Being distracted by criticism and negativity

"Don't be distracted by criticism. Remember, the only taste of success some people have is when they take a bite out of you".'
~ Zig Ziglar


Saw this quote recently and it made an impression. You could replace the word criticism with negativity--it also works. Criticism is fine, as long as it's constructive (but it so seldom is). Negative criticism is destructive; its aim is to squash initiative and motivation. That's where negativity comes in. By negativity, I mean the words and behavior of those who wish to discourage others at all costs from dreaming and achieving those dreams. They behave that way because they don't want you to get ahead (of them). Maybe they had dreams and were defeated, by themselves or others or both. Instead of learning from their experiences, they want to inflict them on others.

You've got to really weigh the words of the naysayers. A few of them have your best interests at heart and don't want to see you get hurt; those are the people who love you and whom you trust and go to for advice. So listening to them is not in and of itself a bad thing--you can weigh what they say and decide for yourself whether or not to take a specific risk. They'll discuss it with you and won't try to stop you or squash your dreams. It's the naysayers you meet in everyday life, the ones who say, 'why would you want to do that?', or 'I would never do that', or 'I would never do it that way' ('You should do it my way'). Or the ones who, no matter what your plans, goals, or dreams, always put a damper on them by saying 'I thought about doing that, but there were too many problems involved, so if I were you, I would forget about it'.

I bring this up today because I realized today that too many women simply never pursue their dreams and ideas. They will tell you that they are bound by family obligations, work, and other things. But the truth is somewhere in between. I think what happens is that many women turn to other people in their lives for support and encouragement when they have a dream or an initiative they'd like to pursue. Or they discuss a potential dream with colleagues. And maybe the majority of the people they talk to are naysayers. And so they give up on a dream before it even gets a footing. We've simply got to really listen to each other, to respect the dreams and goals of others, and to encourage them to achieve them. This way of thinking cannot just apply to children or teenagers; adults must also be encouraged to achieve. It's part of my way of thinking--that motivating others to achieve is a lifelong goal. We are never 'finished products', we are always seeking and searching for ways to grow and become better. We are always looking for outlets for our talents. We should be able to encourage others to do that, and to allow ourselves to do that as well. It is what our lives are really about.

One Door Closes, Another One Opens

After the turbulence of last year, I made the decision that 2011 was going to look very different than 2010. And so far I can report that 2011 is turning out to be different than 2010. I am trying to live each day to its fullest (even though I am tired in the evenings these days and end up falling asleep on the couch instead of finishing off a project or two). I am trying to walk away from incendiary situations, trying to keep a lid on my anger and my irritation, trying to take good care of myself in all ways, trying to be happy and trying to be cheerful for others. I’m trying to be nicer to my husband instead of taking my irritation with workplace situations out on him (but I require the same from him, just to have the equal balance—we’re both trying). I am trying not to get dragged down by hopeless work situations, even though it would be easy to hit the bottom again from time to time. I have extricated myself from useless and time-consuming activities, from trying to change the world with people who haven’t the foggiest idea about what that means or what’s involved. I am trying not to cast whatever pearls I own before swine. I am trying to let go and let God as the saying goes, trying to not wall myself off when sad times hit, trying to reach out to others who are going through tough times, trying to remember that life is short and that every minute counts. When you remember that life is short, you live life in a more aware manner. Not everything that happens has crucial importance for your life; some things just happen, the world is sometimes unfair, people are sometimes frustrating and rude, but better times do come. They do. Doors close, opportunities disappear, but new doors open and new opportunities appear. My mother always used to say this. It appears that she was right about a lot of things, but I didn’t give her the credit she was due when I was younger, when I thought I knew best. Ah, the arrogance of youth.   

The key point is that I am trying, sometimes succeeding and sometimes failing. I realize that I have taken failure so seriously, when in fact failure is a part of life. It balances out success—the yang to the yin. I cannot believe sometimes that I didn’t learn this lesson sooner. I mean really, who am I to think that I would be spared, when people a whole lot smarter and better at things than me have failed? Failing means to have taken a risk, so I can comfort myself with that. Better to have tried and failed than never to have tried at all. I have written about this in an earlier post, but it is true. Trying is what is important, whether or not success is the result. And by success I don’t necessarily mean achieving wealth and fame (although they are of course nice). It is enough with personal satisfaction and happiness, with the knowledge that one has achieved something that one has set out to do. That is immensely satisfying.

