philosophy

For some reason, there’s a distinct stigma associated with practicing social skills. It’s perfectly “normal” to spend two hours working on your jumpshot, but weird to practice starting a conversation with people.

I’ve thought to myself a hundred times that I need to practice my handshake (I always look directly at the hands shaking, rather than at the person I’m meeting).

The example of the handshake is a good one, since it reveals that many social skills are simply mechanical skills in disguise.

A handshake is a physical act, one that can be practiced just as readily as a jump shot. Initiating a conversation is no more than placing yourself appropriately and saying a few (memorizable) words. You can practice walking confidently in front of a mirror in your bedroom, then unleash it on the stage.

Improving a social skill requires the same work as any other skill; repetition, feedback, evaluation, and modification (repeat). Yet it’s something were not supposed to do? Why? I think there’s a common opinion that social skills are supposed to develop naturally (we repeat them and certainly receive feedback from an early age). Would you train to be a basketball player by playing only when the schoolyard kids decided to throw together a game of pick-up? Hell no!

Personal Style: A Starting Point

I’d like to encourage you to begin with a look at how you dress. Again, it seems like we’re just supposed to figure it out using our morning dress routine (often hindered by a lack of sleep, a rush to get out the door, or missing contact lenses).

Take a few minutes to work on these mechanical skills that are part of the social skill of STYLE!

1. Associations

Take ten varied pieces of clothing from your closet (or floor). For each piece, take a look at it, then think of three words that describe it. You may not use any word that describes a concrete feature of the garment (such as blue, cotton, long, bedazzled). Think of the impression it creates, the story it might tell, or the characteristics someone who wears the garment might have.

2. Tucking In

Style doesn’t end when you pick your clothes; you actually have to put them on, and it’s not a trivial process! Practice tucking in a dress shirt (seriously!). I suggest doing this once with jeans and once with a pair of more formal pants/slacks/trousers/whatever. Think about the image of someone wearing a dress shirt and jeans, and someone wearing a dress shirt and dress pants. Are they the same? Which one is more likely to have wrinkles in the shirt? Which one is likely to tuck the shirt unevenly? Tightly? Untuck and retuck each a few times until you look like the character you’re imagining.

3. Color Wheel

We often develop psychological attachments to colors, and end up wearing them over and over. To break such a rut, grab a neutral pair of pants (standard blue jeans work well here), then as many shirts of a similar cut as you have (i.e. all t-shirts, all polo shirts, or all dress shirts). Then, try each on and think about whether you like the color combination. Switch to a different pair of pants (perhaps khakis) and run through the shirts again.

No Fear

Remember, you can do all of this from the safety (from ridicule) of your own room. However, you might find these skills useful when shopping too! Talking through the associations a particular garment has can really clarify whether you want to purchase it. It’s hard to believe sometimes, but there’s nothing wrong with practicing this stuff!

Homework:

Please don’t read this post, nod politely, then not do the exercises above! It’ll take you thirty minutes, tops. If you’re Batman and have to go save the world now, make a note to do it tomorrow morning. Regardless, I’d love to hear how it goes!

Bonus:

This post from Ramit Sethi is a fantastic summary of why people fail at managing money “by the books”. I strongly recommend you read it and consider your own psychology on money.

Impromptu episode based on some recent events at work. Enjoy!

I discuss the importance of silliness in your fashion repertoire. It’s important to understand that style and fashion are not just about rules and looking “perfect,” it’s also about expression, and inspiring emotions in other people.

More 3style:
Youtube
Twitter
Flickr
Delicious
(For all of the above, search/use tag 3stylelife011 for content related to these episodes)
Email: 3stylelife@gmail.com

I recently made a trip up to Durham, North Carolina (to watch the Duke Blue Devils DESTROY unc and claim an ACC championship), and as such spent several hours in the hallowed Krzyzewskiville (where I used to live).

The weather in Krzyzewskiville is typically cold (the low was about 27 degrees on Friday night), making dressing stylishly a difficult challenge.

