![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jaunthie(For those of you who missed Part 1 or want to review, you can find it here.)
So I think I might have misspoken in my previous post, or at the very least conflated two distinctly separate ideas into one:
a) that in my experience, everyone is busy doing *something*, to the point of not having enough time to do everything they want to do (the ubiquitousness of perpetual motion in our culture)
b) that everyone is *producing* something as a result of all this doing, whether it is a creative endeavor, a physical accomplishment, or whatever
My original intent was to post about a), which I still think is generically true. Everyone I know (and yes, this includes you too,![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
sunkrux) is busy most if not all of the time. It's the new normal. We keep ourselves busy all the time, whether it's with hobbies or favorite TV shows or housekeeping or a mountain of stories to read.
However, somewhere along the line - probably because of the people I hang out with - I combined that idea with b), the idea that something tangible is being produced by all this activity that we as a culture keep ourselves busy with. This seems to be the idea that most of those responding to the last post focused on, and why the general consensus (perhaps rightly) is that I do hang out with a bunch of overachievers (which is to say folks outside the norm as might be expressed by a) because they are also members of b).) This is likely true. I know a lot of extraordinary people, and I hang out with a lot of creative, productive, talented folks, not to mention a substantial number of type-A, take-charge-and-do-it personalities. So perhaps I and my cohorts are atypical in that sense. There also seemed to be some half-spoken thought (both in the comments and in outside discussions that I had with a few others) that b) is not only rarer than a), but there is some kind of value judgment or class distinction between a) and b). That surprised me to some degree.
However, I still don't think my friends and I are at all atypical in a), keeping ourselves constantly busy with too many things to do and not enough time to do them all.
What do you think? Is there a difference between a) and b) in the context of this conversation? How do you think of a) and b), and would you classify yourself as members of either or both groups? Do you think either group is typical of today's culture?
So I think I might have misspoken in my previous post, or at the very least conflated two distinctly separate ideas into one:
a) that in my experience, everyone is busy doing *something*, to the point of not having enough time to do everything they want to do (the ubiquitousness of perpetual motion in our culture)
b) that everyone is *producing* something as a result of all this doing, whether it is a creative endeavor, a physical accomplishment, or whatever
My original intent was to post about a), which I still think is generically true. Everyone I know (and yes, this includes you too,
sunkrux) is busy most if not all of the time. It's the new normal. We keep ourselves busy all the time, whether it's with hobbies or favorite TV shows or housekeeping or a mountain of stories to read. However, somewhere along the line - probably because of the people I hang out with - I combined that idea with b), the idea that something tangible is being produced by all this activity that we as a culture keep ourselves busy with. This seems to be the idea that most of those responding to the last post focused on, and why the general consensus (perhaps rightly) is that I do hang out with a bunch of overachievers (which is to say folks outside the norm as might be expressed by a) because they are also members of b).) This is likely true. I know a lot of extraordinary people, and I hang out with a lot of creative, productive, talented folks, not to mention a substantial number of type-A, take-charge-and-do-it personalities. So perhaps I and my cohorts are atypical in that sense. There also seemed to be some half-spoken thought (both in the comments and in outside discussions that I had with a few others) that b) is not only rarer than a), but there is some kind of value judgment or class distinction between a) and b). That surprised me to some degree.
However, I still don't think my friends and I are at all atypical in a), keeping ourselves constantly busy with too many things to do and not enough time to do them all.
What do you think? Is there a difference between a) and b) in the context of this conversation? How do you think of a) and b), and would you classify yourself as members of either or both groups? Do you think either group is typical of today's culture?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-02-06 06:34 am (UTC)Ah but with some of your friends the tangible isn't technically all that tangible (as in you can touch it physically). Acting for an audience isn't really a physically tangible thing. ;P
As for do I classify myself as a type A who produces tangible things in all the busy time I spend outside work...sorta. But generally I do consider myself really rather lazy. Maybe that's because society has made the art of watching television something of bad thing. Like it rots your brain or something. I happen to spend most of my tv watching, watching well written/acted/directed/produced shows - with the occasional cheesy scifi or fantasy shows to rest the brain from all the critical thinking it does during those other well written shows.
I also hate doing housework. I dearly wish I could afford a maid.
As for do I think your group of friends is atypical of the rest of today's culture...yeah I do. Considering that, of the ones I know, most of them are more liberal than a lot of today's culture/society yes we are atypical. We're also way more geekier. :D I mean come on...we've written/or still do, fanfic and I make icons from tv shows. So geek! ;)
Hopefully I'm not sounding completely stupid. It's late for me and I should really turn off this damn computer and get my dishes washed and myself ready for bed.
no subject
Date: 2009-02-07 01:06 am (UTC)I often refer to my own laziness, too. Truth be told, I think we're neither of us exactly lazy, but rather unwilling to waste our time on things we feel are not worthy of pursuit. Whether that's better or worse is totally up for interpretation. ;-P Is it better to be lazy ("I can't be bothered.") or elitist ("It's not good enough for me to bother with.")?