I send out small hopes and prayers into the universe on a daily basis. I won’t say what they are, but they are not selfish prayers. I hope and pray for others as much as I do for myself. I believe in the power of positive thoughts and hope that the prayers will be answered. We just never really know quite how they will be answered. But life and the universe have a way of providing opportunities and answers. I see that now. One of my little prayers has been answered recently--I got a few answers to some questions that have been causing my soul some amount of searching. A new small door has opened. I am entering it and have decided to follow the path that lies beyond the door. I’ll be writing more about that path as time goes on.  

Musings about change and depression

Nearly a year has gone by since I began writing this blog. I began writing it to help me deal with the many changes that were occurring in my workplace, among other things. The changes themselves would have been difficult enough to deal with in my home country (USA), but the fact that they happened here in Norway made them even tougher. That is because it has been nearly impossible to ‘crack the code’ in terms of understanding how my workplace functions, what leaders want (or don’t want), how to get ahead, how to ‘get around’ some of the ancient rules that govern it, and so forth. It has made me feel somewhat better to know that many Norwegians in my workplace haven’t been able to make sense of the changes either. Cold comfort, but comfort nonetheless. Because unless you’ve lived in another country for a number of years, you have no idea of what can happen to you and your sense of judgment in a different culture. No matter what happens, you will always question yourself and your sense of judgment first when things don’t go as planned. Did I interpret this wrong, was I to blame, did I misunderstand the other person or the conclusions from a meeting, and so on. I have spent many years trying to fit in ‘career-wise’, trying to understand the Scandinavian corporate/business/academic mentality, doing my best, giving my all, in the quest to do a great job and to succeed as a research scientist. It has not been easy. It would not have been easy anywhere else either, but it was doubly hard here to succeed in any way because of the extra effort that had to go into trying to figure out the system. I have not been fortunate enough to have had mentors or sponsors. My husband has been a wonderful support system but he has also had difficulties of his own trying to figure out his workplace (we now work for the same hospital conglomerate, just in different locations of the city).

During the past year I have written a lot about my work life in an attempt to understand what happened to my workplace and by extension, to me and my colleagues during that time. The past three to four years have been transition years involving a lot of reorganization and restructuring associated with a huge merger of four major city hospitals, and when the dust settled, it was time to start the process over again since the powers that be who organized the first restructuring were not satisfied. And so it goes. I’ve written about colleagues who have had difficulty adjusting to all the changes; I’ve written about my own struggles adjusting to so many changes. Not all the changes have affected us directly, but even if they have not, they affect workplace morale generally, because budgets have been cut, the quality of patient care is always being questioned, research grant support has been reduced, and there is a lot of talk about the good old days when there was more money available and less bureaucracy and administration. But there is no point in talking about the old days. They are gone. There is much more bureaucratic control now, and a hierarchy of leadership that did not exist before. Is it a better system? Only time will tell. If it works out, it will be because employees made a concerted effort to make it work. There is no guarantee that it will work out, however, and that is the big gamble. The politicians who decided on this huge merger can be voted out, and the new ones who come in can in principle decide to reverse some of what has happened if they don’t like what they see. Plus there is always something new on the horizon, some new social trend or policy that can be implemented so that the legacies of different politicians will be ensured. In the meantime, huge social experiments go unremarked. I wonder if there are sociologists studying the effects of huge mergers on employees. I am waiting for the data from those studies. But so far, I haven’t heard of any such studies.  

