Can you find satisfaction in hobbies that bring you a high level of personal fulfillment? can you call these things work, even if you what you do for "work" is completely separate?
Can success be measured by such things, or is it reserved for on-paper earnings and figures?
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:05 (seventeen years ago)
You ask this on a board full of musicians
― robertwolf8080, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:07 (seventeen years ago)
you ask this on a board full of sexual dynamos
― mookieproof, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:10 (seventeen years ago)
I only read ILX for the gobs of cash it brings in
― bernard snowy, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:27 (seventeen years ago)
i love mixing and have often done it for free. i do take satisfaction in doing a good job. getting paid for it is ace though
― electricsound, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:36 (seventeen years ago)
in what universe is having a hobby weird and noteworthy?
― gbx, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:44 (seventeen years ago)
A universe in which most people's hobby is shopping/amassing debt aka:
http://www.submittheoffer.com/images/usa.gif
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:46 (seventeen years ago)
Can you find satisfaction in hobbies that bring you a high level of personal fulfillment
^^^ doesn't this question answer itself??? can you enjoy a meal that fills you up and is delicious? would you like to own a puppy that was smart and cuet and well-behaved? do you like to spend time doing shit that is shit you like to do????
― gbx, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:47 (seventeen years ago)
THESE RIDDLES VEX ME EVEN IN MY PLEASANTEST REVERIES
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:49 (seventeen years ago)
when is having fun not fun
― gbx, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:53 (seventeen years ago)
lock thread.
― chicago kevin, Thursday, 14 August 2008 00:58 (seventeen years ago)
the question is geared more toward one's concept of self-worth, whether it be akin to societal standards of success or otherwise.
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 01:05 (seventeen years ago)
it's not simply a matter of enjoying your free time.
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 01:06 (seventeen years ago)
rediscovering the love of doing some art things that aren't job-related (since musician is my full-time job-job) has pretty much saved my life this year
― J0hn D., Thursday, 14 August 2008 01:16 (seventeen years ago)
Making mosaics out of non-perishables such as dried pastas and dried beans? It is nice to imagine you doing that.
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 01:18 (seventeen years ago)
i don't know many people (though, to be sure, some) who do things they hate unless it involves making money.
― chicago kevin, Thursday, 14 August 2008 01:19 (seventeen years ago)
Or perhaps helping out loved ones?
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 01:19 (seventeen years ago)
The idea of doing a hobby BECAUSE I need to get to the top of Maslow's pyramid – makes shit so stressful I just don't do the hobby at all. Which is basically why my hobbies are video games, internets, and art I hardly ever show anyone. That and walking my dog.
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 01:21 (seventeen years ago)
The idea of even considering whether I am/my life is a success gives me anxiety-related nausea.
http://talkingtails.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/800px-maslows_hierarchy_of_needssvg.png?w=399&h=266
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 01:23 (seventeen years ago)
See I am usually in yellow-orange.
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 01:24 (seventeen years ago)
So in my free time I can't worry about being THE BEST at my pleasant pasttimes bcz fuck man I got enough to worry about.
Fuck a Maslow
― Granny Dainger, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:00 (seventeen years ago)
DUde I feel ya but it's a good easy metaphor to dig with the general public.
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:03 (seventeen years ago)
Maslow's Food Pyramid
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:04 (seventeen years ago)
i dunno about sex coming before security of the body, family and health
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:05 (seventeen years ago)
I like that SEX is at the bottom but SEXUAL INTIMACY is in the middle. So what's the sex at the bottom? Getting raepd?
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:07 (seventeen years ago)
Bcz that is not so much of a need!
!!
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:13 (seventeen years ago)
haha Abbott
sex in Maslovian understanding = the primal need for sexual stuff sexual intimacy = sexual relationships in which one invests self, is vulnerable, experiences growth, etc
here on the internet we don't generally concern ourselves with these latter cases though and suspect they're strictly theoretical
― J0hn D., Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:14 (seventeen years ago)
maybe this is a hierarchy of needs for dogs
― harbl, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:14 (seventeen years ago)
morality, creativity, spontaneity, a full water dish, bones
― J0hn D., Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:15 (seventeen years ago)
acceptance of facts
― harbl, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:16 (seventeen years ago)
here on the internet
― gbx, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:20 (seventeen years ago)
that's a typo, it's actually "acceptance of cats"
― J0hn D., Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:20 (seventeen years ago)
factceptance
― gbx, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:24 (seventeen years ago)
catceptance
internetceptance
― gbx, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:25 (seventeen years ago)
I foresee a long career in motivational speaking for you with this one
― J0hn D., Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:26 (seventeen years ago)
bottom need of dog pyramid mos defs includes 'baying loudly at inscrutable intervals,' above which is 'mad belly rubs'
― Abbott, Thursday, 14 August 2008 02:26 (seventeen years ago)
we wouldn't need a maslow pyramid at all if we could just lick our own genitals
― El Tomboto, Thursday, 14 August 2008 03:44 (seventeen years ago)
Tombot with the truth bomb
― J0hn D., Thursday, 14 August 2008 03:49 (seventeen years ago)
self actualisturbation
― moley, Thursday, 14 August 2008 11:37 (seventeen years ago)
creativity, spontaneity, problem solving
― J0hn D., Thursday, 14 August 2008 13:07 (seventeen years ago)
I think I understand the gist of this question, which I take to be, Do you place a higher value on your hobbies (and thereby let them define you) than on whatever it is that makes you money, and are you OK with that?
