3 ms·
'Being a non-creator, the quote at the end of the article has hit me so hard, I cannot get it off my head for hours now: "When you don’t create things, you beco
by jamesbritt 17y ago
'Being a non-creator, the quote at the end of the article has hit me so hard, I cannot get it off my head for hours now:
"When you don’t create things, you become defined by your tastes rather than ability. Your tastes only narrow and exclude people. so create."'
How so? How do "you become defined by your tastes rather than ability"? And why do [y]our tastes only narrow and exclude people"?
This sounds like one of those pop-psych quotes that have little intrinsic content but ill-defined assertions into which people read what they want to believe.
I know many people who are not "creators" by most definitions, yet I don't see them as defined by their tastes, but by their everyday words and actions. And when they do express their tastes I don't see that as narrow or excluding people. Their tastes often allow me to see associations among things, and value in places I hadn't expected.
If you want to then turn it around and claim, well, these people, through their words, actions, and expressions of taste are therefor in some way creating something, then I'm lost as to what "create" is supposed to mean, other than perhaps something too amazingly broad to bother with.
(I've also known creative people who are also narrow and exclusive and petty, so these qualities seem to be pretty orthogonal.)
- Jun8 17y agoJames, I don't think the two qualities have two be orthogonal, you can be a creative person with great taste in a lot of matters or not. The quote does have a touch of "pop-psych" (or, perhaps, "pop-HN" :-), but that's what makes it memorable. Let me paraphrase what the quote says yo me: There are three types of people: the source (creator), the sink (end consumer), and the filter (the critic). Now, when I say that, I mean people for which these characteristics are dominant, of course, we all have a mixture of both. Also, we may assume different roles for different fields. And some gifted individuals can do more than once at once; John Updike comes to mind, as a top notch writer and both an literary and art critic. The non-creator types (end consumer and critic) are defined by their tastes, which range from voting with their wallets to the up buttons in HN and links in their blogs. We are the link creators, the judges, the filters of content. However, where does all this content, code, the good stuff come from, who makes these? These are the people who make the quantum jump to creation. Just like the fact that there's a huge difference between a product that is free vs that's priced (even 10 cents), there's the gap between the consumer and the creator. Ooops, this already became a long comment, so I don't have a chance to touch on what the part about "excluding people" parts say to me. Let me finish by pointing out a wonderful book called The Mirror and the Lamp, referring to the roles of the critic and the creator. I cannot think of a better analogy. Currently I'm all mirror and I want to change that! People like _why are a huge inspiration.