Joseph Campbell’s daily routine for “the most important period of my study”
betterhumans.coach.me
betterhumans.coach.me
I think many of us have deployed this graph in our own lives. I watch movies this way - watch more movies made by a director I like. Then watch movies by the people this director likes. Its a wonderful exploration.
I wish there was a version of IMDB that allowed this meta exploration of movies - i.e. exploring the influence-graph for movies (or any art as a matter of fact).
There is a wonderful documentary called Connections [1] that explores this in the world of science, technology and engineering -- it traces the sequence of inventions and inventors that had influenced each other. I strongly recommend viewing it. You may find it very inspiring!
I use https://www.metal-archives.com in this manner. The number of dimensions on which you can find connections and similarities makes finding new music a joy. A version of IMDB based upon the ideas in MA is what you seek.
Not sure if it's exactly what you're looking for, but I'm really happy with Taste.io for browsing personal movie recommendations. I think you should give it a try.
Spotify acquired them, and the new UI/UX makes it much harder to find musical "neighbors" and see what they're listening to, but I'll still check out what my neighbors are listening to once in a while if I'm looking for something new. I find it to be 10x better than Spotify's discover weekly playlists.
Not sure why nobody has done the same for movies yet - track and rate movies, find your "film neighbors", check stuff out based on what directors they have on heavy rotation.
Why is this practice so effective? I think it's partly because when we read we basically let another person directly poke at our mind for a while. And when you have a rich and subtle writer who really gets in there, over time you build up a whole different perspective. And when the writers you obsess over are all connected in some way, you can assume the same "perspective" (the same basic assumptions about what is significant, what is not) and naturally deepen your understanding in one area or another in a fairly unified way.
For example, when you want to become an outstanding guitar player, you'll need to go through many, many hours of dull and definitely boring training in order to perfect your playing technique. Without that training, you can become a good or a creative guitar player, but not a genuine master.
I presume that it's similar with many other instruments and related skills like archery, gymnastics, dancing, or skateboarding.
I’ve heard plenty of guitarists and classical músicians who were extremely technically proficient with their instrument, but only other musicians would appreciate them.
If Joseph Campbell had not pursued this relatively ‘unstructured’ way of honing his craft, and stayed within the regimen of traditional academia, I highly doubt this thread would exist because Joseph would have only been known within the small academic circles. He transcended.
When you have put in the monotonous work of practice, playtime only gets more exciting.
If you want to master the guitar, instead of boring repetition, you need to find ways to train your technique that engage you and are rewarding. People quote the 10,000 hours figure, as if you just needed to put in the time, but in reality those are 10,000 engaged, focused hours where you push yourself. It doesn't matter how many disengaged hours you put in, you'll plateau at "decent" and never become truly excellent.
In Germany, for instance, there used to be these little "ETP books" for guitar players called Tägliche Übungen zur Entwicklung einer Technischen Perfektion that involved lengthy and absolutely monotonous finger exercises that really had nothing to do with music. Everybody praised them and everybody said that these and similar exercises are essential to become a world-class player. There is hardly any way around it, they said, you cannot become that good by merely playing music. I still have no reason to believe they were wrong. It would be surprising if arguably harder instruments like classical piano didn't involve similar monotonous exercises and the same couldn't be said about ballet, world-class athletes, etc. A friend of mine is a professional jazz saxophonist and while he was studying saxophone he had to practice scales up and down for hours and hours every day.
You've got to put some serious effort into it, you agree with that, right? So maybe we agree in the end, because you use vague word "engage". Of course, nobody denies that you need to find a way to motivate you to get through these exercises or to stay "engaged". I didn't deny that. All I'm saying is that a lot of "mere repetition" is needed in many disciplines in order to reach a really high level while staying motivated.
Extensive practice is essential to getting one's self to the point where creativity can take over, where the muscle memory can 'meld' with one's expression of whatever emotions are being communicated via music.
There are certainly counter-examples, musicians who compose from day one, and don't really focus on melodic theory, running scales, and all of the other pieces of the neuro-muscular puzzle that go into making one technically 'good', and some of them do well.
