brooklyn_ashey

Thank you for articulating this. This issue has many manifestations in the interview process. It can be so frustrating.

I can relate to this. I was “bad” at math as a child, and was so bored by its basics or at least how they were taught. I never had a good foundation and so never got to takeTrig or Calculus in high school. Later, during my PHD studies, I discovered I was great at set theory, and went on to learn programming. I realized I was never “bad” at math. I was poorly taught. As a result, I had trouble holding numbers in my head to work with them.Now that I am “good” at math, I find this much easier.

I can say that Bandcamp made this release possible... it just got released this week! and this is a record that waited years to come out and is a big band featuring some of the best/most interesting jazz musicians in NYC - the compositions are incredible— https://andrew-dangelo.bandcamp.com/

An artist is always fundamentally speaking about themselves— they have no choice in this. Herzog’s self applied to various subjects is just really compelling.

Right, but then every company would just grow uberdevs and be chock full of awesome at some point, but it seems like that isn’t happening w these interns as often as would make the intern thing “worth it” for identifying future wonderdevs.

Interesting piece. Two things: 1. How do these few absolutely spectacular developers blossom into such impressive specimens of the lot? Why not get them before this happens and help them over the greatness threshold? 2. Isn’t there a kind of giant group of buried truffles that don’t fit the trad idea of what a great dev smells like? — so much so that you could identify this set with a couple of simple queries— a kind of sifting activity that would yield lots of truffles per square foot?

Shoot. I was trying to be supportive/positive. I have worked in many non-profits. I agree, writing virtuosity would be a tremendous asset in some of the jobs you mentioned. I have not yet encountered such skill in these realms. I’m all for bringing back literacy! Beautiful! But... unless one is employed at Harper’s or Granta, expect a less than orgasmic response to your stylish articulations. I’m still a fan of great writers.

Throughout grad school, I worked as a writing tutor to support my humanities habit. Each new class of high school seniors was less skilled —and even less interested— in writing than the last. These were kids with 3.9 GPAs who went to Dalton, Horace Mann, Brearly, Choate and similar. I think great writing is a valuable life skill. I wish I could see more real-life evidence that employers care about it in the real world. (hiring and advancement)

Wait...does anybody care about writing skills anymore? ——outside—or even inside—journalism? I wish they did. Writing seems to be treated like a 20th century skill of the uber-affluent layabout these days. I jump for joy when I stumble upon some great writing on the internet.

Classical/Lyrical/MT (what is MT?musical theater??)styles do not require "more" technique. They require different techniques that have a long pedagogical history. The style is not harder to teach. Classical music has many styles (Renaissance, Classical, Romantic, Chanson, Bel Canto...) and they are all as teachable as popular styles. I guess this bothered me because there is this incorrect hierarchy people ascribe to classical- like it's a higher art or something. This is misleading. I'm a classical musician. If anything, the "training" makes people think they need to ask permission for everything and keeps them chained to someone else's ideas and removes a lot of their own confidence. Then, they spend the rest of their life trying to undo this damage while they try to sing show tunes with some kind of relaxation "of the street" and without constant judging of themselves. See: Dawn Upshaw's popular musical recordings or Renee Flemming's.

I'm with you on "born with": Karen Carpenter, Barbara Streisand and Whitney... we will never have another of any of these ever again. But Louis Armstrong?-- a great great singer and incredible, towering musician by any measure-- doesn't have a naturally "beautiful" voice like them-- he basically plays a kind of voice trumpet using his vocal chords-- which is his personal, developed style- and it is SO compelling and multi-textured. That is practice, baby! That is being comfortable with your instrument and your own stylistic ideas and making stuff up within a style and context. Robert Plant? That is all about the gut of it- the raw impulse. The rock n roll. It's his commitment to the story and the song, but I won't at all agree that he was born with a gorgeous or even naturally interesting voice-- but he has developed a very clear artistic one-- developed-- practiced and imagined. Bob Dylan? He compels a lot of people to buy records and tickets. Tom Waits? Great singing is stylistic and conceptual artistry like Picasso or Sophie Calle. Most important thing about the singing: being comfortable with yourself and accepting who you actually are and loving the imperfections. That is so difficult, I know - it is what we all practice all the time. Once you feel comfortable- it is all about being vulnerable (being totally cool with making mistakes and being imperfect and unbeautiful) in front of many people and making them feel like you trust them with your mistakes and your imperfections and your story. That's the whole thing and the hardest part.