 

Massive changes can make workers unhappy and even depressed, especially when they do not really understand what is happening around them. To be fair, despite considerable effort to keep employees informed, it is nearly impossible for a workplace to prepare them for all eventualities. But what employees want to know is not how fantastic everything is going to be once the dust settles; they want to know how the changes are going to affect them personally. They need reassurance that their jobs are not in danger. They need to hear that they are more than just chess pawns who can be pushed around on the chess board, plucked up from one area of the board and set down on another. They want to hear that they are doing a good job; they want to know that their projects can proceed as usual; they want some normalcy and stability in a highly unstable situation. There are always employees who thrive on continual change. The majority of employees thrive on stability, and that has to be recognized and accepted by workplace leaders. You cannot demand loyalty and obedience from your employees while telling them that their jobs might be in danger. You cannot tell them to ‘get out’ if they don’t like what is happening around them. This was essentially the message from one of my workplace leaders in a lecture she gave prior to a Christmas party (of all things) several years ago. Some people may have liked her style. I found it unappealing and rather tactless, because she was stating the obvious and didn’t need to. It’s aggressive and unnecessarily so. It’s not how you win friends and influence people. A better approach might have been to have said that there will be changes and that some of them may be difficult, but that we are a team and that if we all pull together, we can get through the changes and perhaps come out stronger. But she is a pawn herself in a long line of pawns that have to spout the company line. I doubt she felt comfortable spouting the rhetoric. If I am representative of the average worker, all I can say at this point in time is that the vagueness and ambiguity that existed prior to the merger have gotten larger, not smaller. It is not possible to get an overview, no matter how hard one tries. I find it difficult in any case. Do I need the overview? I don’t know. I’ve been told that I do, that it’s important to understand the workplace and management structure. Some people I know wonder who their bosses are, because in some cases, people now have three or more bosses—some who have administrative responsibility for employees, some who have the professional responsibility. But when employees ask who their new boss is, they don’t get an answer. So is it any wonder that employees get depressed?

Depression, according to the psychiatrist and author Rollo May, is the “inability to construct a future”. For some reason this definition resonated with me. I responded to it viscerally and intuitively. Why? Because it felt true. When you are depressed, you are stuck. You don’t know which way to turn, because you don’t have a clue about the future. You cannot envision your future nor can you see how to go about building or creating it. In order to create anything, you must be able to visualize it first. With depression you lose the ability to visualize the future. You are stuck in the now. All your creative and mental energy goes into figuring out the ‘now’.  It’s as though a fog settles over your head, blocking your forward view. You are forced to stop driving and to sit on the side of the road. You become passive, waiting for instructions or a road map for how to proceed further. Your energy flow gets blocked. Or you may drive around the same area over and over, stopping at the same stop sign, and not getting any further, because you have lost your sense of direction. Depression may not be a bad thing if you manage to deal with it eventually, if you get frustrated enough with being stuck. It is harmful when you give up and give in and those approaches become a permanent way of dealing with the trials that life deals out.

The Chinese talk about chi (qi), the energy flow in a person, as being an important aspect of a person’s health and life situation. It makes sense to me. If that energy flow is blocked, it will affect the health and energy level of a person. Again, I respond to this intuitively; it just makes sense. The blockage must be dealt with in order for the energy to flow. The goal is harmony for the mind and body. Sometimes it is enough just to read an inspirational text; the blockage may dissipate once the mind understands the situation in a new way. That is the beauty and the power of the written word. In other situations, a good film or conversation may achieve the same thing. The important thing is to free the energy. 

Overcoming the 'jantelov'

When I first moved to Norway, I often heard the expression ’du skal ikke tro at du er noe’ (you shall not believe that you are something). It was often mentioned in discussions about successful people or individuals who had achieved something great and how these same people could be ‘put down’ by others in society with this expression. Some of my Norwegian colleagues warned me about the ‘jantelov’, a mentality/behavior that punishes individual achievement or individuals who break away from the pack and achieve success on their own. I found it hard to understand this mentality until I understood that it has envy as its basis. The jantelov is basically envy in action. So that if someone says to you that you should not believe that you are somebody, you can rest assured that they are envious of you and of your achievements, and that you are in fact ‘somebody’. What you can also be sure of is that you have actually achieved something, if you were at all in doubt. And you could be very easily in doubt about your merits in Norway. It can be very confusing to figure out if you have achieved success in Norway because you will seldom hear someone say to you ‘great job’. You will hear that you did a ‘grei jobb’ (ok job), or you might hear that ‘den var god’ (it was good), but the kind of high-fiving, hand-slapping, enthusiastic ‘way to go’ or ‘yippee, great job’ or ‘terrific’ that you might have heard in the USA, you won’t hear here. Often you will not hear anything at all—in other words, no feedback, or you will hear that you could have done a better job or that you could have done it differently. The latter is the most common. The behavior is very confusing, especially when you know intuitively that you have done a terrific job. But the jantelov exists in other places as well, just under different names. There are some people I knew when I was growing up in the USA that would hesitate to praise you or your accomplishments for fear that the praise would go to your head. It seemed to be part of child-rearing for some adults and teachers. So this mentality also exists outside of Scandinavia. But it seems to have been honed to a sharp finish here. If you are the type of person who relies on positive feedback to progress in a job, you will be disappointed. You need to learn to trust your instincts about your successes and to ignore the negative or confusing comments. Not so easy, I can tell you.

