9 ms·

MasterClass Isn’t Really About Mastery (2020)

42 points by enigmatic02 5y ago

jollybean 5y ago
Masterclass is the TED Talk of education, it's really glorified / overproduced video podcast / interview, some nice notes, the subjects themselves rake in a lot of money. It's interesting fodder, surely it has value. But it's not a 'Master Class'.
- xattt 5y ago
  Masterclass comes off as the coffee table book of online learning: neat to flip through but no actual substance.
- vernie 5y ago
  I've heard it described as "insight porn"
- Multiplayer 5y ago
  I think the cooking classes are very good. I don't know what a "Master Class" is per se, but getting Thomas Keller walking me one on one through a bunch of his recipes has to be pretty close! The article is right on, the classes totally inspired me and now I cook every day, without fear.
Naac 5y ago
>> The truth is that universities sell all of these things, bundled together. And that’s a big reason they’ve been able to raise prices to astronomical levels over the past several decades — it’s really hard to disrupt all of those things at once. No, it's because no matter what the cost of school is, universities know their "customers" will just take out a loan to match whatever the price is. And one way to "disrupt" this is to make public universities free for in state students, similar to what California used to do with the UC system. It was difficult to read the rest of the article given that it started on this false premise. More specifically, this article should really define what MasterClass is right at the beginning. Because given the picture at the top, I thought it was referring to the generic masterclass [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_class
- bigyikes 5y ago
  How does making the school free solve that specific problem? Wouldn’t the taxpayers foot the bill for whatever the price is? At least with loans there is some consumer price sensitivity, even if it’s lowered via use of loans.
  - sokoloff 5y ago
    Taxpayers footing the bills for things are more rational and calculating than either 17 year olds or the parents of same who “just want the best” for their kids. (That’s not to say that taxpayers are particularly great at making trade offs; I just think the 17 year olds and their parents are especially terrible at it.)
  - zenithd 5y ago
    > Wouldn’t the taxpayers foot the bill for whatever the price is? No, that's not how state budgets work. It's the other way around. Universities will get whatever the state appropriates to them and then have an obligation to take all comers.
    - jeegsy 5y ago
      > Universities will get whatever the state appropriates to them and then have an obligation to take all comers. Would that be like current pre-university public schools then? Shudder!
      - zenithd 5y ago
        >> Universities will get whatever the state appropriates to them and then have an obligation to take all comers. > Would that be like current pre-university public schools then? Shudder! Why would that be the case? IE, what are the root causes of problems in public K12 education and why would changing the funding mechanism of universities cause those problems to propagate? Many states have already done this with Community College systems and AFAICT the results have been mostly positive. So, I imagine it would be exactly like current public universities (in CA quite good). It's not like changing the funding mechanism completely wipes out the faculty or curricula. In practice, the major change would be that getting into certain programs at public universities (traditional 4 year bachelors programs) becomes more difficult. The university system takes all comers in the sense that there's no charge the point of use, not in the sense that they literally admit everyone who applies. And making college admissions more selective might be a good thing anyways.
ai_ia 5y ago
Have you wondered that Maybe people aren't really interested in mastery. Some do, ofcourse but most will be happy with learning just enough. Whenever I hear the word mastery, I am reminded of the Japanese documentary Jiro dreams of sushi. A Japanese sushi chef who is a master at sushi and that's what he has been doing for the last 40 years or so. Only when one realizes the actual effort that needs to be done to achieve Mastery, most people back out. This is crazy, they say. Who has the time to practice 4 hours a day. Masterclass doesn't sell mastery. DuoLingo doesn't sell language learning. It sells an aspirational hope that this new skill or language is just one course away. And that's comforting to us somehow. We are simple creatures after all. BTW, I like the word mastery too much that I decided to start a company around it. Primerlabs(https://primerlabs.io https://primerlabs.io). The goal is to create self paced courses that will allow anyone to truly self-learn difficult subject such as physics, mathematics, economics. We are focusing on CS currently but we will get there (hopefully).
- Jensson 5y ago
  People also pay a lot of money just to have something to talk about. Saying "I started taking this course from {famous_person}" is a conversation starter.
- ineedasername 5y ago
  Except a "master class" is usually only given to students that are already well into the introductory-- and often advanced-- stages of learning a craft. And that's not even getting into the structure of how such courses usually function & engage with the students. People don't have to want to be "masters" in order to be interested in this sort of content, but calling them "master classes" rather waters down the definition quite a bit when someone with an interest but no experience in cinematography now goes around saying with smug pride, "I took a master class with Martin Scorsese". Language changes and the meaning of words & phrases change, sure. But I guess what I don't like is the deliberate manipulation of language to co-opt it for marketing & profiting contrary to what the current use of the language actually means.
- wbsss4412 5y ago
  I think that’s a bit harsh of a description of duolingo. It definitely undersells the amount of work involved, but it absolutely does sell language learning. I’ve personally used it to that effect multiple times.
MisterBastahrd 5y ago
