most popular tracks by the Mountain Goats, though I must confess to not being terribly vexed about it as a track.
Now the idea seems a bit borderline sensible, borderline bonkers. However it actually works very well. The different versions are all sufficiently differentiated to be worth listening too, and because it is the same song, they actually hang together pretty well. It makes for a good background album, you maybe don't need to think about it too much, but it will occassionally grab your interest with something totally arresting or surprising.
I do hope that I am not damning with faint praise, it is a really enjoyable listen, every track is different and of a professional standard, while having a real indie creative vibe to it. There is nothing workmanlike to any of the tracks. The tracks that have most caught me so far have been one by Joe Harbison, which is instantly compelling and electronic, and a bonkers version sung in Norwegian, but there is not a dud version amongst them. Clearly these are some very talented and creative people.
It used to be that what we saw, read, listened to, were all mediated through the process of being published. So quality was consistent, maybe not high, but certainly consistent. The Bloomsbury Set, Algonquin Round Table, or a myriad of other groups demonstrated how narrow and non-inclusive this process was.
However now there need be no mediation through the process of being published. Self publication used to be the vanity press, and accordingly distained. Now numerous people have demonstrated the ability to move from self-publication on the web to creating a perfectly valid career of their own. I have probably touched on this already, so I won't stress over listing folk like Merlin Mann, Scott Sigler, and Jonathan Coulton.
Equally valid there are plenty of people who create material of interest and genuine worth that finds its own small audience. In the past this might have involved bands doing weddings and random gigs at pubs, either performing generic material that people liked, or less generic material that most people did not like, even if a few did.
But now it is straightforward to create material, straightforward to make it available more widely, straightforward to find very niche product. Talent is required rather than just technique or contacts.
Accordingly I can now listen to an album of different versions of the same song, by a band that most people have never even heard of. All the songs are produced with professionalism, passion and real flair.
The world is changing, and sometimes it changes for the better.
The full story is available within a thread on the Mountain Goats' website, most of the tracks are on a single file for download, although there were a couple that missed the compilation that are appended to postings, and are well worth seeking out.
Someone started off the forum thread with a suggestion that people each contribute their own cover of the track Going to Georgia for a tribute album. Going to Georgia is one of the most popular tracks by the Mountain Goats, though I must confess to not being terribly vexed about it as a track.
Now the idea seems a bit borderline sensible, borderline bonkers. However it actually works very well. The different versions are all sufficiently differentiated to be worth listening too, and because it is the same song, they actually hang together pretty well. It makes for a good background album, you maybe don't need to think about it too much, but it will occassionally grab your interest with something totally arresting or surprising.
I do hope that I am not damning with faint praise, it is a really enjoyable listen, every track is different and of a professional standard, while having a real indie creative vibe to it. There is nothing workmanlike to any of the tracks. The tracks that have most caught me so far have been one by Joe Harbison, which is instantly compelling and electronic, and a bonkers version sung in Norwegian, but there is not a dud version amongst them. Clearly these are some very talented and creative people.
It used to be that what we saw, read, listened to, were all mediated through the process of being published. So quality was consistent, maybe not high, but certainly consistent. The Bloomsbury Set, Algonquin Round Table, or a myriad of other groups demonstrated how narrow and non-inclusive this process was.
However now there need be no mediation through the process of being published. Self publication used to be the vanity press, and accordingly distained. Now numerous people have demonstrated the ability to move from self-publication on the web to creating a perfectly valid career of their own. I have probably touched on this already, so I won't stress over listing folk like Merlin Mann, Scott Sigler, and Jonathan Coulton.
Equally valid there are plenty of people who create material of interest and genuine worth that finds its own small audience. In the past this might have involved bands doing weddings and random gigs at pubs, either performing generic material that people liked, or less generic material that most people did not like, even if a few did.
But now it is straightforward to create material, straightforward to make it available more widely, straightforward to find very niche product. Talent is required rather than just technique or contacts.
Accordingly I can now listen to an album of different versions of the same song, by a band that most people have never even heard of. All the songs are produced with professionalism, passion and real flair.
The world is changing, and sometimes it changes for the better.
reality has once again reasserted itself
I have been relatively remiss with blogging recently.
After making vast in-roads into my plans to blitz the world of arts and ideas, with gazillions of pitches of every subject under the sun, things have rather slowed down to a more ponderous rate after the initial frenzy. That is not to say that there was anything wrong with my original thinking. However for the first couple of weeks, I was relatively quiet at work, had an extra day off each week, and was not doing much at the weekend. Accordingly it was relatively easy to find the time to do all this pitching and working up of creative ideas.
Reality has once again reasserted itself, in the various dimensions that it is prone to.
1 Work
2 Creativity
3 Blogging and web-siting
At work, things seem to have moved up to a rather hectic pace, so hectic that it all rather zen, just figure out what I need to do, then do it. Scant time to think, plan, wonder or worry. Hopefully things will slip down a notch or two, but things might conspire against this. I have taken on an entire other job, in addition to the admittedly light duties that I already had. I have been volunteered to do some work for senior management, which rather means that I have to do a good job of it, and I don't want to be making excuses about not getting stuff done. I don't mind, it is a chance to do some interesting stuff, and potentially get noticed. Though frankly I am a bit long in the tooth, for harbouring any great ambitions. Also I continue to come up with ideas to stretch myself, the idea that I pitched in a recent blog, for a staff seminar, will be taking place in April! and I have volunteered to take nightclasses in paralegal studies.