Like, I've worked as a copy editor for the last few years and haven't really tried to seek new career opportunities or climb the corporate ladder because one of the main things I value about my job is that it's reasonably easy and flexible enough time-wise for me to be able to pursue my passions outside of work (writing, music, improv, crosswords, etc.). I like my job, but I'd probably feel depressed at my salary and lack of advancement if I didn't have these other things going for me, which contribute more to my self-worth.
― jaymc, Thursday, 14 August 2008 13:24 (seventeen years ago)
When is having a discussion not fun? I mean, shit, man, this is a message board (oops bored) so a place where we like TALK AND SHIT. :-)
Anyhow, yes, of course I love things that don't make me money. Like having kids. It's kinda the opposite. You pour lots of cash in it and the only thing that comes out is shit and piss. And some love. ;-)
Adorno to thread.
― stevienixed, Thursday, 14 August 2008 13:31 (seventeen years ago)
:D
well, certain hobbies could be a profession for the right person, with the right money, in the right circumstances. there are a lot of people who do things (painting, any kind of art, sports) that consume most of their free time. but what does that do other than make you feel good? it doesn't pay the rent, or advance you in society, necessarily.
what if you're like jaymc (or me), in a position where you're not moving up the corporate ladder very fast, and could probably land a better job somewhere, but you're happy with it because it allows for outside pursuits. pursuits that can't really be measured, universally. is this respectable? is it settling? mediocrity?
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 13:54 (seventeen years ago)
Yeah, that's definitely a question I grapple with. Especially as I get older and it's harder to see any of my hobbies turning into a source of income (which was always a long-shot, but hey, one can dream), and I feel like focusing on my career might be slightly more pragmatic in the long run.
― jaymc, Thursday, 14 August 2008 13:59 (seventeen years ago)
-- gbx, Wednesday, August 13, 2008 8:53 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link
having fun is not fun when it interferes with your dayjob, and you're broke, and you can't pay the rent and might have to cancel the cable.
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:00 (seventeen years ago)
slightly more pragmatic in the long run.
-- jaymc, Thursday, August 14, 2008 9:59 AM (41 seconds ago) Bookmark Link
right, but a little less happy, too? maybe?
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:01 (seventeen years ago)
maybe not. sometimes being pragmatic is happy, i guess.
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:06 (seventeen years ago)
Didn't Adorno take issue with the label hobby? It meant the hobby was just something silly. This he found wrong as he put as much effort in it (as his "work").
Surmounter, I don't think one has to use standards set by others. What balance do you like? That's what matters. What also made me "wrestle" is having kids which suddenly meant a LOT less time for hobbies. But that was temporary and silly to worry about. I prefer kids over 6 hours of music listening per day tbh. :-)
― stevienixed, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:32 (seventeen years ago)
it's true -- the others thing is what gets me. what will everyone else think?
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:44 (seventeen years ago)
Totally individual, of course, but you could start by canceling the cable. Etc. This is the balance.
― Laurel, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:47 (seventeen years ago)
Personally I could start by not smoking, but it's such a pleasant and relaxing hobby, I think I might need it for personal fulfillment.
― Laurel, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:49 (seventeen years ago)
Anyway half of those people with the "successful" jobs think they're underachievers even at, say, $65,000 a year because there are people who make $120,000. Once you get into that trap, I don't think you can win, like, ever.
― Laurel, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:53 (seventeen years ago)
the only way to win the race is to get out of the race
― La Lechera, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:53 (seventeen years ago)
right, re: smoking (my boss just got me a $15 carton from the phillipines!)... and the cable should go, but there are just those CERTAIN shows. only like 1 or 2 that i really, really love to have when i'm just at a loss.
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:54 (seventeen years ago)
the concept of making $65k/yr is pretty radical to me right now
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:55 (seventeen years ago)
-- Surmounter, Thursday, August 14, 2008 12:05 AM (13 hours ago) Bookmark Link
Yes. One of my goals for this year was to submit fiction to at least 12 journals. I've done about 6 so far, and even if I never make a fucking dime writing fiction, I know I can be successful insofar as it's possible to see my name in print somewhere in the not to distant future. Sometimes writing is like pulling teeth, but it makes me happy. That makes it work.
I pay the bills with my job. I get fulfillment out of my work.
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:57 (seventeen years ago)
xp Yeah, me too. But people who think it's normal are spending all of that money like the rest of us are spending ours, it's the ratchet effect of consumption. And there's a good chance that they don't feel any better off than they did $25,000 ago.
― Laurel, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:57 (seventeen years ago)
lol Adorno otm wtf
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 14 August 2008 14:58 (seventeen years ago)
-- BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, August 14, 2008 10:57 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Link
love this
― Surmounter, Thursday, 14 August 2008 15:00 (seventeen years ago)
know I can be successful insofar as it's possible to see my name in print somewhere in the not to distant future.
lol maybe not
― BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Thursday, 14 August 2008 15:01 (seventeen years ago)
That's what copy editors are for.
― Laurel, Thursday, 14 August 2008 15:02 (seventeen years ago)
Not that you'd know it from reading some of our books.
― Laurel, Thursday, 14 August 2008 15:03 (seventeen years ago)