What is envy, really? I looked it up in the dictionary and it is defined as a ‘feeling of discontent or covetousness with regard to another’s advantages, success, or possessions’. What then is jealousy? According to the dictionary, envy and jealousy are closely related. Envy has more to do with longing for the success or advantages that another person has, whereas jealousy has more to do with resenting that another person has that success or advantage instead of you. So I guess it’s human to feel envy and jealousy at times. Everyone has been envious or jealous at one point or another. The key is to not let them get the upper hand, because if they do, you end up living your life in ‘reaction’ to the person or people you envy or are jealous of. You will ignore your own individuality and focus entirely on another’s. You will ultimately diminish yourself and your own creativity because you will spend most of your time trying to imitate another person or badmouthing him or her if the former doesn’t work. It is said that ‘imitation is the sincerest form of flattery’ (attributed to Charles Caleb Colton) and that ‘flattery will get you nowhere’ (proverb). The latter is the truth. There is no point in imitating another person out of envy or jealousy. If you imitate another person in an effort to learn from him or her at the start of a personal venture, this is harmless enough and may help you on your own path to success. But it hardly pays to do this constantly. For one thing, you will alienate the person you are imitating, and then you will ultimately understand that you lack the creativity and competence to continue down this path. It is a pity that more people don’t realize that they have their own individual talents that are just waiting to be explored, that they don’t have to imitate others to feel important. But sometimes out of fear, people will not explore them because it is safer not to. If you don’t explore them, you can live safely within the crowd, you can maintain your anonymity, you don’t have to stand out. But if you never step outside the crowd, you will diminish yourself routinely and experience more envy than a person who has at least ‘tried on’ his or her individuality, even if he or she has not accomplished great things by doing so. ‘Better to have tried and failed than never to have tried at all’ is a good motto. So perhaps the cure for the jantelov is to step outside of the crowd more, to be an individual, to let your light shine, to try--and not worry about failing. With all this activity, you won’t have time to be envious or jealous. And that is the key to a happy life, forgetting about what the others think or will think of you, and basking in the warmth of your efforts and small successes in love, work and daily life. 

