A Rhetorical Quest(ion)

by Brian on 11-07-2007

in general

What if someone tried to make a genuinely original contribution to the way we see and think about ideas?

How might the rest of us recognize such genuine originality amidst the crowds of people rhetorically posing as original?

What are all of us (together and as individuals) hoping to accomplish here?… traffic and subscribers? attention? success? notoriety? insight? clear-thinking? understanding? meaning?

Consider your answer to this question: Is being creative a way to be popular and successful, or is being popular and successful a way to be more creative?

If I managed to “acheive” 10,000 subscribers, I still wouldn’t be happy if none of them actually read what I’m trying to say (and more importantly, what I’m trying not to say) and challenged me to think more creatively and effectively.

But if I found one reader, I’d consider this a success.

Related Posts:

Tagged as: originality, rhetoric, success

  • Steve

    Brian – where’s the genuine origninality? What are you trying to say (and not say)?

  • Steve

    Brian – where’s the genuine origninality? What are you trying to say (and not say)?

  • Brian Frank

    Steve, I’m not totally sure of what I’m trying to say either: I’m looking for new insights into the complex relationship between originality and popularity.

    A couple of weeks ago I found a blog called How to be an Original:
    http://blog.lodewijkvdb.com/
    which focuses on admirable and uplifting things like staying motivated, living meaningfully, setting goals, achieving them…

    Advice on how to be “an original” was obviously a big part of that blog’s content, but it seemed mostly concerned with how to maximize blog traffic and subscribers.

    Do these aims conflict? Doesn’t increasing popularity require being fairly unoriginal, recognizable, familiar, and meeting people’s expectations — and then adding *just enough* novelty…

    This is an important issue (though not an especially original one!) –the old paradoxical relationship between novelty and familiarity, curiosity and security, individualism and belonging, et cetera.

    What does this mean for designing experiences (in the broadest sense of the term)?

    (I’m not sure why I didn’t say all this in the post! … never thought of it till now: Thanks.)

  • Brian Frank

    Steve, I’m not totally sure of what I’m trying to say either: I’m looking for new insights into the complex relationship between originality and popularity.A couple of weeks ago I found a blog called How to be an Original:http://blog.lodewijkvdb.com/which focuses on admirable and uplifting things like staying motivated, living meaningfully, setting goals, achieving them…Advice on how to be “an original” was obviously a big part of that blog’s content, but it seemed mostly concerned with how to maximize blog traffic and subscribers. Do these aims conflict? Doesn’t increasing popularity require being fairly unoriginal, recognizable, familiar, and meeting people’s expectations — and then adding *just enough* novelty…This is an important issue (though not an especially original one!) –the old paradoxical relationship between novelty and familiarity, curiosity and security, individualism and belonging, et cetera.What does this mean for designing experiences (in the broadest sense of the term)?(I’m not sure why I didn’t say all this in the post! … never thought of it till now: Thanks.)