Going Big
February 17th, 2006I’ve made a reference before about a music critic on the Sunday morning (Grandpa) show CBS News Sunday Morning. He talks about elitism, smallness and exclusivity, with the implication that being small and exclusive might not be the best way to get your music heard. He was talking about Coldplay. And I can hear the haters already:
“Coldplay sucks now.”
“Coldplay was never good.”
“You like Coldplay?”
Yes, I do. Whatever.
The part of the critic’s review of Coldplay’s album X&Y that really resonated with me was this:
“Since the 90s, a lot of rock has gotten exclusive and elitist and small.”
What struck me about this comment so forcefully last summer when I heard it, wasn’t just that it was so perfectly dead on. It was the universality of what it meant for who we’ve become. And why we choose things like bands and hobbies and movies and television shows and software and sites we visit and how we publish or perform or express ourselves publicly.
Something has to be little-known to be considered cool. Otherwise it’s mainstream. And mainstream sucks. Being big sucks. I used to believe this when I was younger. I used to embody this attitude. There was a kind of mean-spirited quality to it as well. For example, when I was in bands, we’d get pissy when another local band got to go to South by Southwest, or when another local band got a better time slot at a show, or recognized for some great work. Really stupid stuff that was very small. It didn’t make the other band smaller, it made me smaller. And it didn’t really make me feel better in the long run. It didn’t make me write better music or put better energy out there into the world.
I see this nearly every day in the online world. Comment threads and blog posts full of vitriol towards anybody remotely considered mainstream. I’ve been guilty of it as well. Whole sites dedicated to the belittling of the big. When it’s smartly done, and done without ire, I think there can be a valid and necessary conversation. Satire and sarcasm can be wonderful leveling devices. Humor is good. Anger can be good. For example, Enron or a governmental entity. Or Pamela Anderson’s boobs. But if it’s coming from a jealous place or a small place, it’s going to be small in six months or six years and who’s better off?
I’m married to a person with a fairly popular web site. She’s none of the things that the haters rant on about. So many of them fall into what David Pogue at the New York Times calls “online curmudgeons“. But beyond their opinions, however misguided, which they are certainly entitled to, there seems to be a general smallness. Which I think is why, in 2001, when I decided to pursue Heather and make some big life changes, I decided to consciously stop being exclusive, elitist and small. My experiment on this site with openness has often paid me back with huge personal satisfaction and an awareness of others. Others who often don’t agree with me. Watching the same thing happen with Heather and post-partum depression was a truly wonderful experience. Which made the tsunami of anti-advertising commments (and then a subsequent wave of supportive emails to Heather) all the more confusing. “You go girl” vs. “I liked you better when”, with the latter being tinged with precisely what I’m talking about.
To be sure, there is also an element in modern culture of the ever-changing zeitgeist and our constant need for new new new new. But I think that isn’t what I’m getting at today.
Going big isn’t about making money or not making money. For me it’s about not thinking small anymore.
This personal choice has made a huge difference in my life. I’ve been able to work through and get through some difficulties without going supremely crazy. I’ve been better able to wish others well. I’ve been less angry on a creative level. Success for others in my field(s) is only going to benefit the field as a whole, and what is my contribution? Anger? Negativity? Or good work? I’m hoping for the latter. o
February 17th, 2006 at 8:17 pm
Hmm…
I don’t really get what your talking about here. I’ll try reading it again in the morning.
February 17th, 2006 at 8:35 pm
Excellent post on so many levels. For years, I’ve struggled with letting myself feel okay about liking certain things that might be considered mainstream. As I get older, it becomes easier to tell the elitist snob in me to just shut up and enjoy what I enjoy.
Regarding Heather, every so often I come across little stabs at her site and how “everyone likes Dooce” so they don’t read her anymore, etc. Their loss. She’s popular for a reason–she’s an awesome writer and that’s why I’ve been coming back for more than three years. I don’t care how popular/famous she is. She has pure talent and is a joy to read.
February 17th, 2006 at 8:35 pm
Me, I heart those knocking people. I love the lack of irony.
Most of all, I got to see 40000 Levellers fans at Glastonbury, all dressed more or less exactly the same kind of different, singing “There’s only one way of life, and that’s your own”. In unison.
You can’t buy that kind of comedy.
February 17th, 2006 at 9:19 pm
Dude, you’re human. Changing your mind or reflecting on your past opinions is A.OK.