... Masterclass is a small subset of classes by famous people to give you a bit of personal insight into what they do and how they do it. Universities are a large set of classes focused on a particular domain of knowledge with subsets of a set of other knowledge domains bolted on that have a use for the student. Watching Masterclass With Gordon Ramsey will give you a cookbook, and a few cooking tips for the things he prepares. Watching 11 years of Emeril Live! won't prepare you for working as a chef, but you can probably watch them and summarize some dos and don'ts of cooking. Attending the French Culinary Institute, taking their classes, and working in their student restaurant will prepare you for a career in the culinary field in some capacity. Whether starting as a dishwasher and working your way up is better than spending $60K on 2 years of cooking classes is up to the individual.
mrVentures 5y ago
I was very unhappy with the instruction I received from masterclass. Maybe I'm an idiot but I actually thought it was going to be out of Mastery level and I was disappointed that a lot of the classes really only focused on introductory material. It's annoying because most educational material for any topic is introductory, particularly the kind that you find online. So it can be pretty hard to find Mastery level advice at a high quality level of instruction.
- paulpauper 5y ago
  Does anyone expect to be pro by just following a course?
  - Danieru 5y ago
    They excpect to receive wisdom and knowledge of a master, not to be a master themselves. MasterClass is really BeginnerClass, but that wouldn't sell. Yeah so, if OP did not realize the scheme before he bought I feel sorry for him. Way back when I first heard of Masterclass it too k me a minute of seeing the homepage to figure out the scheme. But I'm well versed in startup bs. "Of course a startup would focus on the mass market beginner level material" even if it says master class on the box.
tshaddox 5y ago
I'm not sure why this is described as if it's bad or even surprising. Of course their audience is mostly not watching with the earnest expectation that the content of the videos will bestow upon them mastery of the topic. It's educational entertainment, just like any number of great YouTube channels, but with the high production values and famous faces that allow their content to command a high price.
- Jensson 5y ago
  Not sure that everyone realizes this is just pop-science and not proper courses. Their homepage says: > Whether it be in business and leadership, photography, cooking, writing, acting, music, sports and more, MasterClass delivers a world class online learning experience.
  - tshaddox 5y ago
    Now that I've looked into their selection more, the descriptions do seem to vary quite a lot and some do sound more like sequential lesson plans.
jfengel 5y ago
I wouldn't expect it to be. A "master class" is a class taught by a master, not a class intended to make you a master. A master class is supposed to involve personal interaction with the the master, not a videotaped lecture. So I would expect even less from it than from a proper master class. Master classes can bring very advanced students up a notch, though it's not really intended to make them masters themselves all at a go. That's something you have to earn on your own. But master classes are often taught to the most advanced students to bring their performances to level where they're prepared to strike out on their own and truly master their craft.
- ksaj 5y ago
  And by "up a notch" I think you mean in nuances that are not as expanded upon in the standard course. That's the value of the masterclass. It's like asking a knowledgeable friend for advice. That won't turn you into a sage on the topic, but you'll come out all the better for it.
paxys 5y ago
I feel like Masterclass is a more direct competitor to Netflix than a university. I am a member and love the content, but don't really watch it with the intention of becoming the next Gordon Ramsay or Judd Apatow. Watching celebrities and others who are at the top of their craft give an insight into their creative process is worth it in itself. If I learn something useful then, well, that's a bonus.
sumnole 5y ago
It's unfortunately a rare case for someone to be both a master at something and a master at teaching. Those are the best people to learn from. As for MasterClass, most people agree that it's more IntroClass.
arthurcolle 5y ago
It's just fun to watch. I liked the Disney guy's one Also anything even tangentially involving Gordon Ramsay is immediately at the top of my list
coralreef 5y ago
Master class can be hit and miss. I liked the gardening one and dog training one, and the negotiating one. But didnt really like Steph Curry's basketball course, or Steve Martin's comedy writing, they just seemed to lack useful substance. Maybe the bigger the celeb the less thought/work they put into the course.
- paulpauper 5y ago
  i like the one about how to go food shopping. (yeah, they have gotten really specific now)
- TigeriusKirk 5y ago
  I thought Dan Brown's class was the best writing instruction I've come across. He understands exactly how he does what he does and he knows how to explain it to you.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
alexashka 5y ago
So, what redeeming quality does 'masterclass' have besides 'made money'? You know what else makes money? Any charity 'work' a mega celebrity does. You mean you can make money when you get a mega celebrity to endorse your product for a tiny fee? It's as if you've leveraged celebrity worship to sell a random product and it worked!
munificent 5y ago