Incidentally, no matter how beautiful the "born with" part, some of those who are most "born with" that impossibly gorgeous tone quality have a much harder time than the rest of us with the accepting of themselves and their imperfections (few, if any in the vocal department) and being vulnerable and ok with who they are. In fact, in the case of Carpenter and Whitney- it killed them —they were unable to sustain this vulnerability.

To your question: "So you have taught someone to change the tone/quality of the voice they were given to the point where ppl pay to hear them sing?" Well, not to change it fundamentally, but to embody it and learn to enhance it and present it with skill and generosity so that others (collaborators, audience members) will be compelled/motivated/helped by its vulnerability, truth, intention and whatever it's about-- this is essentially my job as a teacher of music. Just an FYI--- music is not about who pays to hear it- that is not the mark of its power or greatness. Does it change your life? That's it! (People pay for some crazy bad stuff.)

Paul, this absolutely breaks my heart. Anyone can learn to sing in tune. I’ve taught kids and adults who are “tone deaf” to listen and sing/play in tune in weeks to months. It isn’t a magic trick, just listening and singing and listening and singing. Like algorithms- you break it down. There is no such thing as a bad voice— the best voice is when you sound like yourself: natural. No one is born knowing how to sing. we, all of us learn to sing by listening and imitating and singing a long—- its hours of practice. We are not born knowing how to talk either. Please try to sing again and don’t let the haters get you down.

You don’t need a teacher. Seriously. The teacher thing is not the mindset you seek. Or rather, your best teachers are the great musicians you listen to over and over and admire from recordings and from your life. Jerry Reed had his own very strange way of playing guitar- it was so cool, Elvis hired him to play guitar on a record because he could not reproduce it.

Find a group ( or start one!) that likes similar music or all types and sit in a room ( or zoom?) and play these songs together- everyone goes around the room taking solos, singing the tune, or whatever they want to do one time through the form. You will get comfortable with that, and you will learn new tunes!

BTW, this is how birds learn their calls! The only app or teacher or tuning device you will ever really need are your own ears. We musicians develop technique by training ourselves to listen and sing using our listening as the guide— this is how we improve. No person or device can do this for you— this is what singing is all about just like logic is what programming is all about. There is no shortcutting this— it is myelinating those nerve fibers through practice and listening and developing an opinion of your own about it. The mindset is not about getting a badge from a qualified judge— that judge is you and only you. The mindset is about adventure and experimentation and creativity and expression of style.

I’m a professional musician in NYC. I perform and record classical and “jazz” and compose music. I learned to code a while ago too. Here are a few vocalists who “taught themselves” how to sing: Chet Baker, Stevie Wonder, Ella Fitzgerald, Sheila Jordan, Blossom Dearie, Bob Dorough, James Taylor, Nelly McKay... even Barbara Streisand. (at first) I’d say all great singers play an instrument well, but Ella and Sheila didn’t, nor did Barbara. What do you like to sing? What do you want to do with it? Since you didn’t say “opera” and you called it “vocals”, I’m guessing you like pop or jazz or singer/songwriter stuff. If jazz, who is your hero? If they are alive, call them up for a lesson. I promise they will love to teach anyone with enthusiasm. I know, because I know this crowd of vocalists well. Where do you live? Looking past these times, it would be great for you to just go out and sing with a band every week. Every city has such a thing and it is usually a supportive group of people. Singers are great for that. But most impirtantly— apart from opera— there is no wrong way. we have mics now. Don’t worry about doing something “with bad habits”. The only important bad habit to avoid is to not try for fear of doing something wrong. I promise that there is no wrong if you listen, embrace mistake making and experiment with relish. That is how any great singer or musician does it. You don’t “need a teacher” but it’s fun to have someone to check in with. Better than a teacher— pick some songs you love, learn them and find a fantastic, professional accompanist who will play them with you once a week. (guitarist, bassist, or pianist— even vibes— a comping instrument, not a melody one)I could recommend actual people if I knew where you were. Just listen hundreds of times to great vocalists singing the same song. For example: How Deep Is The Ocean— Sheila Jordan, Chet Baker, Ella, ... anyone you love and imitate exactly how they sing it— note for note, bend for bend, even the scatting parts- especially those. Get the phone app: The Amazing Slow Downer and loop sections so you can sing exactly like them. This builds your ear and your technique. Obviously, you don’t want to sing the song like they do at all, but you want to learn from them. For more current singers—I’ve been digging Natalia Lafourcade recently, her phrasing is impeccable and natural. Nelly McKay is also such a natural singer- her If I had You is so perfect. Just put a little set together w a friend and go outside (10 ft apart) and sing to people walking by. That’s better than any teacher. I wish you great fun and encourage you to get singing ASAP! Cheers!