There are those that allot all of their time to becoming technically proficient, pianists who spend endless hours working up Rachmaninoff's 2nd concerto, only to get so lost in the technicality of their discipline that they become cold and mechanistic, but, again, are so proficient that they find work their entire lives.
But true greatness needs both. You have to, as one artist put it, be able to 'forget' all that you have learned and compose and/or perform from the heart, letting all of that training do what it will naturally do, resulting in a transcendent expression of artistic grace.
That's what makes Campbell so accessible. He speaks and writes as though he is talking about the weather to his best friend, but his erudition provides such a solid foundation in the topics he expounds upon that one hardly notices that one is being educated.
Ray Allen
https://www.theplayerstribune.com/ray-allen-letter-to-my-you...
Needless to say he was insanely smart, maybe the smartest person I've ever met.
Anyway, he was overdoing the daily routine, he confessed to me, and missing out on too many other things. I wonder whether he stayed in mathematics, but don't remember the name.
Moral of the story (I suppose): If you want to achieve great things early in your life, routine and a distraction free environment is important. But keep it in a sane equilibrium with social life and find people to occasionally talk about other topics than your work.
There is a line, that's not really a spoiler but sets the tone that once you read I think you'd resonate with:
"One must imagine Sisyphus happy."
Edit: Spend more time in zones 1 and 2. https://deanyeong.com/how-we-learn-new-things/
Learning is a luxury, and reading is key to it. That said, if you think about fields like mathematics or even programming, reading about them will hardly lead you to mastery: you need to sit down and get your fingers dirty, trying to do it yourself. Have you ever had this happening to you: when a teacher shows you a new method to compute something, it all sounds perfectly clear and simple, until you sit down and try it out on an unseen problem yourself?
If you're on Hacker News (which you are) chances are you love reading to -- after all, it's a site that provides links to articles (sometimes videos). But increasingly, I realize that my time is better spent building something myself. Being a "hacker" (in the original sense of the word) implies doing something actively, while (to me) reading is a rather passive occupation. Enjoyable, yes, but at the end of the year, I'd like to look back and say "this year, I made X and Y" rather than "I read about X and Y".
Has anyone actually read Campell's classic "The hero with a thousand faces"? I did when in college, but to be honest, I found it too dry to make it to the end. But I still have my copy of the book. Maybe I should get it out of the shelf and give it another try.
Not for 9 hours of the day though. There's code that wants to bet written...
A false dichotomy IMO. What I want is "this year, I understood X and Y", and understanding a thing involves both making and reading (most of the time).
By the way, books are easy to get for free these days on the net. I remember 20 years ago when I would spend crazy money on books ... No more! Also, these days I read more papers than books. Which are also easy to get for free.
Yes! I think it's the raison d'etre for sites like StackOverflow.
Somebody once told me that since make was created, nobody has written their own makefile. All makefiles are decendants of the ur-makefile.
> Reading, after a certain age, diverts the mind too much from its creative pursuits. Any man who reads too much and uses his own brain too little falls into lazy habits of thinking.
-- Albert Einstein
I think you can also read in various ways. You can just absorb it uncritically, or try to find flaws or supportive anecdotes for it, or just freely associate about the thoughts and emotions it makes one aware of etc. But he and you do have a point, there's got to be a balance. Second-hand expertise is valuable, we can't all find out which berries are toxic individually. But with many things that aren't quite so critical, learning through mistakes can be quite empowering, and sometimes you find out it's not a mistake, but something new and good outside of the usual rut.
I've been kicked to curb this year with failures, with skullduggerous cheats, with outright rejections and with rejections of no communication. A growing sense of a dark godawful dread has made residence in the core of my belly. I walk around with it everywhere I go. I feel more than ever that I have now truly and completely doomed my family's future. I should have instead remained, I now think, grinding at that safe but soulless day job before I even thought of cultivating that perilous and impossible journey - that falsely advertised dream to go out alone in consulting and into the business of enterprise bloody software. (A place where arse-kissing and networking matters more than your ability to produce software that is actually useful to clients!)