> MasterClass might claim to be selling education, but don’t be fooled: they are selling credibility and inspiration. I strongly disagree. If you buy a MasterClass, you don't get any more credibility, so they haven't sold any to you. You might be more inspired, but I think that's debatable too. I'm into game dev, writing, and music, and I hang out in various communities for all of them. Despite being very different domains, they are very similar in many ways: * People who are successful at them have high prestige in our culture and often wealth. A hit can be experienced by millions, so there's very high visibility to success. Because of this, there are a large number of people clamoring to get in and do it too. There's a huge shiny pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and everyone wants it. * The process of consuming the created work is very different from creating it. In fact, the process is really fucking hard. A game you spent three hours playing took a year to make. That little sparkle animation you saw once when you got that bonus item took an artist a week to draw. That page you read in five minutes while waiting in line took the author seven drafts and two editors to get in print. And for every one of those pages, another one got cut entirely. That catchy little guitar riff took the artist ten years of practice to find the rare melodic nugget that sounds familiar enough hook you but isn't actually ripped off from another song. Because the products are so visible and widely consumed, the fact that the process is so different is not well understood. In plain words, people don't realize what they're getting into when they want to be a game developer, writer, or musician. And when they encounter the reality that it's way harder than it seems and that they are signing up for years of making shitty art before they get good enough to produce something of merit, a whole lot of psychological stuff kicks in. There is a strong cognitive dissonance between the skilled creator they imagine themselves to be and the unskilled one they actually are today. They've hung some of their self esteem on the idea that they are a gamedev or a musician, but when they sit down to actually do that, they are forcibly confronted with the reality of their skill level. One of the most common reactions to that is avoidance. People will do anything but make progress on their skill if it lets them avoid experiencing their current lack of it. So game developers go off and spend five years "making an engine" instead of making an actual game and shipping it. Writers obsess over the perfect writing routines and rituals. "Oh, I need to use a Montegrappa pen like Hemingway." Musicians buy and sell gear thinking this next guitar or synth will be the one that the music flows out of like water. (I am highly guilty of all of these.) None of this ever helps them improve their skills and become a creator, but it feels good. It keeps the cognitive dissonance and fear of failure at bay. Dropping $180 on a MasterClass from your favorite creative person seems like it will improve your skills, but it requires no actual effort on your part. You don't have to do anything. And, because of that, there is no risk of failure, no risk of seeing that you aren't who you imagine yourself to be. That's what MasterClass sells: avoidance of fear of failure. Balm for the anxiety that we aren't who we aspire to be. They're in the same product category as "signature edition" guitars and distraction-free writing apps. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with this. The reality is that most of us won't ever be successful Hollywood directors or celebrity chefs. The economics just don't work out that way. I'd rather someone entertain an idle fantasy of being creative even if it rarely bears fruit than give up hope on the idea of being creative at all. Surely the only thing sadder than a wannabe musician is a mindless consumer who doesn't want to be anything at all. And, who knows, it probably does inspire a few. Personally, I'd rather watch a few hours of video from a creative person who has actually made things that impacted the world, then, you know, unboxing videos or Instragram influencers or something. Maybe the success of MasterClass is a good sign. It says that many of us cherish the idea of mastering a creative art and making things for others.
karmanyaahm 5y ago
> experts don’t actually do it just for the money, but also as a way to give back. ... easy way to share their story and give advice to a lot of people. A one-year subscription priced at $180 is pretty accessible — certainly cheaper than getting advice from them directly. YouTube? If reach is all that matters then 0 is better than 180.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
mmaunder 5y ago
Masterclass is brilliant in that it is flattering to the audience (master learners only), taught by actual masters of the craft (credibility) and positioned in a way that gives the teacher permission to omit the fundamentals (this is master level, not basics). Many amateur publishers outside of masterclass dot com have stolen this concept because it too gives them permission to not actually teach fundamentals, but give the feeling of learning. And that's really what you get from masterclass. I've done a lot of courses on there including Deadmau5 and a lot of film stuff. Actual EDM production and actual filmmaking are incredibly technical and cover a LOT. I've gone deep on Ableton and gone deep on film (I'm a trained steadicam op, attended DP courses (and I know BMD cameras backwards), attended colorist courses (I know Resolve backwards) etc. And the actual learning of these crafts is something you will never even approach at masterclass dot com. But the author is right. It's very inspirational. But there is very little usable knowledge in any 'masterclass' on how to practice the craft. I think it's critical to understand this because the 'feeling' of learning that MC provides is not the same as 'actual' learning. Actual learning is very time consuming which is why one of the prereqs is passion for the subject because of the volume of content one is required to consume. So I think one negative effect that MC has is that it can give people the illusion of actual learning when it creates the feeling of learning and merely provides inspiration. But I do love MC and I do still use it, so I don't want it to go away and I'm glad it exists.
nfw2 5y ago
Entertainment and inspiration surely play a large part of MasterClass's success. However, I strongly disagree with the bailey in this article's motte-and-bailey -- that the platform isn't really about education. At the highest echelon of competitive domains, mentorship by world-class performers is very common. Lin-Manuel Miranda was mentored by Stephen Sondheim. Seth Rogen was mentored by Judd Apatow. Steph Curry was mentored by Dell Curry. The reason that this sort of mentorship is not standard in education isn't because it isn't effective; it's because these world-class creators outnumber interested students a million to one. An argument could be made that this sort of online MOOC medium doesn't convey any of the educational benefits of direct mentorship, but that would require more concrete research that this article hasn't done.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