You may want to check this out- online classes from Berkeley- I saw that you were nearby... https://cjc.edu/workshops/ I know Kate McGarry and have heard Dena DeRose teach many times- both phenomenal singers and teachers of singing. Both classes look interesting! You could also email Kate or tweet to her to see if she might know a good accompanist or vocal teacher or if she herself does lessons outside the music school.

There is also SFConservatory, but I don't know the whole faculty there.

It is ageism when a company would hire a 25 year old with the same skill set but would’t hire the 45 year old in those circumstances (or insert anyone in a protected class). The point is, they arehappy to invest in young ppl but not so-called “older” ones. The only way around this is collective action that includes the young- other industries have unionized and sued again and again w class actions to protect themselves and their futures. It’s how discrimination became “illegal”

Um, so you... failed to check a pretty glaring "edge case" is what you are saying? You maybe failed to optimize the solution, is what you are saying? Ok. Fortunately, this glitch— although certainly catastrophic— is a weakness in analysis and execution that can be practiced over time.

“Anyone who’s spent a few months at a sizable tech company can tell you that a lot of software seems to exist primarily because companies have hired people to write and maintain them. In some ways, the software serves not the business, but the people who have written it, and then those who need to maintain it. This is stupid, but also very, very true.“

This is exactly what happened to higher education. It seems to be a kind of entropy that signals that a system is in major need of complete overhaul so it can get back to doing what it was actually designed to do.

Does Naxos pay Youtube for these takedowns?

Imagine it like this: It feels like toxic propaganda that doesn’t jive with reality or empathy for anyone- an every man for himself lack of community and warmth. And for some, it feels even worse: it feels like the pressure to pretend you are slways doing well, even when homeless and starving, lest you appear weak and thus marked as such in a society that shuns anyone who doesn’t look wildly successful and wealthy and somehow like a celebrity.

The thing is, I’m actually interested in why we, a community of engineers and tech people, aren’t genuinely interested in evolving the fundamental failures of our system. We might learn something from classical music’s failures which led to its musicians being mostly unable to continue to be professionals. They used this same organization building system we are using now and it led to a collapse of their entire industry. If we “peer review” our code, why don’t we “peer review” the way we build our companies and the way we bring new folks in. We mostly only pretend to care about diversity and we only care about innovation when we are comfortable. It would be great to hear about why we look to the individual interview process for faults it can’t really accept responsibility for. Don’t its fundamental failures lie in the greater system and by extension, the (even unconscious) intentions of the folks who designed it? Ibram Kendi (youngest winner of the National Book Award) recently wrote a book “How to be an Anti-racist”. In it, he details how the SAT was written and how it was specifically and consciously designed to be eugenicist. I’m not claiming that’s the case with interviews, but don’t you think we should consider better ways NOT to redline certain folks out of the hiring process?

Why is it that no one questions the system in which these —at best, ridiculously obtuse—at worst, totally corrupt, often nepotistic— “interviews” reside? The whole “interview/audition” culture comes out of a kind of gladiator/Olympic ethos that pits "commoners" against one another for the amusement of the powerful, while solidifying the collective deception that keeps them in power. It’s a lever workers hand over willingly because the other mythology—the one in which their genius and hard work “earned” them their position—is an identity narrative they can’t survive the despair of corporate culture without. But haven’t the critical thinkers among us agreed that when the starting bootstraps are of different lengths, we can’t trust our notions of “merit-based” reward? Celebrities bribing their kids into college is but one of the more languid manifestations of the bankruptcy of this belief system. When we play along in this gerrymandered Miss America pagent—what now passes for job interviews in tech—we legitimize and endorse these so-called “measurements". We need to collectively refuse to participate, with some vehemence and volume. We must stop trying to make fairer versions of this fundamentally dishonest bullshit. There is no fair Three Card Monty; it’s a trick! Back in the day, the only folks who would play that game around 42nd St. were tourists or kids who’d just moved to the city. This interview process is the same; you can only pull it on the green, which is why it selects for the young and desperate. Hey! Young and Desperate! You are way smarter and better than this.

