Hacker News Reader

Comment by thejohnconway | Hacker News Reader

When I think about the successful, interesting people I have known in my life, I struggle to think of one that fitted this zen minimalist model. Most (all maybe?), have messy or at least full offices and houses. They have lots of interest in things, and have artefacts of those interests around them. Lots of half-finished/in progress projects, books, papers, tools, materials and so on.

What they have in common is relentless and flexible thinking about their subject(s) of interest, not, like, really nice sound systems.

That's not to say that minimalism doesn't work for some, but I don't think all this meta stuff matters much. And I'd like to see some evidence from sorts of people who write about how great minimalism is that it does.

View on HN

> have messy or at least full offices

There's a difference between messy and full. My office is very full, but there is very little waste - I don't keep broken parts (I salvage bits immediately), I keep everything organized in ready-to-go-kits (the hiking pack just needs snacks and water added, my computer repair kit is kept well stocked, my electronics box is organized and all labeled).

I don't think minimalism is necessary (though it can be useful for some) but some order (whatever works for you, personally) is very important. But this is a personal thing - one persons carefully cataloged desk is someone else's trash pile.

There is definitely something to order being important to some tasks, but not all. If your subject requires a big toolset, you need order just to avoid wasting too much time. If your subject requires original thinking without a large toolset, chaos might actually help!

When I was younger someone tried to sell me the idea that your desk reflects your head.

This bothered me briefly until I realized that if this was the case I'd rather have a messy desk than an empty desk ;-)

Minimalism sometimes is an economic class identifier. Maintaining a tidy and minimal living environment is much easier if you can outsource all housework, and upgrade to the absolute latest technology, and if you don't feel much need to hoard anything because you can afford to buy or rent exactly what you want precisely when you want it.

It's also sometimes not, though. In college I was a minimalist mostly out of necessity - it's not hard to keep tidy if you can only afford a $600/mo. bedroom and only own a laptop, bed, a desk, and some clothes.

I agree that it is not always an economic class thing. Of course, the stereotype is that college dorm rooms are notoriously messy. So it is sometimes just an extension of one's personality, habits, and aesthetics.

Other caveats include children and pets. With some kids and some pets, it doesn't matter how much money you have and how tidy you are by habit.

Think about the basis of clutter. If you are working class you might have a decent size toolshed or a garage full of tools. When something breaks, you fix it. If you are rich, you may decide to rely on auto mechanics, carpenters, gardeners, and often if something breaks you just get a new one... even a car.

If you are working class you may have a sewing table full of half-finished repair jobs. If you are rich, you either buy new clothes whenever you want, or you offload that work onto a tailor.

If you are working class your dirty clothes may pile up, and you need an ironing board and maybe a clothesline. If you are rich, you use the dry cleaners.

If you are poor your dishes pile up because you cook meals frequently, and you may not even own a dishwasher. If you are rich, you may eat out frequently and certainly can afford a dishwasher.

Or that's what some people use it for, and what others tell themselves must be the case as an excuse.

There are poor (but content) people who are very minimalist. They don't need to hoard not because they "can afford to buy or rent exactly what you want precisely when you want it", but because they don't want much, period.

Someone I respect a lot once phrased a sentiment like that in this way: "some people say that a cluttered desk means a cluttered mind, but if that's the case then an empty desk must mean an empty mind."

There's probably a happy middle ground somewhere in between.

Take the Zen interpretation of that and empty mind is what one should strive for.

I worked with a guy who had the messiest desk. Complete disaster of books, cables, disk drives, tons of random geek toys, and whatever other detritus landed on it. But he knew where each and every thing was. If you touched anything he would notice and get very unhappy.

Our boss was a neat and tidy sort who kept his desk completely spotless. Nothing on it but a laptop. One day he came up and said "You know they say that a cluttered desk is a sign of a cluttered mind."

Ben didn't miss a beat and asked "Well Rob, if that's true, what is an empty desk a sign of?"

I wonder if Ben's gotten that feedback frequently, and just canned the retort over time.

I strongly believe we are in a bar where people tell story like they were part of it.

Prof Alan Guth's office: http://archive.boston.com/realestate/galleries/springsweep/b...

I am not sure interesting and successful necessarily intersect.