42 points by enigmatic02 5y ago

Masterclass is the TED Talk of education, it's really glorified / overproduced video podcast / interview, some nice notes, the subjects themselves rake in a lot of money. It's interesting fodder, surely it has value. But it's not a 'Master Class'.

xattt 5y ago
Masterclass comes off as the coffee table book of online learning: neat to flip through but no actual substance.
vernie 5y ago
I've heard it described as "insight porn"
Multiplayer 5y ago
I think the cooking classes are very good. I don't know what a "Master Class" is per se, but getting Thomas Keller walking me one on one through a bunch of his recipes has to be pretty close! The article is right on, the classes totally inspired me and now I cook every day, without fear.

Naac 5y ago

>> The truth is that universities sell all of these things, bundled together. And that’s a big reason they’ve been able to raise prices to astronomical levels over the past several decades — it’s really hard to disrupt all of those things at once. No, it's because no matter what the cost of school is, universities know their "customers" will just take out a loan to match whatever the price is. And one way to "disrupt" this is to make public universities free for in state students, similar to what California used to do with the UC system. It was difficult to read the rest of the article given that it started on this false premise. More specifically, this article should really define what MasterClass is right at the beginning. Because given the picture at the top, I thought it was referring to the generic masterclass [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_class https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_class

bigyikes 5y ago
How does making the school free solve that specific problem? Wouldn’t the taxpayers foot the bill for whatever the price is? At least with loans there is some consumer price sensitivity, even if it’s lowered via use of loans.
- sokoloff 5y ago
  Taxpayers footing the bills for things are more rational and calculating than either 17 year olds or the parents of same who “just want the best” for their kids. (That’s not to say that taxpayers are particularly great at making trade offs; I just think the 17 year olds and their parents are especially terrible at it.)
- zenithd 5y ago
  > Wouldn’t the taxpayers foot the bill for whatever the price is? No, that's not how state budgets work. It's the other way around. Universities will get whatever the state appropriates to them and then have an obligation to take all comers.
  - jeegsy 5y ago
    > Universities will get whatever the state appropriates to them and then have an obligation to take all comers. Would that be like current pre-university public schools then? Shudder!
    - zenithd 5y ago
      >> Universities will get whatever the state appropriates to them and then have an obligation to take all comers. > Would that be like current pre-university public schools then? Shudder! Why would that be the case? IE, what are the root causes of problems in public K12 education and why would changing the funding mechanism of universities cause those problems to propagate? Many states have already done this with Community College systems and AFAICT the results have been mostly positive. So, I imagine it would be exactly like current public universities (in CA quite good). It's not like changing the funding mechanism completely wipes out the faculty or curricula. In practice, the major change would be that getting into certain programs at public universities (traditional 4 year bachelors programs) becomes more difficult. The university system takes all comers in the sense that there's no charge the point of use, not in the sense that they literally admit everyone who applies. And making college admissions more selective might be a good thing anyways.

ai_ia 5y ago

