You might want to rethink aligning your life to a Cracked listicle, in particular this one. For example:
> For instance, some people want to respond to that speech with Tyler Durden's line from Fight Club: "You are not your job." But, well, actually, you totally are.
Well, actually, you totally aren't. The next part is even worse and downright dehumanizing:
> you are nothing more than the sum total of your useful skills [...] Your "job" -- the useful thing you do for other people -- is all you are.
It's not a good idea to view yourself as purely a means to an end for other people. I'm strongly in favor of being a useful and productive part of society, but not to the point where nothing remains of your person except for an exploitable resource for others.
Having just read it for the first time, I'd characterize that article as the metaphorical slap to bring someone to their senses. It is not enough on its own to build a philosophy on, and it isn't necessarily representative of all of life, but that article is a slap a good number of people need.
But then there's also people for whom it will be the worst thing ever, who have already completely organized their lives around pleasing others and satisfying the needs of others while not thinking about the fact they have their own needs, and need in some sense the complete opposite slap.
But I'm not surprised there's some people who found the article to be food for some fairly big thoughts.
Thanks, that's an insightful take on it. You bring up a good point, which is that reading this article can be healthy for some people, and unhealthy for others.
I don't think there's a solution for this, because any kind of disclaimer would dilute its message for those that need to hear it, and do nothing for those that shouldn't hear it. And what would such a disclaimer even look like? "Disregard this article if you're not an entitled, selfish man-child"?
>Feel free to stop reading this if your career is going great, you're thrilled with your life, and you're happy with your relationships. Enjoy the rest of your day friend, this article is not for you.
The disclaimer is woven neatly in the opening paragraph, above the delightful picture of Lenny and his large scarf.
I generally agree and don't know how well this holds up, but reading this article when I was around 20 really broke me out of some entitlement and helped me start working on myself. I think it made me view things less selfishly and think about other people's perspectives more. So I do think it works for the question asked here
The article is absolutely perfect for its audience, which is the smirking, early-20s Internet user of 10 years ago that read Cracked, or Maddox and spent their time on Digg and Reddit. You know the type.
I remember the impact it had when it came out. It was the reality check that a lot of people in that age range needed, especially new college graduates. This was the era of the "jobless recovery" of post-2008, when S&P500 was going up but underemployment was very high. You have to learn to drop a lot of ego when your fancy degree has you working at the same Starbucks as a kid straight out of high school.
Out of every post here so far, this is by far the best. It also aged like fine wine. Probably more poignant now than ever. I totally see this as a good occasional slap in the face every few months to re-analysis yourself.
I know the article is intentionally provocative and over the top to provoke a reaction... whether it's a healthy reflection on your attitude to success or crippling self-loathing probably depends on the reader.
Also, there are undeniably some hard truths hidden in there. However, my experience in almost 20 years in the tech/software/product industry often paints a different picture. Yes, our brains keep us from changing and evolving and yes, obviously you need skills to be successful in life and your career. But in my industry in particular, hard and soft skills are not the dominant factor that keeps individuals from succeeding or progressing. I'm lucky enough to work with an abundance of talent and skill, and yet, one of the major factors of dissatisfaction is lack of "progression". One of the main factors is self-confidence and in the more severe cases even mental health issues. Some of the most skilled and knowledgeable engineers I worked with struggled to realise their potential because of it. If the leaders in your organisation think they can just shout at them to "learn self-confidence as a skill" and get over it you're going to have a bad time. It will attract a certain type and employee that thrives in that environment and disengage everyone else. Wasting talent, wasting skills and ultimately a lot of money.
Creating an environment and learning how to tease the potential out of skilled and talented individuals is not a "hippie/hipster" thing to do, it is good for business.
I wish I could find an archive of Jason Pargin's old writings back from when he ran PointlessWasteOfTime.com under the David Wong handle. The Monkeysphere was a brilliant essay.
Maybe the Glengarry Glen Ross "closing" scene would have a positive impact on me and get me fired up if the profession was something in tech, at a company whose mission I cared about. Otherwise, as the article mentions, I do indeed just think Alec Baldwin's character is a borderline sociopathic asshole.
I just rewatched that scene - he isn't saying anything meaningful. He's being rude, telling people how much money he makes and telling them to "just close".
He’s telling them the harsh truths of how the world works. He’s flaunting what they want in front of them and then showing them what they have to do in order to have it.
It’s as controversial as the cracked piece in itself. And for some people in my circle - it’s a wake up call.
You can’t expect to just get what he has by drifting through life aimlessly. You have to do what it takes. It’s a message to the kids who were told as children that they were perfect just the way they are and that they could do anything they wanted (but never put in any effort towards it). It’s a message to the children raised by shitty parents who didn’t instill grit and perseverance and tenacity into their kids that they need to get it together if they want what others have. That it takes work and that you don’t get things handed to you like your parents handed things to you all the time as a kid.
Those salesmen never stood a chance -- that's the point. All the grit and perseverance in the world can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. They were selling shitty real estate, hoping to find someone clueless or out to lunch enough to buy swampland in Florida or whatever it was. Alec Baldwin's character was there as much to prevent the salespeople from catching on to the scam as to motivate them by making sure they felt that it was their own fault if they couldn't move the bad product. "The fuckin' leads are weak? YOU'RE weak."
I've noticed that multi-level marketing companies use "love bombing" tactics with new members, showering them with praise and good vibes and assuring them that it is easy to make money using their system. Once you're in, however, the "sales experts" quickly turn into the Alec Baldwin character, pressuring, mocking, and grilling you to sell more in an environment where it's near impossible to sell anything.
I don't think that he's showing them what they have to do. Unless acting like he does in the scene is what they're supposed to be doing as salesmen? I don't know too much about sales so if the lesson was the all that the other salesmen need to be douchebags with their clients just like Baldwin's character was with them, then that lesson has gone completely over my head.
To me it looked like he's shaking them up a little. But the motivation from being shaken up doesn't last long especially if it isn't supplemented by actual skills. Let's say that one of these salesmen is really pumped up after this meeting - what happens the next time they're on a call with a client who isn't interested? What does that salesman know now that they didn't know pre-Baldwin-speech? What can they do differenty? Nothing as far as I can tell. And if the argument is that they all have the skills and it's all about the motivation, then that sounds very much like something from the soft generation that you're describing in your comment.
> I don't think that he's showing them what they have to do. Unless acting like he does in the scene is what they're supposed to be doing as salesmen?
Limitation of the format of the media and that it's for entertainment. Do you really expect a dry presentation about sales tactics in a play/movie???
It's a wake up call speech. It's a speech that you need to either shape up or get out - and to stop expecting handouts and to stop acting entitled. And the thing about his speech is that he's actually empathetic to people - he isn't saying you're worthless as a human being, he's saying you're not fit for the job and you need to be fit for the job if you want to keep it. "Good father? Fuck you - go home and play with your kids." It's a retaliation against the "but I'm a good/nice/whatever person" mentality of entitlement. If you want to work here - you need to close. That's the whole point - that our environment needs people with skills and people who can actually use those skills in a useful matter. You can't do it? Fine - you're not a worthless person but you don't deserve the job just out of birthright.
I'd watch the full thing to the end - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrhSLf0I-HM In no way is he entrapping them or anything - he says over and over again... "Don't like it? Leave." He's tell them over and over - do the job or leave. Stop expecting a handout - stop being entitled - do the job we hired you for.
https://www.cracked.com/blog/6-harsh-truths-that-will-make-y...