As ever, opportunity never comes in any planned manner, it just all arrives at once, when you are not expecting it. But with this sort of work, sometimes it it just the ability to seem calm and in control that counts, rather than actually doing anything terribly specific. I have been mindful of not working excessive hours, because at the moment I need to be productive, rather than just sitting there doing a lot. So the productive side of my brain gets burnt out after a while. Time to head home.
2 Creativity
as above, after an initial flurry, I have slowed down on the pitching like a maniac, and trying to drive up traffic to my website. Potentially you could easily spend over a day a week on those, and there just has not been the time lately. However I do think that the underlying principles of pitching broadly and keeping track of what happens are sound enough.
Of the initial pitches, the most productive to date seems to be the seminar idea, which has been accepted, and will be taking place. I do feel that my jokes are decent enough, but I've really not found an outlet that might take them yet. I might take a day off at the end of the week to catch up some of this creative stuff.
3 Blogging and web-siting
I suppose it would be easy enough to justify any amount of unproductive trawling around the web as being either research, or making comments in the hope of driving up traffic to your own website.
Accordingly the lack of huge amounts of time ambling the information superhighway probably won't set back civilisation unduly.
I have recognised that it is useful to have permanent links to my individual blogs, just in case I, or anyone else wants to put a link to them somewhere. I have accordingly been doing some of that boring behind the scenes stuff to set up permalinks on my blog. Nothing terribly noticeable, but useful to have.
I have also been a little remiss in blogging, but I do find it a useful way to straighten out my thoughts, and just keep in the habit of writing, so I'm doing a few blog entries this weekend, when there are bound to be other more productive things that I could be doing instead.
In conclusion, that is about that for the moment. I suppose getting somewhere is really about tempering what you want with what you are managing to do, and coming up with a decent compromise somewhere in between.
After making vast in-roads into my plans to blitz the world of arts and ideas, with gazillions of pitches of every subject under the sun, things have rather slowed down to a more ponderous rate after the initial frenzy. That is not to say that there was anything wrong with my original thinking. However for the first couple of weeks, I was relatively quiet at work, had an extra day off each week, and was not doing much at the weekend. Accordingly it was relatively easy to find the time to do all this pitching and working up of creative ideas.
Reality has once again reasserted itself, in the various dimensions that it is prone to.
1 Work
2 Creativity
3 Blogging and web-siting
At work, things seem to have moved up to a rather hectic pace, so hectic that it all rather zen, just figure out what I need to do, then do it. Scant time to think, plan, wonder or worry. Hopefully things will slip down a notch or two, but things might conspire against this. I have taken on an entire other job, in addition to the admittedly light duties that I already had. I have been volunteered to do some work for senior management, which rather means that I have to do a good job of it, and I don't want to be making excuses about not getting stuff done. I don't mind, it is a chance to do some interesting stuff, and potentially get noticed. Though frankly I am a bit long in the tooth, for harbouring any great ambitions. Also I continue to come up with ideas to stretch myself, the idea that I pitched in a recent blog, for a staff seminar, will be taking place in April! and I have volunteered to take nightclasses in paralegal studies.
As ever, opportunity never comes in any planned manner, it just all arrives at once, when you are not expecting it. But with this sort of work, sometimes it it just the ability to seem calm and in control that counts, rather than actually doing anything terribly specific. I have been mindful of not working excessive hours, because at the moment I need to be productive, rather than just sitting there doing a lot. So the productive side of my brain gets burnt out after a while. Time to head home.
2 Creativity
as above, after an initial flurry, I have slowed down on the pitching like a maniac, and trying to drive up traffic to my website. Potentially you could easily spend over a day a week on those, and there just has not been the time lately. However I do think that the underlying principles of pitching broadly and keeping track of what happens are sound enough.
Of the initial pitches, the most productive to date seems to be the seminar idea, which has been accepted, and will be taking place. I do feel that my jokes are decent enough, but I've really not found an outlet that might take them yet. I might take a day off at the end of the week to catch up some of this creative stuff.
3 Blogging and web-siting
I suppose it would be easy enough to justify any amount of unproductive trawling around the web as being either research, or making comments in the hope of driving up traffic to your own website.
Accordingly the lack of huge amounts of time ambling the information superhighway probably won't set back civilisation unduly.
I have recognised that it is useful to have permanent links to my individual blogs, just in case I, or anyone else wants to put a link to them somewhere. I have accordingly been doing some of that boring behind the scenes stuff to set up permalinks on my blog. Nothing terribly noticeable, but useful to have.
I have also been a little remiss in blogging, but I do find it a useful way to straighten out my thoughts, and just keep in the habit of writing, so I'm doing a few blog entries this weekend, when there are bound to be other more productive things that I could be doing instead.
In conclusion, that is about that for the moment. I suppose getting somewhere is really about tempering what you want with what you are managing to do, and coming up with a decent compromise somewhere in between.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)