Have you wondered that Maybe people aren't really interested in mastery. Some do, ofcourse but most will be happy with learning just enough. Whenever I hear the word mastery, I am reminded of the Japanese documentary Jiro dreams of sushi. A Japanese sushi chef who is a master at sushi and that's what he has been doing for the last 40 years or so. Only when one realizes the actual effort that needs to be done to achieve Mastery, most people back out. This is crazy, they say. Who has the time to practice 4 hours a day. Masterclass doesn't sell mastery. DuoLingo doesn't sell language learning. It sells an aspirational hope that this new skill or language is just one course away. And that's comforting to us somehow. We are simple creatures after all. BTW, I like the word mastery too much that I decided to start a company around it. Primerlabs(https://primerlabs.io https://primerlabs.io). The goal is to create self paced courses that will allow anyone to truly self-learn difficult subject such as physics, mathematics, economics. We are focusing on CS currently but we will get there (hopefully).

Jensson 5y ago
People also pay a lot of money just to have something to talk about. Saying "I started taking this course from {famous_person}" is a conversation starter.
ineedasername 5y ago
Except a "master class" is usually only given to students that are already well into the introductory-- and often advanced-- stages of learning a craft. And that's not even getting into the structure of how such courses usually function & engage with the students. People don't have to want to be "masters" in order to be interested in this sort of content, but calling them "master classes" rather waters down the definition quite a bit when someone with an interest but no experience in cinematography now goes around saying with smug pride, "I took a master class with Martin Scorsese". Language changes and the meaning of words & phrases change, sure. But I guess what I don't like is the deliberate manipulation of language to co-opt it for marketing & profiting contrary to what the current use of the language actually means.
wbsss4412 5y ago
I think that’s a bit harsh of a description of duolingo. It definitely undersells the amount of work involved, but it absolutely does sell language learning. I’ve personally used it to that effect multiple times.

MisterBastahrd 5y ago

... Masterclass is a small subset of classes by famous people to give you a bit of personal insight into what they do and how they do it. Universities are a large set of classes focused on a particular domain of knowledge with subsets of a set of other knowledge domains bolted on that have a use for the student. Watching Masterclass With Gordon Ramsey will give you a cookbook, and a few cooking tips for the things he prepares. Watching 11 years of Emeril Live! won't prepare you for working as a chef, but you can probably watch them and summarize some dos and don'ts of cooking. Attending the French Culinary Institute, taking their classes, and working in their student restaurant will prepare you for a career in the culinary field in some capacity. Whether starting as a dishwasher and working your way up is better than spending $60K on 2 years of cooking classes is up to the individual.

mrVentures 5y ago

I was very unhappy with the instruction I received from masterclass. Maybe I'm an idiot but I actually thought it was going to be out of Mastery level and I was disappointed that a lot of the classes really only focused on introductory material. It's annoying because most educational material for any topic is introductory, particularly the kind that you find online. So it can be pretty hard to find Mastery level advice at a high quality level of instruction.

paulpauper 5y ago
Does anyone expect to be pro by just following a course?
- Danieru 5y ago
  They excpect to receive wisdom and knowledge of a master, not to be a master themselves. MasterClass is really BeginnerClass, but that wouldn't sell. Yeah so, if OP did not realize the scheme before he bought I feel sorry for him. Way back when I first heard of Masterclass it too k me a minute of seeing the homepage to figure out the scheme. But I'm well versed in startup bs. "Of course a startup would focus on the mass market beginner level material" even if it says master class on the box.

tshaddox 5y ago

I'm not sure why this is described as if it's bad or even surprising. Of course their audience is mostly not watching with the earnest expectation that the content of the videos will bestow upon them mastery of the topic. It's educational entertainment, just like any number of great YouTube channels, but with the high production values and famous faces that allow their content to command a high price.