Naturally, I was interested by the challenge, and participated in it with gusto. I’ll talk about how to dress to your style despite cold conditions later, but today I want to talk about what the point of that is.

Many people consider fashion/style to be a reflection of ourselves or a form of communication. Thus, we can talk of whether this communication is honest; whether it reflects what we truly feel. In cold weather, this manifests itself in the question of whether warmth and comfort is more important than the visual image we project.

I was thinking about whether being uncomfortable to allow my standard style meant:

• My honest feeling is that I valued the style over the warmth.
• OR

  My honest feeling is that I valued the warmth over the style, and my fashion communicates dishonestly.

It’s a tricky philosophical question, and I don’t have a clear answer yet. I’ll be thinking about this over the coming week, and I’d like to hear what your opinions are. Has a similar situation come up for you?

Two recent experiences have led me to an interesting question:

How do we decide (consciously or not) what makes us satisfied with life? Why have I always been relatively discontent with my successes, while others seem perfectly (read: more) happy with less?

The question is effectively stated in this video by Chris Brogan, part of the Overnight Success series. The relevant line is at 2:14:

Again, you don’t have to do this. There are other ways to the finish line, but you and me, we’re talking about overnight success.

I know that I’m trying to build “overnight success” and I know that it kind of kills me that I don’t have it yet. What makes such a large level of success so important to me? Why do I need to do something broad, significant, and difficult to find satisfaction? (Not that I’m complaining, or I’d rather be content to watch TV all day, I’m just curious.)

On the flipside; certain simple things are incredibly rewarding. I went bowling last evening after doing design work all day. Bowling on the two lanes to my right was a group of ten friends, probably a few years older than me, just drinking beers, hanging out, and bowling a few games on a Sunday night.

I was struck by how happy the entire group seemed, and I can understand how one could be happy living a life with experiences like that on a regular basis. Yet, here I am, plugging away at something currently very solitary, very inwardly motivated. Why does this drive me the way it does? Why do I require this “difficult” experience to feel satified?

Why do I need overnight success?

Online marketers in today’s world sing the praises of testing from blogs to Youtube, to the most far-flung reaches that dialup modems can access. Analytic tools from Google, web hosting services, and blog services allow for constant measurement, recalibration, and refinement. All of this to the end of reaching one’s goals more effectively.

Curiously, this seems well and good in the “no-emotion” world of business but oddly taboo in the creative practices (art, music, writing, etc.). I know people go so far as to rigorously test large combinations of book titles, subtitles, color schemes, and book covers in order to get their product in the hands of more readers. (Tim Ferriss talks about this process here; it’s a long, but very informative watch). I have to imagine that the same process goes on at record labels, movie studios, and large publishing companies.

Yet I never hear of the content being tested in such a way. I don’t see artists parading around drafts and different versions on some idea to see how people react. I don’t know of writers who circulate novel chapters to anyone but close friends/editors. The closest thing I can think of is when a band plays a song from their next album at a live concert; though even then I imagine it’s more for publicity and interest generation than actual feedback and testing.

Does it go against the “mystique” of the artist to test their work and evolve it based on the opinions of his/her audience rather than their own? Again, it all comes back to the goals of the artist.

If you are out to express something personal; solely to have your own thoughts crystallized in the universe, then yes, you should make the work in solitude, free from the tampering of others’ ideas.

However, if your aim is to influence, to make others feel, to make others think, to inspire, to question, to intentionally do something with your art, then testing seems crucial. In such a subjective realm as art (music, fashion, writing…) only the most experienced can have even a hope of trusting their judgment as to how people will react to a creative piece.

I’d guess that most artists lie in both camps; producing both for themselves and for an external purpose. Further, I’d guess that there is a strong enough stigma (embodied in terms like “selling out”) against anything but truly solitary creative development that the vast majority of artists simply make what comes into their heads and hope for the best.

Is is necessary to test and refine art in this way? No. May it help you get more out of the work? I think so. Is it shameful to do? Certainly not.