I remember being in a circle of friends with a famous pop star. For a famous guy who was supposedly partying a lot, he hated going out. He hated to meet people. He worked really hard on his projects (an album, a tour, the vidoes etc).

He wasn't particularly interesting, or interested, in socializing with new people, though he spent a little time with his family, and his girlfriend.

Actually, you probably all know successful people. They just work a lot with a single minded focus. It is not the same as being interesting.

Perhaps the minimalist person would have completely finished books, papers, tools and so on, and maybe they would not be interesting to hang out with.

There are many interesting people in this world who won’t talk to me either. It is often the case that professional artists are picky about who they like to be around if they aren’t promoting

I think it’s a personality thing. Some people think a lot about their space. Some don’t. I like having a nice space but don’t put thought into it. My wife cares deeply so I have active work in progress in my spaces (garage, storage) but keep it out of the house.

Some people think about their space and don't want it to be minimal. The way a lot of people talk about minimalism feels like propaganda to me. It's _assumed_ to be good, in and of itself. Well, I don't want to live like that, and I see no evidence that it helps.

What helps me is cleanliness and tidiness (which is about aesthetic) more than minimalism (which should be about function but its aesthetic is more.. well.. visible.).

I've found that rather than an actual focus on minimalism, the most successful people I've known tend to be very good at saying no to external demands on their time. Which is a form of shielding their time from being wasted by things that are not important to them. To run a business successfully as one example, you typically have to get good at that, or external demands on your time will persistently harm your ability to operate effectively (you end up like Lucy in the chocolate factory).

So rather than being minimalists, they avoid adding to their existing pile/s whenever possible. I can do this much and no more; they know their productive limits and seek to stay within those.

[Author of blog post here] This is what I am alluding to with the post - the goal is less so about "remove stuff that doesn't spark joy" rather than to focus on things that empower one to get their job done. If it's a desk with 1,000 papers spread all around it - so be it, if it works for you. As long as you can focus and minimize wasteful time spending, that means it's working.

I tend to agree with you so I did a quick google to see how many Billionaires, CEO's, and other people of high achievement represent themselves as minimalist.

A lot more come up than you would think.

The most uprising example to me was Michael Bloomberg. Apparently he refuses to have more than 6 pairs of shoes. I don't even know how to take that, because he must have more than 6 homes, right?

No matter how many homes he has he only has two feet. Putting myself in his shoes (pun intended) I'd imagine that I'd have a certain bond with my shoes after they're worn in - in a literal sense.

Personally, I've never understood people who have dozens of shoes. Though I also own 6 mechanical keyboards with one pair of hands so I'm just as bad :)

Related to your experience, here's a picture of Einstein's office at Princeton: https://time.com/3494553/the-day-albert-einstein-died-a-phot...

That's actually pretty minimal. It only looks cluttered because the desk is small. The shelves are only half-used, and mostly in proper stacks.

There's another way to look at this though:

"When I think about the successful, interesting people I have known in my life, they all have garbage in their houses."

In other words, perhaps complexity is an unavoidable byproduct of productivity, but the successful keep it under a manageable threshold.

> Most (all maybe?), have messy or at least full offices and houses. They have lots of interest in things, and have artefacts of those interests around them.

I think that's just most people in general tbh

Really? Most people have what I consider to be neat houses. They have photos and stuff on their walls, some books etc., but what I'm talking about is usually a step beyond that. Usually is involves piles of stuff all over the place. Sometimes just heaps on the floor.

The next time you come here, I'll probably still be trying to figure out what this sentence means: "And I'd like to see some evidence from sorts of people who about how great minimalism is that it does."

Not GP but I believe it was supposed to be "And I'd like to see some evidence from those sorts of people about how great minimalism is at what it does"

It's not my finest sentence, to be sure! Worse still, there was a missing word. It should read "[...] from sorts of people who _write_ about how great minimalism [...]".

Got it lol! I live a pretty minimalist life myself; far simpler than the author's. It was forced on me financially due to illness and brain injury, but I must say that I now love living simply and having few things. I define my success in part by being happy with what I don't have. However, I'm not so naive as to think that just because it works for me, that it would work for everyone. Some people love taking advantage of the many things that this life has to offer. Nothing wrong with that.

He thinks that minimalism doesn't work as advertised (to make you more productive, successful, etc), and "he would like to see some evidence from [the] sort of people who [go on] about how great minimalism is, that it does".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com