Jensson 5y ago
Not sure that everyone realizes this is just pop-science and not proper courses. Their homepage says: > Whether it be in business and leadership, photography, cooking, writing, acting, music, sports and more, MasterClass delivers a world class online learning experience.
- tshaddox 5y ago
  Now that I've looked into their selection more, the descriptions do seem to vary quite a lot and some do sound more like sequential lesson plans.

jfengel 5y ago

I wouldn't expect it to be. A "master class" is a class taught by a master, not a class intended to make you a master. A master class is supposed to involve personal interaction with the the master, not a videotaped lecture. So I would expect even less from it than from a proper master class. Master classes can bring very advanced students up a notch, though it's not really intended to make them masters themselves all at a go. That's something you have to earn on your own. But master classes are often taught to the most advanced students to bring their performances to level where they're prepared to strike out on their own and truly master their craft.

ksaj 5y ago
And by "up a notch" I think you mean in nuances that are not as expanded upon in the standard course. That's the value of the masterclass. It's like asking a knowledgeable friend for advice. That won't turn you into a sage on the topic, but you'll come out all the better for it.

paxys 5y ago

I feel like Masterclass is a more direct competitor to Netflix than a university. I am a member and love the content, but don't really watch it with the intention of becoming the next Gordon Ramsay or Judd Apatow. Watching celebrities and others who are at the top of their craft give an insight into their creative process is worth it in itself. If I learn something useful then, well, that's a bonus.

sumnole 5y ago

It's unfortunately a rare case for someone to be both a master at something and a master at teaching. Those are the best people to learn from. As for MasterClass, most people agree that it's more IntroClass.

arthurcolle 5y ago

It's just fun to watch. I liked the Disney guy's one Also anything even tangentially involving Gordon Ramsay is immediately at the top of my list

coralreef 5y ago

Master class can be hit and miss. I liked the gardening one and dog training one, and the negotiating one. But didnt really like Steph Curry's basketball course, or Steve Martin's comedy writing, they just seemed to lack useful substance. Maybe the bigger the celeb the less thought/work they put into the course.

paulpauper 5y ago
i like the one about how to go food shopping. (yeah, they have gotten really specific now)
TigeriusKirk 5y ago
I thought Dan Brown's class was the best writing instruction I've come across. He understands exactly how he does what he does and he knows how to explain it to you.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

alexashka 5y ago

So, what redeeming quality does 'masterclass' have besides 'made money'? You know what else makes money? Any charity 'work' a mega celebrity does. You mean you can make money when you get a mega celebrity to endorse your product for a tiny fee? It's as if you've leveraged celebrity worship to sell a random product and it worked!

