Kristi Heim wrote a nice article about Interrelativity (and me) in The Seattle Times, entitled Using High-Tech to Help Break Ice, that appeared in today’s paper. As with Kristi’s’ great article about Amal Graafstra and his RFID agenda, she really captured the essence of what Interrelativity — and I — are all about.
I felt quite honored (and, perhaps, somewhat self-important) to be invited in for an interview. The hour with Kristi flew by, and we spoke about so many interesting topics, I was looking forward to seeing which aspects she would choose to focus on. When the article came out this morning, I could not have been happier … except that I [now] recognize that I was looking forward to some "atta boy’s" from people who might read the article. To my surprise, I didn’t receive much acknowlegement that anyone I know — aside from people I’d told about it — had read the article … and, as with most surprises, this represents a learning opportunity.
Cindy, a friend in the neighborhood, brought by a copy of the article, but I had seen her yesterday, and mentioned the article, and [so] I am not sure whether she would have noticed the article … or thought to drop off a copy (though I suspect she would, given that she is an incredibly kind and generous person). Dan and Scott, other kind and generous friends, sent emails — as did my mom — but I had alerted them about the upcoming article, too. I received an email from Anthony, at 3:30am, who had read the online version after it was posted around midnight and had some great suggestions about other potential applications of proactive displays … and also noted that the email link on the web site was broken (which I hastened to repair). I received another email from Adam, who kindly offered to help me find office space for Interrelativity, an offer I’m not in a good position to take advantage of now, but perhaps will be able to, if / when we grow beyond my home office in the future.
All of these acknowledgements were welcome, but I felt some disappointment that I didn’t hear or read from more friends (or acquaintances … or strangers). Recognizing this disappointment has, in turn, helped me realize that, despite my best intentions, I have not [yet] succeeded in living without attachments. I will continue to work on this issue of attachment to outcomes, but I also want to take the opportunity to muse a bit further.
There are several possible explanations to this low level of response, among them:
- Few people read the article
- Few people who know [of] me (or Interrelativity) read the article
- People read the article but were not impressed with the article or its topic (or both)
- People read the article and thought it was a good article and/or topic, but didn’t think it was worth mentioning [to me]
While this seemed like a big deal to me, perhaps it doesn’t seem like a big deal to most other people … not the first time I’ve experienced mismatch between my perceptions and those of others. It reminded me of Noah Kagan‘s recent observations about the joy of receiving comments on a blog post , my own observations about filling buckets online and offline, and Don Miguel Ruiz’ first agreement to be Impeccable with your Word, as one’s words — or lack thereof — can exert a strong influence (positive or negative) on others.
I feel a bit self-conscious in writing about this, as one possible outcome is that people might read this blog post and submit comments ackowledging the post and/or the Seattle Times article. However, one of my explicit goals in maintaining this blog is to detach from any expectation that anyone else is reading it, much less willing to take the time to comment. I now recognize that I was applying a different perspective to the newspaper article … and I recognize all the more poignantly the value of detaching from outcomes … especially those involving [near] fame and fortune.
Comments
7 responses to “Almost Famous”
I think these are good thoughts, and I would offer one more explanation.
People are busy, and as a result don’t notice things; and are relating to information in new, adapted ways.
I rarely read a “paper” newspaper any longer. I engage with news through the web primarily, and this means my news is generally limited to headlines.
I also think that the busy nature of people’s lives means that we don’t stop to notice things like we used to, and that things like etiquette and social graces are falling away.
I think it’s great you got press and you should revel in your success. Don’t worry about what others say or don’t say. There’s some power inherent in knowing that most people love hearing about other’s lives and successes, so just imagine the moment of joy each person experiences when they read your story. It’s good karma and energy out in the world for you 🙂
Thanks for the kind and insightful comments! I also do not always read the newspaper, and find that I am often inattentive to or unmindful of people and things. I took advantage of this reflection opportunity to identify some of the relationships that I have let lapse due to lack of attention, and have [thus] renewed my effort toward renewal of some of these relationships (I have a long way to go). As is so often the case, that which irritates or disappoints me with respect to others is simply a reflection of that which irritates or disappoints me about myself … and provides an [unsought] opportunity for some inner work. And I will also grant myself permission to revel in the joy that the Interrelativity proactive displays bring to the people who experience them … as well to those who read about it.
Joe, I totally agree with “One of your fans” :))
I only read the main headlines and few additional info related to the headlines.
I am happy for you…You deserve the recognition. They should have said something about your blog too.
Oh, Joe, thank you for your emotional honesty. It would be easy to say, “This ain’t gonna bother me,” but that’s not true. It does bother any of us who like to see our leadership replied to by the broader world, not just the people who closely surround us. I once got an interview with Fast Company. I thought it would be a big deal! When it was published, the article was great, but I never heard a thing from anyone else and it felt like dropping through a floor or two in my self-esteem. But these feelings aren’t facts. You are leading and you do have something of value and it will come, it will come….
I saw a panel with Buzz Bruggeman at The Blog Business Summit talking about the same thing – the first time he was featured prominently in a newspaper story, he thought for sure it would result in an avalanche of attention and publicity. It didn’t happen. His take: Newspapers no longer matter the way they used to. I totally concur. The only way I even knew you were in the newspaper was because you dropped the hint in an email – I haven’t subscribed to a newspaper in about 8 years.
What you want is a mention in Lifehacker…
Two other possibilities for the low response rate:
1) People saw the article, meant to send you an encouraging note, but then never got around to it. I fell into this category. (Encouraging note would’ve been, “Hey Joe, nice article in the Seattle Times! I read it this morning. Judging from the article, your company really has it together, and you’re passionate about the technology.”)
2) Readers reasoned that anyone famous enough to get an article like that in the Seattle Times wouldn’t care about any encouragement.
As you mentioned, this gets back to filling others’ buckets. Why don’t we do it more often? Is there a cost, beyond the minor inconvenience, of saying something nice to someone? Does it diminish my worth if I acknowledge that someone else in a similar field is doing a good job? It’s not a zero sum game, but there are those that treat it that way.
Anyway, I was happy to see the upbeat article about you and your company.
Martha, Dan, Dan and John: thanks for the additional comments! This has all been very helpful blogotherapy for me.
John: your second point is particularly well taken. I don’t know if it applies in this case, but it is very much in keeping with observations other friends have made about the confidence and independence [I’m told] I sometimes project in the physical world, which has the side effect of making me seem less approachable, less needful of (or willing to accept) help. I think sometimes, for me, this is simply an unconscious defense mechanism, and it often leads to isolation … rather incongruent with my role of “connector-in-chief” … except that it provides yet another example of me working through my shadows and woundedness in order to share my gift(s) with others.
I’ve been using this blog [in part] to practice being more open and vulnerable, and have found that the more I am willing to honestly reveal, the more others appear willing to provide support … and the more comfortable and confident I feel I can shift from independence to interdependence.