A lie I tell myself...
Hello there :)
Welcome to issue sixty seven of Manufacturing Serendipity, a loosely connected, somewhat rambling collection of the unexpected things I’ve recently encountered.
This newsletter is free to receive, but expensive to make :)
If you’d like to support me, and can afford to do so, please consider buying me a coffee. Your support means the world to me, and keeps this newsletter free for everyone.
Speaking of coffee, grab yourself a suitable beverage my loves, let’s do this thing...
Part I: Things I’ve Been Thinking About…
Friends, I tell myself many lies, but this is probably the one I tell myself most frequently:
“I only have 30 minutes — it’s not worth me starting that new thing, or working on that big project; by the time I get into it, it’ll be time to stop.”
It’s a pretty great lie in that it gets me off the hook. When I tell myself this lie, not only does it allow me to put off doing the things I really should be doing, but it does so in a way that sounds legitimate — I’m saying I shouldn’t work on that thing right now because it won’t be an efficient or productive use of my time.
Effectively, I’m telling myself that I’m being more efficient and productive by not doing the thing.
And what do I actually do with those 30 minutes? Nothing much.
Whilst I’d acknowledge that sometimes that lie I’ve told myself might serve a useful purpose — for example, if I used those 30 minutes to take a break, that might be a really good thing. But mostly I don’t take a proper break, or do anything else that’s particularly useful, and as such, that lie I tell myself doesn’t serve me well.
The truth is, it would be better to spend 30 minutes doing that thing, than to spend no time on it at all.
So why do I tell myself that lie?
The thing is, it is kind of true. It’s often the case that I can get more and/or better work done in a single 2-hour time slot than I can get done in 4 x 30-minute time slots. (But it’s not always the case — sometimes I’ll spend a single 2-hour time slot spectacularly unproductively with very little to show at the end of it).
I think that the truth is, that it’s a preference — it’s not that I can’t get anything useful done in 30 minutes, it’s just that I prefer to schedule myself larger chunks of time to work on certain types of projects.
In the past, I’ve frequently talked about the importance of figuring out when and how you work best, and then scheduling your time in a way that allows you to work in that way. For what it’s worth, I still think that’s good advice — up to a point. But what that advice fails to acknowledge is that the real world often gets in the way, and so scheduling ourselves like that isn’t always possible.
Why am I telling you this?
For the last 4 months or so I’ve been working on several projects in much shorter time slots — conference talks, devising new courses, writing this newsletter — have all (mostly) been done in time slots varying from 20 minutes to an hour. Historically, I would never have worked like this — if I didn’t have at least 2 hours, I wouldn’t even begin working on things like those.
But you know what? It definitely wasn’t an unproductive or inefficient use of my time. I actually think it was the opposite. I’ve learned that I can actually do a bunch of pretty great stuff even when I only have 20 minutes. Also, even when whatever I get done isn’t that great, it’s still better than doing nothing at all.
If you also tell yourself lies like “I can’t get anything good done in 20 or 30 minutes” I’d recommend giving it a go and seeing what you can get done.
I’m not suggesting that you deliberately schedule yourself like this for everything — if you can schedule yourself a longer time slot to work on a thing, then great! Do that (if that’s how you prefer to work); but rather than completely writing off the days where that’s not possible, see what happens when you work on your thing for a shorter time period.
I write about stuff like this quite a bit. If this resonated, then you might also like to check out: Doing the “big” things, and The capacity to tolerate minor discomfort is a superpower.
Serendipitous finds:
Nesrine Malik highlights how politicians exploit sensational stories to further their own political agendas, and divert attention away from the real issues:
“Cat child didn’t happen, just as Rule, Britannia! and Land of Hope and Glory were not axed from what was described as the BBC’s “Black Lives Matter Proms”. Nor was Cambridge University “forced to drop white authors”, or a Muslim bus driver allowed to throw his passengers out so he could pray, or an Iraqi caught “red-handed” with a bomb awarded thousands of pounds in compensation for being kept in custody too long.
