Deliberately closing off potentially rewarding opportunities based on highly specific points of principles your detriment.

Have you ever done this?

Sadly I think that this is my M.O. - I never get past it. I know what I'm doing and I deliberately act destructively in order to make an obscure point of principle which the people I'm making it to wouldn't understand anyway, even if I told them, which I wouldn't. It ends up with me severing contact with organisations that could pay my bills as well as add to my creative life.

Deliberate destruction.

Is there a word or explanation for this? Passive aggressive is kind of what I'm describing but P-A doesn't really cover it.

I know it's a form of mental illness though.

Title should say "to your detriment" obv.

'Better not apply to this job I want, as I would have to exaggerate the experience, qualifications and skills I have, and lying is bad'

Self-handicapping is a term that comes to mind, which sounds similar to this behaviour. Is that apt?

Sounds right, Ross. What's the reason I do it though?

Would you be any happier if you dispensed with all principles in order to be successful?

Principles are meant to limit socially destructive actions, not render you unable to cope with society.

I guess the $64,000 question would be, what horrible thing do you think would happen if you were to abrogate your fine principles and take advantage of these potentially rewarding opportunities? Would puppies be tortured? Would the skies fall? Would God be angered? What, exactly, is the pitfall you are avoiding so assiduously?

Oh Jed it wouldn't be right for me to diagnose or say, but from what I've read of self-handicapping/self-defeating behaviours, sometimes it's that the failure to do so feels as good as the reward of success does. I wish I could find the link, but can't.

(Hint: In a great number of cases the answer to that question is [person important to me] would be horribly disappointed if they ever knew I did this.)

"The self-handicapper reduces his or her chances for success, but also protects himself or herself from the implications of failure"

There's probably a healthy halfway point where you get to keep your principles intact without this disabling effect, for example if you don't like the way your workplace does thing you can try and get those things changed rather than severing ties with them

*things

I'll be more specific but it will sounds crazy because it is crazy. I applied to an open call for artists to design a work that would be installed in the foyer of a public building. I lost the commission but I saw the winning entry and it was so egregious to me that I decided I'll never work for this organisation again. But this organisation is kind of who I've been working towards working for. A friend had an event for this organisation and I turned down the invite because I won't enter the building.

I know it's mad.

I have to say that "you're just a cunt" would be a legitimate explanation.

So did you decide not to work for this organisation as a matter of your personal artistic integrity?

Kinda sounds like you don't want to sell your dignity for bucks

Important detail: it sounds as if you would be free to complete your own designs while theoretically working for this organization, regardless of their egregious taste regarding the work of others. Everyone who saw your work would see at a glance that your work is wholly in line with your own aesthetic, the meatheads who run the org you now disdain notwithstanding.

Unfortunately, those who select art installations in public buildings are often idiots or charlatans. This is an unfortunate fact of life and can't be helped. Just because they have asinine taste in art cannot even slightly affect your own pieces or how they are viewed. People remember Michelangelo with awe and gratitude. They don't give a shit about the popes who hired him.

Ross, it's not about dignity as much as sending some passive aggressive message that no on would care about, to my annoyance.

Aimless, I'm not at the level where the specifics of my work would matter, I think.

I guess I'm more interested in why i do this or why people do this than justifying my probably not up to scratch public art submissions. I appreciate the input totally.

Ross's "the failure to do so feels as good as the reward of success does" feels pretty close to what I'm trying to work out.

I feel like there's *some* good points in this article, but I can't find the one I was looking for: https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/are-we-born-racist/201104/why-we-self-sabotage-our-success

For me self sabotaging is like a WIN/WIN sometimes, because if you go through with something the possibility of success exists, but also the possibility of failure, and that may not feel good. If you just don't go through with it, it's not always "no risk, no reward" - the lack of things *changing* can be just as much as a reward, as you haven't lost any ground and failed. It's all in how you look at it. That may have made no sense.