The role of a lifetime

Yesterday I wrote a post about the definition of success, and then last night I went to see a movie that deals with the topic of success in a rather bizarre way--Black Swan, a film about what it takes to reach the top in the dance world. You might say that it is a film about what it takes to be the winner at all costs, but it is just as much about what happens to the losers in the competitive world of ballet. Mostly it is about the psychological disintegration of a talented but passionless young ballet dancer, Nina (played by Natalie Portman), who desperately wants the role of a lifetime—the coveted role of the White Swan/Black Swan in the new production of Swan Lake. She is a technically-perfect dancer who cannot seem to let go and give her role the passion it requires, whereas the woman whom she perceives as her rival, Lily (played by Mila Kunis), while not a technically-perfect dancer, is a passionate and free-spirited one. Lily is everything Nina is not; she is the ‘fantasy’ girl of teenage years, especially for the wall-flower types--cool, a party-girl, a flirt, and a seductress. She is unafraid of authority and of her peers. Nina is attracted to her and fantasizes about being with her. Nina on the other hand is virginal, repressed, afraid of her feelings, introverted, cowed, and immature, and of course she admires Lily’s free-spiritedness at the same time that she realizes that Lily is after ‘her’ role. The overwhelming pressure to succeed, as well as the perceived extreme competition coupled with Erica’s (Nina’s mother, played by Barbara Hershey) overbearing and controlling behavior toward her daughter, is too much for her and she ‘cracks’. The film’s portrayal of her mental disintegration borders on the grotesque—the obsession with her body, her scratching that leads to bloody wounds on her back, fingernails that need to be cut so that she doesn’t scratch herself, toenails that are cracked and bloody, and so on. When the former White Swan, Beth (played by Winona Ryder) is pushed out of her role due to her age, she deliberately walks out into the street and gets hit by a car. She ends up in the hospital with injured legs. Nina visits her, and while Beth is sleeping, Nina takes a look at the damage to her legs and recoils in horror. The film does a good job at showing just how dependent ballet dancers are on a functioning body—legs, arms, feet, hands, toes, etc. Without any one of them, a dancer cannot perform well. So the obsession with the body is understandable. But the film also has Nina pursued by a kind of evil ‘double’, which is a jolting experience at times when she appears (shades of The Grudge—also in the scene where Nina’s bones start to crack and she ends up deformed-looking). Again, I won’t spoil the film for you by giving away the different events or the ending. I will say that it is a good film, albeit a demanding one to watch. But I did not think it was a great film, and I am surprised that so many critics thought it was. It could have been a great film, but it was too disjointed in parts and it could not make up its mind whether it wanted to be a horror/thriller film or a dramatic film. It opted to be a bit of both and for me it didn’t quite do both well. I would have liked more focus on the relationship between ‘stage’ mother Erica (who was a former dancer who gave up dancing when she had her daughter) and Nina, because that to me was one of the most interesting relationships in the film. It was clear from the way Erica behaved that she was unsure about whether she wanted Nina to achieve success. It seemed as though she would have preferred that her daughter ‘failed’ like she had done. I would have liked a bit more insight into Beth’s life. How was it possible that a top dancer in a top dance company was so unaware that her years at the top were limited? How could she not have prepared for that eventuality? That seemed unrealistic to me. Both Erica and Beth were portrayed as the losers, and I would have liked to have known more about them. I also did not think that the lesbian scene between Nina and Lily added much to the film. I didn’t find it offensive; I just thought it was unnecessary. The scene of the two of them kissing in the taxi would have been enough to give us the general idea that this is what Nina wanted, what woke her passion. I would have preferred a more realistic and dramatic exploration of this aspect of Nina’s personality. Overall, I would perhaps have liked the film better if it had been a more realistic story of a ballet dancer’s life instead of a horror film about a repressed ballet dancer’s life. I was reminded of Roman Polanski’s Repulsion because it also dealt with a sexually-repressed young woman who goes insane. I think Repulsion is a better film than Black Swan. Watching the completely-repressed and frigid Catherine Deneuve’s breakdown was disturbing, but at least we understood that her actions were real—she really did kill the men who came into the apartment, and her condition led her to imagine all sorts of bizarre things, like the sequence where she walks down the apartment hallway and sees hands coming out of the walls to touch and grab her. Repulsion was a genuinely scary film in the same way that Psycho was—they were horror films. I would have liked to have understood the ending of Black Swan—in order to have some kind of closure. It would also have defined the film better for me. But there are some beautiful moments in the film—when Nina and Lily dance or just listening to the incredible music of Tchaikovsky. These make the film worth seeing. And Natalie Portman will probably win a well-deserved Oscar. But I don’t know if the film itself will win for Best Film. 

The definition of success

I’ve been thinking about the definition of success lately. It’s a subject that has always interested me, and then a friend loaned me the book Outliers: The Story of Success by Malcolm Gladwell. He is the author of the earlier books The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference, and Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. I am nearly finished with the book and I have to say it’s one of the most interesting books I’ve ever read. The author has a way of drawing you into his world; he is a good storyteller, and that makes him a good author. He is also a best-selling author, in other words, a successful author, and I have to wonder as he wrote this book, if he wasn’t wondering a bit about what made him so successful. His books fill a void—call it the void of interesting heretofore unknown facts that become wildly-interesting stories—possibly because he weaves those facts into a coherent story. He sees synergies and connections in those facts that others don’t see. I’d call him a true researcher because of his intelligence, curiosity and enthusiasm for the subjects he studies and writes about. His books are often placed in the genre ‘psychology’. I guess that’s as good a genre as any, but this book is not a self-help book. It is an exploratory philosophical book about what makes successful people successful; there are no 10 steps to follow on the path to success, no guarantees for success.