[…]
The problem isn’t anything as trite as an epidemic of “fake news”. Half-truths and full lies are more concerned with diverting political consciousness and consumption to the trenches of identity and lifestyle preoccupation, and away from more critical areas such as the political and economic decisions relating to our standard of living.
[…]
And all this diversion and drama suits our politicians. Boris Johnson, as prime minister, jumping on a rightwing crowd-pleasing story about the BBC, declared “we are not embarrassed to sing Rule, Britannia!”. The facts are not what matters as the bandwagon rolls: all that matters is how the situation is used to advance an image, to reap political advantage, to shape a national mood.
But the costs of this are high. Not just to our ability to negotiate inevitable changes and accommodations needed in a modern, compassionate society, but to the people at the heart of these distortions and fabrications – immigrants, racial and sexual minorities, disabled benefit claimants.”
Seeing Beyond the Beauty of a Vermeer
Teju Cole on how the violence of Vermeer’s era can be found in his serene masterpieces — if you know where to look:
“…my relationship with art has changed. I look for trouble now.
No longer is a Vermeer painting simply “foreign and alluring.” It is an artifact inescapably involved in the world’s messiness — the world when the painting was made and the world now. Looking at paintings this way doesn’t spoil them. On the contrary, it opens them up, and what used to be mere surface becomes a portal, divulging all kinds of other things I need to know.”
Hanif Abdurraqib on The Church Of Minding One’s Own Business
I love this twitter thread from writer Hanif Abdurraqib. Given Twitter’s precarious nature right now, I’m worried it’ll be lost forever, so I’ve copied and pasted the full text below:
“[I] truly cannot stress how enthusiastically I’ve tried to convert my pals to The Church Of Minding One’s Own Business — [it] has served me on every level imaginable over the past several years.
Not even as a "no thoughts, head empty" thing, but my commitment to minding my own business sharply clarifies what I consider my business and what I absolutely do not, and so it realigns my focus, my depth of care for the things I DO care about, my actual & literal energy, etc.
Like, quite plainly, I think I love the people/things I love much better (& am more open/available/curious to love NEW people/things!) because of the space I save simply by understanding what I don't have interest in knowing any more about.
I think because we get tangible windows into the lives of others all day, it can be easy to be convinced that the window entitles one to a depth of knowing, but I have to resist that because I can turn back to the concrete/real knowing, the potential for new knowing, etc.
All that said I do sometimes like to spy on a lil bit of mess from afar while doing a bit of procrastinating or whatnot, I treat it like a small television episode that I watch for a bit & then tap out of & mostly forget about.”
Found via this post from Austin Kleon.
Maria Farrell rightly questions the all too familiar narrative arc of the tech executives who reinvent themselves as data justice warriors, and then are unthinkingly celebrated as a truth-telling heroes:
“They suddenly see their former employers as toxic, and reinvent themselves as experts on taming the tech giants. They were lost and are now found. They are warmly welcomed home to the center of our discourse with invitations to write opeds for major newspapers, for think tank funding, book deals and TED talks. These guys – and yes, they are all guys – are generally thoughtful and well-meaning, and I wish them well. But I question why they seize so much attention and are awarded scarce resources, and why they’re given not just a second chance, but also the mantle of moral and expert authority.
[…]
The only thing more fungible than cold, hard cash is privilege. The prodigal tech bro doesn’t so much take an off-ramp from the relatively high status and well-paid job he left when the scales fell from his eyes, as zoom up an on-ramp into a new sector that accepts the reputational currency he has accumulated. He’s not joining the resistance. He’s launching a new kind of start-up using his industry contacts for seed-funding in return for some reputation-laundering.”
They won’t play a lady-o on country radio…
Incredibly analysis from the team at The Pudding on just how little airplay women artists get on country radio stations in the US:
“Radio airplay, which builds exposure for artists and creates pathways to industry popularity charts, is also linked to opportunity and access to resources within the industry, including touring, festivals, merchandising, eligibility for awards, and more. At the same time, radio airplay influences how labels sign, produce and promote artists, creating a feedback loop within the industry ecosystem that also impacts songwriters and publishers, studio and touring musicians, and production teams responsible for mixing/recording new music. The path for white women in the industry is faint, but as Andrea Williams explains explains: the path for women of color is non-existent.