Cheers
February 17th, 2006 at 9:28 pm
I think a lot of people resent others “making it big” because of jealousy and insecurity. But we need to remember that making it big has its downside. Just last week Dave Chappelle talked movingly about the price of fame in his interview on The Actors Studio.
So instead of being jealous about what other people have, let’s just thank our lucky stars for what _we_ have. And wish everyone else the best of luck in life, because life is hard for everyone.
As Jane Pauley said in her autobiography, “There are no perfect lives. There are only lives.”
February 17th, 2006 at 9:35 pm
My take away is that big, small or whatever, it’s an ugly attitude, one that with whatever lens we happen to be wearing at that season, we judge and spew about someone/something else…… And as wise, witty, catalytic as we think our words and judgments are, they’re probably no more than negative energy released into the universe. In fact, because they are negative energy put out there, why oh why do we do it? It doesn’t benefit anyone - ever.
February 17th, 2006 at 10:35 pm
Thank the fucking LORD someone FINALLY said this Jon. I’m SO sick of the hate. People have given me hassle for linking to your lovely wife’s site. I’ve told them all personally to fek off. I read Dooce because I can relate to her, not because she’s popular or whatever people are perceiving her to be. Her writings of PPD, motherhood and general shit life flings at her is stuff I’ve lived, stuff I can relate to, and Jesus H. Christ she cracks me the hell up. We could not have grown up more differently, and it amazes me how many characteristics I share with Heather. Her writing got me through the toughest shit life has ever thrown at me, and I have so much gratitude toward her. Much love.
Okay - at least one glaring difference: I poop. Every day. Sometimes twice.
Hope you’re having an awesome Friday night together!
February 18th, 2006 at 2:12 am
Hi Jon,
Great post. I’ve often wondered what was so distinctive about my younger sister’s generation -
I’m 45, she’s 34. I really appreciate people who
think about why they like something, or don’t like
it. The important thing is that you own the judgment,
not that you make it because you feel pressured to.
It has been tremendously exciting for me as someone who grew up battling mainstream tastes in music to see what an amazing range of music is available to all age groups now, and how open minded your generation is about music - I can’t get my kids to stop playing classic rock, either. It’s incredible.
Perhaps you are giving your generation a bit of a raw
deal? - creating more niches also creates opportunities for cultural richness of a kind I could only dream of as a teenager.And you guys have provided it freely for my kids to enjoy. They should be so lucky.
Also if people are encouraged to exercise discrimination in artistic matters, there’s a greater chance they’ll try to be better informed on matters political. Not such a bad thing either!
February 18th, 2006 at 6:50 am
I agree with about, oh, 100% of your post. And I love Coldplay.
February 18th, 2006 at 10:49 am
I arrived via your wife’s “fairly popular web site,” which my wife and I both enjoy regularly. Great post, great comments. I have nothing to add, but Cat and Girl (a uniqueóand still only marginally popular!óonline comic) do:
The band coolness life cycle:
http://snipurl.com/mp9o
Waiting for New Wave’s big comeback:
http://snipurl.com/mp9q
“It was so much cooler here before the Pilgrims arrived”
http://snipurl.com/mp9r
February 18th, 2006 at 11:51 am
Very well articulated post, Jon, and have really enjoyed reading the comments that followed.
“It’s about not thinking small anymore.”
EXACTLY.
The small part of me wanted to not like dooce.com, the big part of me couldn’t stop reading, laughing, enjoying, and realizing that sometimes there is a reason things get popular: they speak to us.
You and Heather both do that, and do it well.
Good work? Yes, you do.
February 18th, 2006 at 11:54 am
Hey, I hear you on this one.
I think that the mainstream thing is critical to understand in our ability to really grow up. At risk of generalizing a whole bunch, I think alot of people waste their lives trying to be in “that” group of people, forsaking reality and everything that goes along with a good,real, and mainstream life.
I think once you stop caring what others think in order to fit in, you really start living…more than that though you start discovering who you really are.
February 18th, 2006 at 12:55 pm
I think one reason we can all be so resistant to going “mainstream” in anything whether it is music, writing, technology, snowboarding or whatever is that we all know going mainstream bring a lot of different people into something that used to be a niche. I really disgust myself when I realize I have acted like an elitist because there are so many nice people out there who gave me a chance and let me into their world and taught me what they know. It is truely a betrayal of the people who have helped us when we in turn don’t help others when it comes to our personal niches.