munificent 5y ago

> MasterClass might claim to be selling education, but don’t be fooled: they are selling credibility and inspiration. I strongly disagree. If you buy a MasterClass, you don't get any more credibility, so they haven't sold any to you. You might be more inspired, but I think that's debatable too. I'm into game dev, writing, and music, and I hang out in various communities for all of them. Despite being very different domains, they are very similar in many ways: * People who are successful at them have high prestige in our culture and often wealth. A hit can be experienced by millions, so there's very high visibility to success. Because of this, there are a large number of people clamoring to get in and do it too. There's a huge shiny pot of gold at the end of the rainbow and everyone wants it. * The process of consuming the created work is very different from creating it. In fact, the process is really fucking hard. A game you spent three hours playing took a year to make. That little sparkle animation you saw once when you got that bonus item took an artist a week to draw. That page you read in five minutes while waiting in line took the author seven drafts and two editors to get in print. And for every one of those pages, another one got cut entirely. That catchy little guitar riff took the artist ten years of practice to find the rare melodic nugget that sounds familiar enough hook you but isn't actually ripped off from another song. Because the products are so visible and widely consumed, the fact that the process is so different is not well understood. In plain words, people don't realize what they're getting into when they want to be a game developer, writer, or musician. And when they encounter the reality that it's way harder than it seems and that they are signing up for years of making shitty art before they get good enough to produce something of merit, a whole lot of psychological stuff kicks in. There is a strong cognitive dissonance between the skilled creator they imagine themselves to be and the unskilled one they actually are today. They've hung some of their self esteem on the idea that they are a gamedev or a musician, but when they sit down to actually do that, they are forcibly confronted with the reality of their skill level. One of the most common reactions to that is avoidance. People will do anything but make progress on their skill if it lets them avoid experiencing their current lack of it. So game developers go off and spend five years "making an engine" instead of making an actual game and shipping it. Writers obsess over the perfect writing routines and rituals. "Oh, I need to use a Montegrappa pen like Hemingway." Musicians buy and sell gear thinking this next guitar or synth will be the one that the music flows out of like water. (I am highly guilty of all of these.) None of this ever helps them improve their skills and become a creator, but it feels good. It keeps the cognitive dissonance and fear of failure at bay. Dropping $180 on a MasterClass from your favorite creative person seems like it will improve your skills, but it requires no actual effort on your part. You don't have to do anything. And, because of that, there is no risk of failure, no risk of seeing that you aren't who you imagine yourself to be. That's what MasterClass sells: avoidance of fear of failure. Balm for the anxiety that we aren't who we aspire to be. They're in the same product category as "signature edition" guitars and distraction-free writing apps. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with this. The reality is that most of us won't ever be successful Hollywood directors or celebrity chefs. The economics just don't work out that way. I'd rather someone entertain an idle fantasy of being creative even if it rarely bears fruit than give up hope on the idea of being creative at all. Surely the only thing sadder than a wannabe musician is a mindless consumer who doesn't want to be anything at all. And, who knows, it probably does inspire a few. Personally, I'd rather watch a few hours of video from a creative person who has actually made things that impacted the world, then, you know, unboxing videos or Instragram influencers or something. Maybe the success of MasterClass is a good sign. It says that many of us cherish the idea of mastering a creative art and making things for others.

karmanyaahm 5y ago

> experts don’t actually do it just for the money, but also as a way to give back. ... easy way to share their story and give advice to a lot of people. A one-year subscription priced at $180 is pretty accessible — certainly cheaper than getting advice from them directly. YouTube? If reach is all that matters then 0 is better than 180.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

mmaunder 5y ago

Masterclass is brilliant in that it is flattering to the audience (master learners only), taught by actual masters of the craft (credibility) and positioned in a way that gives the teacher permission to omit the fundamentals (this is master level, not basics). Many amateur publishers outside of masterclass dot com have stolen this concept because it too gives them permission to not actually teach fundamentals, but give the feeling of learning. And that's really what you get from masterclass. I've done a lot of courses on there including Deadmau5 and a lot of film stuff. Actual EDM production and actual filmmaking are incredibly technical and cover a LOT. I've gone deep on Ableton and gone deep on film (I'm a trained steadicam op, attended DP courses (and I know BMD cameras backwards), attended colorist courses (I know Resolve backwards) etc. And the actual learning of these crafts is something you will never even approach at masterclass dot com. But the author is right. It's very inspirational. But there is very little usable knowledge in any 'masterclass' on how to practice the craft. I think it's critical to understand this because the 'feeling' of learning that MC provides is not the same as 'actual' learning. Actual learning is very time consuming which is why one of the prereqs is passion for the subject because of the volume of content one is required to consume. So I think one negative effect that MC has is that it can give people the illusion of actual learning when it creates the feeling of learning and merely provides inspiration. But I do love MC and I do still use it, so I don't want it to go away and I'm glad it exists.

nfw2 5y ago

Entertainment and inspiration surely play a large part of MasterClass's success. However, I strongly disagree with the bailey in this article's motte-and-bailey -- that the platform isn't really about education. At the highest echelon of competitive domains, mentorship by world-class performers is very common. Lin-Manuel Miranda was mentored by Stephen Sondheim. Seth Rogen was mentored by Judd Apatow. Steph Curry was mentored by Dell Curry. The reason that this sort of mentorship is not standard in education isn't because it isn't effective; it's because these world-class creators outnumber interested students a million to one. An argument could be made that this sort of online MOOC medium doesn't convey any of the educational benefits of direct mentorship, but that would require more concrete research that this article hasn't done.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]