I was hanging by that last thread of once abundant hope. This dastardly year is coming to its ignoble end, and I continue to stare solemnly at the targets I set for myself in January this year. It's deplorable.
Campbell says "the real end is the journey" and that I need to possess the fire to drive me into battle fearlessly.
I have to summon that courage. But I have to summon the courage to be honest first!
Agreed, if I have to imagine doing fine in the longer run, I have to confront this phase as a game of nerves. Gotta keep the nerves.
If you were in town, I'd get the first round this Friday!
I need to have this on DVD. I may have "heard" of the man in the sense of having heard the name or having seen the face somewhere, but I had no clue what I was missing out on; thank you!
He's absolutely right, the only way to "save the world" is to be alive.. whatever additional possible useful interactions there may be, they have to come from and be in harmony with that. Most of the time, being open and constructive leads to things you couldn't have possibly foreseen or planned to achieve. Come to think of it, for the first time ever I don't feel 100% silly for sometimes feeling like "the universe" kind of "rewards" paying attention to it for the sake of the relation between it and oneself, not the relation of oneself and others. But it's not about this deity or that myth, at the very least, there indeed is consciousness everywhere we can look, so maybe there is even more where we can't look yet or ever. There sure is a lot we drown out with our own clanging of pots and pans, individually and socially... but like a plant turns to the sun, maybe the sun turns to plants, in a way. Meister Eckhart went so far as to say that you can basically "force" God to come down to you, into you, by making yourself completely empty, because he simply cannot resist humbleness. I always found that kind of a sweet and wise way to look at what others would describe very draconically, in the language of slaves rather than lovers, but more importantly it's really profoundly true. As a metaphor, as poetry.
> "You do not need to leave your room. Remain sitting at your table and listen. Do not even listen, simply wait, be quiet, still and solitary. The world will freely offer itself to you to be unmasked, it has no choice, it will roll in ecstasy at your feet."
- Franz Kafka
So instead of reading this sample of Campbell's work of on Hacker News, I should be following the advice contained in it? But then the advice is to favor a single body of work over such samples! So had I followed his very advice too strictly, I would never have had the chance to read it in the first place!
Unless, of course, if I already knew about Campbell's work because he was one of the authors I chose to read thoroughly.
That all said, Edmund Burke did say: "Between two evils, choose neither; between two goods,choose both". So maybe: spend some time reading Hacker News, and most of it ignoring the web and other shallow sources entirely.
Edit: writer mixup
I fare much better if I take notes as I read. I'm starting to think that maybe writing a chapter synopsis after every chapter I read would fix my problem. Plus then I could put them online and maybe get some feedback from other readers.
I'm halfway through Cryptonomicon right now and find myself reading Steve Russillo's page on the book to remind myself what just happened. My brain might not be good enough for passive reading anymore.
Edit: BTW, Russillo's page is a warm reminder to me of what first made me fall in love with the web. Check it out: http://russillosm.com/index.html
I'm wondering what Campbell did achieve by doing all that reading and what made it the most important period of his scholarship and study.
The 10,000 hour figure (which is just an arbitrary number, not an absolute rule according to Anders Ericsson[1] whose research Malcolm Gladwell referred to) implies you can reach mastery with a lot of practice, given you do the right kind of practice.
Mastery is the ability to perform a skill, it's not about knowledge. You need knowledge to perform, but knowledge without being able to perform does not imply mastery.
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Peak-Secrets-New-Science-Expertise-eb...
Seems like a good investment to me.
For anyone that is planning to become more organized and get more done during the day, I´d recommend https://zenkit.com
(Disclaimer: I work at Zenkit.)
Btw: my author of choice would be Tim Ferris. If you don´t know his books, definitely check him out. https://tim.blog/tim-ferriss-books/
Humble individual, it seems.
What a man.
Three problem with this plan is that it is very fragile.
Campbell exhibits traits and practices of creativity, originality, and intellectual accomplishment of interest to some HN readers. Certainly myself.