February 18th, 2006 at 12:55 pm
I call this “attitude”. When I was living in Davis California, everyone was so “Granola”, I felt I couldn’t get to the heart of who they were, even though we had similar ideologies. I like peoples idiosyncrasies, its more interesting, but most of all I like when people are genuine and kind. However, this comes with age, because I couldn’t say the same when I was a teenager.
February 18th, 2006 at 3:56 pm
I’m trying to sort through the cultural implications of this. To be successful is bad. To be unsuccessful is good. No, that’s not it. To be successful is bad because it de facto means you’ve been untrue to your self/talent to get there. To be unsuccessful is good because it means you haven’t been untrue to your self/talent to get there. But there’s a third part to the equation: if you’re unsuccessful because you’re untalented, that’s not good. So if you stay “small”, you never have to risk failure. Pretty safe position, isn’t it.
February 18th, 2006 at 4:34 pm
Good post. I am very different from you but feel welcome and enjoy watching your family develop. Its better than sea monkeys.
I became aware of this with my highschool age kids. They do not want to wear any t-shirt to school if any one else already wears it - unique to the extreme. But my son, now a freshman in college, has shown the advantage of this exploring all kinds of music off the beaten track and discovered some real good stuff and turned me on to it. But snobbery should never survive the highschool years, not that it belongs even there. Being a sane adult person means to me living life to the full and damning the sterotypes on the way.
February 18th, 2006 at 6:55 pm
I’m not going to agree with you 100% here, just a forewarning.
I think that in the case of Heather, and in many blogs’ cases, the “going big” concept is that once a blogger goes superdupermainstream, there is a sense of personal loss, however inappropriate. It’s not as small-minded as you might think, and not always driven by jealousy or elitism. Sometimes its mourning a loss of accessibility. For example, when I read Heather several years ago, there was a sense of community among Dooce readers. Since there weren’t nearly as many of us,that we could tell at least, there was a sense of ownership and community that came with it. When it became clear exactly *how big* her readership was getting, it was a bit of a sad day - not that I was even the slightest bit turned off by reading her anymore, not that I was suddenly green with envy that she had this success, but that suddenly, because I was now among legions, it became less *mine,* and Dooce was now part of the collective ownership of thousands. I think the same is true for bands, books, whatevers that I’ve liked that have gone big - I still like them just as much as I always did, and I have no disdain for them, but it’s a little sad, since it loses its sense of personality and personal investment for the individual.
And let’s consider the band example: If you were a U2 fan from way way back in the day and spent your time buying their albums and going to their concerts, and suddenly, due to their raging success, you find that you - YOU, longtime, long-suffering U2 fan - suddenly can’t get tickets because of the millions of other fans have suddenly discovered them, I imagine it would be frustrating in the sense that your personal secret - your wonderful little discovery - is now out there to the point where you can no longer benefit from it.
I’m not a U2 fan, just throwing out the example. The same is true for blogs - suddenly, my comment or email to/on Dooce or Blurbomat or Amalah or WHOEVER is no longer being read because there are millions of other people out there who are there first, and it’s suddenly no longer what felt like a small, close-knit community. And many people just don’t know how to deal with that, so it comes out as anger/jealousy/etc. And maybe I’m just being too kind, and maybe people really are small-minded assholes, but I think what I just laid out isn’t as uncommon as it seems, at first blush.
And then there is the whole thing with blogs that LOTS of bloggers write about/talk about is that at some points, blogging can feel like high school. There are the cool girls, the cliques, the inside, random jokes that we commonfolk can’t follow, etc. And that, I think, feeds into the jealousy/smallmindedness, however unintentional. And this is directed at no one in particular and may be, in fact, totally random.
February 18th, 2006 at 7:01 pm
And I realize that I didn’t really directly answer the question, just rambled about people’s misdirected sense of loss or frustration. Instead, I’d like to point out where most jealousy comes from: There is a complete misconception that there is only so much success/beauty/brains/whatever to go around in this world. That the supply of Good Things is finite. It’s not true. Just because Heather or you or whoever is beautiful/smart/successful doesn’t mean that I can’t be too. You’re not taking away from the available Pool of Good Stuff. The world is inherently good. So we can all go out there and get some!