He defines outliers as people ‘who do things that are out of the ordinary’. In statistics, outliers are usually the data points that are outside other values in a set of data—values that are often far away from the others, and statisticians often don’t like outliers. They would in fact prefer that they were not there, because their existence can mess up an otherwise perfectly good data set. So statisticians have ways of dealing with outliers. Gladwell has decided to focus on them, because they are the people who lie outside the norm. I won’t spoil the book for you, but his premise is that no successful person is ‘self-made’. We hang on to that myth though as though our life depended on it. If I could sum up his view, it would be that successful people achieved their success due to a combination of factors: intelligence; circumstances (family history and social standing); opportunities that were seized, not ignored; happenstance (being in the right place at the right time--also in a historical perspective); and of course hard work (the ten thousand hour rule). We like to think that successful people were ‘discovered’ and that on the basis of one song or one story that they became successful. But that’s not the case, and he demolishes that view very elegantly.

I’ve thought a lot about success during the past year with all the tumult at my workplace. Westernized society’s standard definition of success is clear—top jobs, large salaries, and power— often involving rags-to-riches stories or self-made man/woman stories. But when I look at my own workplace, one thing is completely clear. None of the people who made it to the top and who are successful in the standard sense made it without help. They had support networks, people rooting for them, mentors, call it what you will. They had political connections--they did not make it alone. And those who think that they did are living in a fantasy world. This does not negate the fact that they are intelligent, worthy of their success, have worked hard, and have a lot to offer. It simply says that they also had crucial help at a point when the opportunities for them to move up presented themselves (their personal windows of opportunity). If they were not aware of the opportunities, they had mentors who showed them that they were there. Mentors are important. I would venture to say that mentors are important at all ages. It is not just the young who need them, although they need them perhaps the most. But older people in the workplace need them too. They need impartial, unbiased, objective people with whom to discuss their careers and workplace situations. If you have never had them, you don’t know what you’ve missed until you hit the glass ceiling or find that your career path is moving laterally, not upward. You don’t know that you’ve made critical mistakes until it’s too late. Mentors might have been able to redirect your thoughts or plans. But of course this presupposes that you buy into the standard definition of success—that you are successful if you have a top job, earn a lot of money, or have a lot of power. It’s easy to see why most people want this type of success. It makes living in our society much easier. If you are wealthy, you command respect that poorer people don’t get. And if you think this is not true, think about the last time poor people were really ‘listened’ to, anywhere on the planet. For every Mother Teresa in the world, there are millions of poor people who command no respect.

There is nothing wrong with the standard definition of success. It’s nice to be able to have enough money to do the things you want, to live your life comfortably, to have some ‘say’ in what goes on at your workplace. In fact, I would go so far as to say that it is only when you have achieved some measure of standard success that you are in a position to help others—as a mentor or as a benefactor. But still, I wonder if successful people are happy. I’m guessing that many of them are—because they have reached the top in their chosen field, and that by itself must give them a sense of satisfaction or completion. It’s like a sports star who has won his or her competition—that feeling of winning. But of course once at the top, you can never really rest. You must keep going. There are always others waiting in the wings to replace you. There are also unhappy successful people, and they interest me, perhaps more than the happy ones. I wonder why they are unhappy if they’ve achieved everything they wanted to achieve in their work life. The answer has to be that work life alone is not the be-all and the end-all of life. If you don’t have a good personal life—family and friends who see you through the good and the bad times, you don’t have much. I’ve watched successful men in my workplace get old, retire, and lose their status and power. Some of them tackled it well; others did not. I wonder if those who tackled it well were those with a good family life. Because if workplace success is the only way you define your life, you are bound to be unhappy. And there are the other scenarios that lead to unhappiness that are out of your control. There are unfortunately just as many unhappy twists of fates in the workplace as there are happy ones; I have seen bad things happen to good people who were successful in the standard sense. They were at the top one day and at the bottom the next. Not literally of course, but it seems that way. What did they do wrong? Did they do anything wrong? Is this just how workplace life is? Do you need to learn to roll with the punches as a successful person? Are successful people good at doing this? These are all interesting questions. In any case, the vagaries and mystery of success will keep researchers and writers preoccupied for years to come.