So it's "nothing ventured, nothing lost", eh? That sounds right in line with Homer Simpson's immortal quote to Bart, "Son, trying is the first step toward failure."

"nothing ventured, nothing lost", yeah. Much tidier description too.

I'll be more specific but it will sounds crazy because it is crazy. I applied to an open call for artists to design a work that would be installed in the foyer of a public building. I lost the commission but I saw the winning entry and it was so egregious to me that I decided I'll never work for this organisation again. But this organisation is kind of who I've been working towards working for. A friend had an event for this organisation and I turned down the invite because I won't enter the building.

I know it's mad.

― Heavy Doors (jed_), Tuesday, March 14, 2017 8:07 PM (one hour ago)

ha, I can totally relate to this! ... and don't get me started on public art, and the politics of it. Actually, you could get me started, but it would derail the thread.

I'd be exaggerating to say "I do this all the time," but I do this often enough. But "detriment" is one of those things that is complicated. I mean, there are various things I didn't try for, or fight to retain, or play the game required to qualify, etc. that it was to my financial detriment not to do, or to my "power" or "prestige" not to do. But, some of them -- probably quite a few in retrospect -- ended up being to my benefit in that I built a reputation in a different way, that has also been positive.

Some of it depends on your profession though -- I mean, if things like honesty, fairness, principle, etc. aren't that important, then maybe it's more detrimental than for someone who gets judged on things like that.

Self-martyrdom? Dunno if that covers it.

I did this with a big career opportunity in my mid 20s and the choice, aftermath etc nearly gave me a nervous breakdown

oh, absolutely, self-sabotage is my life! god, i dropped out of college a semester before graduating _twice_ over some manufactured point of "principle". in fact in some ways failure is more rewarding to me than success. finally graduating college sent me into a depressive tailspin because i no longer had a major life goal to dedicate myself to.

I basically quit my last job to prove a point and had nothing lined up and whoops.

I have to fight pretty much every weekday to avoid making this mistake again.

finally graduating college sent me into a depressive tailspin because i no longer had a major life goal to dedicate myself to.

― increasingly bonkers (rushomancy), Wednesday, March 15, 2017 7:03 AM (thirty-eight minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Holy shit, do we share a brain?

I think, in my dotage, I've gotten better at accepting that justice is a total crapshoot and that most people don't really give more than fifteen minutes notice to a martyr to a cause, so if you're trying to prove a point to anyone but yourself in a situation that doesn't ultimately matter that much (like, no one is really that adversely affected if your workplace makes everyone end their workday a half hour later), you're better off just putting your head down and eating shit.

Going to an event doesn't sound like a big deal and it doesn't sound like you've just passed up an opportunity of a lifetime, and given your headspace it doesn't sound like you would have got very much positive out of it in the first place. There are real points of principle (ie "they're an arms dealer") and then there are semi-made-up ones (ie "they went for this complete hack's work over mine they must be awful"). If you work in a small or incestuous industry and you get a reputation for the latter, fairly or unfairly, then you could be in trouble.

There are career coaches and similar figures you can talk to who might be able to help you get over what sounds like a fairly big psychological block - dunno if you've tried going down this route but it might be some help.

Holy shit, do we share a brain?

― Milkwalker's World (Old Lunch)

i hope not, given how much trouble my brain has given me over the years. :(

there are semi-made-up ones (ie "they went for this complete hack's work over mine they must be awful")

I don't think that's something to be so dismissive of -- I mean, how you respond to this, both internally and externally, there are, uh, more "productive" ways and less "productive" ways, but it depends on context. You could tell yourself, their priorities and aesthetics don't match mine, I'm going to focus my efforts elsewhere. In terms of the arts, there's a long history of these principles resulting in important change to the "industry." For centuries, straight white men doing particular types of art got preference over women, queers, and people of color -- is this a "semi-made-up principle" or is this a "real point"?

But it depends on a bunch of factors like, are they the only game in town, is everywhere else pretty much the same, how much do you want to work/need the money, etc?