[…]
Where back-to-back spins for songs by women were on average 0.5% of all airplay, back-to-back spins for songs by all artists of color averaged 0.38% and back-to-back spins for those by women artists of color were non-existent. Out of 182,848 total songs from the 29 stations we surveyed, there was a single back-to-back song pair from out LGBTQ+ artists: On February 7, 2022 at 2:16pm Chicago WUSN-FM played the Brothers Osborne’s “Stay A Little Longer” followed by Hunter Hayes’ “Wanted.” Non-binary and trans artists are completely absent on mainstream country radio.”
Julie Liger-Belair’s collages which explore home & interiority
“The house can be a symbol of comfort and refuge from the harsh world. A house, in other words, can be a reflection of everything we hold dear,” says Toronto-based artist Julie Liger-Belair, whose mixed-media collages often center on depictions of home. “But a house can also be a place of fear, oppression, and powerlessness,” she adds. “I’m really obsessed by this duality.”
Liger-Belair augments found photographs, historical portraits, botanicals, and patterned papers with a range of drawing media. During the pandemic, when quarantines enforced boundaries between interior spaces and the outside world, she started to consider what it means to do or show something “on the inside.” This led to incorporating motifs related to living spaces and enigmatic dwellers. Bodies merge with architecture, botanicals bloom from torsos and limbs, and otherworldly landscapes extend into the distance.”
Part II: Books I’m Reading Right Now
Furies: Stories of the Wicked, Wild and Untamed - this short story anthology, published to celebrate Virago’s 50th birthday is an absolute delight. It includes stories from Margaret Atwood, Kirsty Logan, Chibundu Onuzo, Helen Oyeyemi, Kamila Shamsie, Ali Smith, and more - buy a copy for every she-devil, hussy, harridan, and siren in your life.
Part III: Things I’ve Been Watching
Most of what I’ve watched has been mildly disappointing — anyone else feel like Black Mirror - Season 6, (Netflix), was kind of meh? In a similar vein, the new Wham! (Netflix) documentary was fun, but lacked substance — effectively it was just 90 minutes of music videos and concert performances. The highlight for me was this TV presenter’s gem of an intro for Wham Rap!: “Let’s check out some social-comment rapping with a dance record from Wham!”.
Far and away the best thing I watched this fortnight was Game On: The Unstoppable Rise of Women’s Sport, (Netflix). Sue Anstiss directs this documentary, which is based on her book of the same name. Through a series of interviews with high profile women in sport, she charts the recent surge of interest in women’s sport, and highlights the barriers still in place, namely: Why does women’s sport still not have the funding and investment of men’s? Watch it, it’s ace.
Part IV: What I’ve been up to…
Repotting plants. Trying to find a swimming costume that fits. Getting as much work as possible done before I go away…
What’s next?
On Friday I get to see my friend Bridget who’s over from the US! Then, next week I’m going away with my Dad. We’ll be spending the week with a bunch of lovely people singing and playing folk music, and I am *very* excited about it.
A little shameless self-promotion:
I had a lovely time chatting to Austine Esezobor about how individual Digital PR pieces actually perform; the pros and cons of "Hero" (or asset-led Digital PR) versus "Reactive" (or Digital PR without an asset); and what more realistic Digital PR goals might look like. You can watch or listen to the episode here.
On 3rd October I’ll be speaking at Leicester Digital Live alongside a bunch of wonderful speakers including Irina Nici from Hubspot, and of course, Ann Stanley from Annica Digital (who organises the event). Early bird tickets are on sale now, and cost just £50.
That’s all from me for now :)
If you enjoyed this newsletter, please consider sharing it, and if you would like to support me you can buy me a coffee.
Big love,
Hannah x
PS Wanna find out more about me and my work? Head over to Worderist.com