February 18th, 2006 at 8:18 pm
Jonniker,
Doesn’t your position say less about the thing and more about you? If one were a true fan of somebody else’s work (U2 circa 1981, for example) wouldn’t one want millions of people to enjoy their music? What I’m getting at is that we project ourselves onto our likes. And do so in an entirely harmful way. We set ourselves up for that moment when the fan base stops being an intimate few to the unwashed masses. This seems selfish and small.
Isn’t that entirely fucked up? I was this way with the Smiths in 1986. I got back to America and they released The Queen is Dead and they had a video on MTV and everything. Suddenly, I wasn’t the hipster I thought I was. But it didn’t make the Smiths a lame band. It meant that I was confronted, for the first time, with the dysfunctional relationship I had with them. I had to re-assess my thinking. It wasn’t the last time I needed to go through this. It’s been fascinating to watch geekery and self-publishing take on this same dynamic.
February 18th, 2006 at 9:39 pm
“Note: I’ve been writing this for quite some time and have wondered if it didn’t sound too preachy. My apologies if it comes across that way. That certainly wasn’t my intention. Also, I’m aware of pages on this site that fall into exactly what I’ve tried to avoid.”
Ever walked past a painting in a gallery with an artist’s disclaimer mounted next to it? I didn’t so.
Forget your audience and continue writing from your gut, trust that you have the chops to adequately convey your ideas, and never apologize for your shit, especially when it’s this good.
February 18th, 2006 at 10:34 pm
I really appreciated your thoughts on going big.
I always wonder why the hipnoscenti of the world don’t want everyone to know and appreciate the music, books, art and fashion they like.
I mean, these are things that are cool, right? Wouldn’t it be great if you could share that with lots of people? Isn’t it good to support good work so there will be more of it in the world?
Personally, I think anything positive that will help me connect and share a slice of the world with a lot of people is no bad thing.
So, I’ll listen to an album someone else suggests if they’ll read Kevin MacNeil’s The Stornoway Way… let us make small things big!
February 18th, 2006 at 10:49 pm
It’s totally selfish, yes, I am ashamed to admit, but I guess what I was trying to say, however ineffectively, was that I don’t think it’s always meant to be as malicious as it comes out sometimes, you know? I think what I’m talking about isn’t the full-blown hatred or disdain for things or bands that get big, but more of the small, hard-to-admit disappointment and admittedly selfish personal loss that comes out in kind of crappy ways sometimes. Kind of like when you have a friend who gets really famous - you’re SO SO happy for them, but selfishly, you miss when it was just you and them hanging out in the bars, you know? And when you had all of this TIME to yourself with them and again, while you’re totally happy and psyched for them, selfishly, this small part of you is trying to get over the fact that you miss them and the time you had together when it was just you guys. You miss the intimacy.
Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it’s just that I think that most people can’t identify that feeling - instead they get angry and belittle the person/thing/whatever for their success to take the pain and sense of loss off of themselves. It’s selfish, but I guess my poorly-articulated point was that sometimes it’s not an entirely malicious or intentionally elitist kind of thing - more or less a selfish sense of loss borne out of something that was meant to be nice to begin with, you know? And since we’re all not that great at talking about our feelings for what they are, it comes out small and mean-spirited, as I’m sure people were to you and Heather when this whole thing started.
I might have gone completely off-base here and might not be making any sense - I was just thinking about it a bit after I read this yesterday, and was trying to think of what the actual feelings are that might drive this behavior. Am I making sense, or just sounding like a giant asshole? I can take it either way
Anyway, I think it does boil down to our own selfish behavior and the need to want everything to be MINE MINE MINE and no one else’s. And separately, I also firmly believe that a lot of the animosity that you and Heather have unfortunately been on the receiving end of is borne out of simple jealousy and the (wrong) idea that if you and she have found success this way, that it somehow takes away from the (limited) pool of self-publishing success that’s out there, which we all know is simply not true. It reminds me of the girls in high school who were mean to other pretty girls because they thought that somehow others’ prettiness meant that they couldn’t be pretty too. WE CAN ALL BE PRETTY, PEOPLE. And we can all be successful, too. What you and Heather do, and what other successful people do in their respective industries should be an inspiration of what is possible, not what has suddenly become impossible.
Dude, I am so sorry for the rambling post(s).