For those looking for actual data, like the post’s author who says as much, one could turn to the classical music “industry”. This audition process where “the best man wins” was exactly that for many, many years, until someone thought to put up a screen and down a carpeted walkway, and well, what do you know?...when the candidates were truly anonymous, women started winning. Here’s an article http://gap.hks.harvard.edu/orchestrating-impartiality-impact..., one of many on this study. So that trick was revealed, but ultimately, the idea that they would select the “best” players of orchestral excerpts resulted in them looking for players who rivaled computers in accuracy. Unfortunately, that isn’t really what one wants in an art. Anyone there has the accuracy required in spades. Accuracy beyond that is just meat compiling. It turns out that classical orchestras populated by this kind of person lack morale, creativity and vitality and don’t evolve with the culture, so these organizations have become culturally dead and are going bankrupt all over the country—this after their members were forced to let go of any real compensation and all dignity. The problem is that most organizations like these and tech companies are top-down. They are run like the military; their basic training programs are even called “boot camps”, and like boot camps, they won’t get you much. We need to take a look at the whole system, I’m afraid, or it will suffer a fate similar to music in this country, because that’s what happens here, eventually.

Truly excellent post! I discovered just how inaccessible the NYC transit system is for folks using wheelchairs or other personal assists when I had surgery. It is appalling how many elevators are broken all the time, thus making fast transit nigh impossible. That experience made me much more aware of accessibility issues people face. More needs to be done.

There's also an epidemic of imposter syndrome blooming within these "competitive" tech companies.

https://www.quora.com/Do-engineers-at-companies-like-Google-...

I put "competitive" in quotes, because you can't really have actual, honest competition if you exclude (or include fewer) African Americans, women, and people over a certain age who are "not a culture fit", as it says in the article. In that linked Quora post, it mentions a serious problem with this syndrome at Google in particular, and an internal list dedicated to it. When one is relatively young or inexperienced and one has a kickass job plus imposter syndrome, one might find it unsettling to be the boss of someone older/more experienced or perhaps more accomplished than one... (see Dan Lyons comedic output). ONe way around this is to avoid hiring anyone that distant from your own experience level.

Are you asking because this happened to you? You can subpoena the CVs of the people invited to the interview and you can cite the hiring/interview practices of the company and its record on age-related hiring and firing. That said, it's usually after the interview and rejection that you bring a successful case. If your point was that so many people over a certain age don't even get asked to the interview in the first place, and that's where the discrimination gets most people, you'd be right! In that many "elderly" (wink/over 30) workers have some valuable experience and maybe some great ideas, not to mention wonderful facility, we may have to consider: does high level work actually need doing?

I think once someone has carved out a place for themselves, it seems like it’s something to be attained, like it exists as a thing to envy or a “place”to be. But you are only ever seeing a distinct part of a longer, more complex story, the small part you envy. You see your own path more realistically—as the longer story it actually is. You remember its aspirational beginnings and mundane points along the way. It has its high and low points too.

It’s natural for everyone to want to be at a high point when they’re struggling to get somewhere. And then when someone’s at a really high point, it doesn’t necessarily feel that way to them. “Success” usually feels more like success to its far off audience and often more like work to the person supposedly “enjoying” it.

Focus on finding the joy/inspiration/thrill in what you are doing now. Because it isn’t the wild success that will quell these feelings of envy. The envy is more of a sign that you should be doing something you actually love doing! If you were, you’d be thinking about your own stuff and what cool thing to do with it next, instead of what someone else is accomplishing. If you can’t find the joy in your current thing, then work on what you are truly compelled by. If you are in that zone, you will never envy anyone else, because you will be far too absorbed in doing what you deeply love doing.

Agreed. Ah, the New York Times with its paywall—- bastion of modern democracy! Loved the line about how this is the best example of democracy on offer, sheesh.

yeah- kinda the olive version of the maraschino cherry

if the practice is not fun, in the sense that it’s compelling like a great book or a great game or a great conversation, then 1. it isn’t effective practice 2. you wont want to do it- great practice is for everyone