February 19th, 2006 at 7:38 am
I have argued and debated this anti-mainstream thing many times, mostly in the circles of “parenting”. There are many people out there who thumb their noses at anything mainstream. Now, if you are thumbing you nose at U2, that’s one thing.
However, when it comes to parenting philosophy, the mainstream is seen to be this anti-breastfeeding, spanking, circ’ing, let-your-baby-cry-it-out-ing force of people. However, I’ve been parenting for many years (my oldest is nearly 23 and my baby isn’t yet 2) and I’ve watched those things that the anti-mainstream people embrace slowly BECOME mainstream.
So what now? Does their position that mainstream is composed of a bunch of SHEEPLE who cannot possibly think for themselves suddenly CHANGE? Do they think differently about whether or not mainstream is bad, unthinking, stupid? Or do they hold onto that SMALL position and move away from those parenting practices they embraced so heartily back when those practices were more elite and not mainstream?
You’re spot-on in this assessment, Jon.
I recently wrote something similar but it was framed in terms of Red Lobster (and places like that) and how some people hate them on principle but - screw ‘em - they’re missing out on the cheddar bay biscuits. LOL (OK, so my blog post wasn’t nearly as deep and philosophical as yours and I won’t link here because I don’t know you well enough to know if that’s a no-no or not… I also wrote a meant-to-be-funny tribute to Heather and you get mentioned in there too, but again, I’ll not put up a link… come by and see it, if you have a minute).
February 19th, 2006 at 8:03 am
I read this twice and I’m not sure if I altogether “get it”. But here’s my two cents at any rate.
I think most of what you’re talking about is human nature - I’m not saying that because it is, that it’s right - but with all good comes bad.
We all like to have little things that set us apart from other people and make us feel special and I don’t necessarily think that’s an awful thing. Sometimes I think it makes you look like a prick (especially in the case of music), but whatever.
I also agree with Jonnick that often it’s not even about jealousy or vitriol but just a general sense of disappointment about accessibility.
In the case of Heather I think people are reacting so strongly because it’s a weird kind of timing in that right now blogs are being shoved down our throats ALL. THE. TIME. and backlash, no matter how great of a writer she may be, is inevitable.
This is not to say that I think any hate mail or nasty things said about Heather are warranted - they’re just not surprising.
But I, as an unabashed lover of Britney Spears and all other pop music ilk say if it makes you happy, fuck everything else and just keep playing Toxic over and over again - or you know, keep doing what makes you happy and forget about everything else.
February 19th, 2006 at 8:48 am
I had to delurk myself to comment on this post because it’s something that I’ve thought a lot about over the years and also as something that I am guilty of (pause for a moment to silently confess my sins…).
I think in terms of “bigness” people may be reacting against a phenomenon more than the actual person; like people acting out against a police officer while they are in uniform but not if that same officer in their street clothes.
I think one reason why “the mainstreams” are perceived in a negative light is because they’ve lost their humanity. They’re lost behind a series of press people, agents and general silence. When Britany drives with her kid on her lap she has to go though a hierarchy of people to get a simple “I screwed up” out. I’ve often wondered that if huge movie / music stars got a blog it would humanize them and perhaps tone down some of the obsessiveness with the paparazzi. How much would a photo of Tom Cruise be worth if suddenly he’s putting lots of them on the Internet?
It’s for this reason that I find the hugeness of Dooce very interesting because it has become this “bigness” even though Heather is sharing her life with anyone who wants to read. And, what is different between Dooce and Kottke? Why is Heather berated more than Jason? Is it what she is putting online? Is it because she’s female? Is it because of who reads her site? Is it because she doesn’t reply to people when they send an email?
I’ve wondered about this “reply to email” question. It’s like Heather is behind this wall of nothingness — and if you were to meet her or get an email suddenly you are someone because you were special enough to get a response. For every “not Dooce” you see on the Internet I’m sure there is an equal “Kudos for getting noticed by Dooce” comment. This could also be why comments never worked with the photos.
I’m not pointing any of this out as a “should do” or a “flaw” - I just find it all fascinating because ultimately it is a part of the human psyche. Why is this all happening? Why are they so adoring of people they can’t touch? I’ve been fascinated with this since Metallica became popular with Master of Puppets and then lost their loyal fan base - but then it became even trendier to say “I’ve been a loyal fan since before everyone left” as if you are proving your worth.
Thanks for the post, insight and subsequent thought, Jon. Sorry for such a long comment.
- Sharlene