jakelacaze.com

I don’t know if you’d believe this by reading my blog posts, but I used to be a bit of a grammar Nazi. I wanted to master the English language and rid my writing of all comma splices, subject/verb disagreements, run-ons, capitalization errors, etc. Colloquial expressions were a no-no. And ain’t? Don’t even get me started.

If you were writing a term paper and needed someone to go to for help, I was your man. I knew the rules of the English language and taught them at every opportunity.

As I read more and more fiction by authors like Irvine Welsh (Trainspotting) and Hubert Selby, Jr. (Last Exit To Brooklyn and Requiem For A Dream), I realized that it was not their perfect grammar that drew me into their stories (because, to be perfectly honest, neither author has/had perfect grammar). I realized that they broke many of the rules that I had learned about English. Selby’s punctuation was very unusual; he often used slashes instead of apostrophes (example: it/ll instead of it’ll). And Irvine Welsh’s characters hardly spoke proper English. When he quoted his characters, he didn’t write the English language; he wrote the Scottish dialect, the way it was truly spoken.

And then I looked at my own writing, so perfect and intentional, yet so boring and completely lacking in authenticity. And then I realized that, in order to write anything worth a damn, anything true, I was going to have to break the rules. Or maybe you could argue that the rules of the term paper do not apply to fiction writing. And they damn sure don’t apply to the rules of my blog.

Rules are made to be broken (at the right time).

Rules are very rarely absolute. Just look at the English language itself.

i before e except after c. That rule’s kind of weird. Weird, huh, look at that. That word doesn’t follow the i before e rule.

For all of you business students earning your degrees right now, the rules of big business that your professors are teaching you don’t apply to the rules of small business. So, unless you work for a Fortune 500 company, you’ll most likely have to break or disregard those rules that are being drilled into your head as you sit through those lectures.

If you had a boss who left you in charge of his shop and said, “I’ll be out of town; don’t call me,” I’m sure he’d appreciate a call if the place were to somehow burn to the ground. Maybe that example was a little obvious, but it’s not up to me to judge.

So, to close, ask yourself from time to time if you need to break some rules. Are the rules that you’re following truly absolute? Can they never be broken?

What are some other rules that need to be broken at times? Share!

I would like to dedicate this post to Melissa Cooley. You may know her on Twitter as @TheJobQuest. Although I would not label Melissa a devil’s advocate, she is someone who sometimes disagrees with what I blog about, but she does so in a way that offers insight and adds value to the conversation. I treasure her comments and truly wish that she would disagree with me more often.

How often do you analyze your friendships and relationships? Do you ever sit back and ask yourself why you’re friends with a certain person? There may be instances when you can’t exactly put your finger on it, but chances are there are also times when you know exactly why you’re friends.

Maybe you work together. Or you share the same political or religious views. You like the same arts and entertainment. You’re both dog lovers. Or dog haters.

There are so many ways in which people can connect with each other. And often, when we connect with someone, it’s due to similar interests.

How often do you befriend someone who often disagrees with you? How often do you befriend someone who challenges everything you believe, someone who’s willing to challenge the world as you know it, even if he does so only with words? Do you openly allow others to contest your assumptions?

Some people choose to challenge messages even though they agree with them. They like to take the other side, just to see what kind of conversation can stir up. You may know these people as devil’s advocates.

Some of us shy away from devil’s advocates. Why? One reason may be that we simply don’t like to be challenged. After all, most of us surround ourselves with like-minded people. People who believe the same. People who won’t cause any friction. People who are less likely to piss us off. If this reminds you of yourself, you likely don’t have many devil’s advocates that you call “friend”.

Another reason we may avoid devil’s advocates is because sometimes they have good points. Sometimes they expose the weaknesses in our ideas or plans and reveal what they truly are — underdeveloped and doomed to fail. Many of us see this scenario as a threat, rather than seeing the positive in this situation. If your devil’s advocate has shown the weakness in your idea or plan, chances are that someone else will see the weakness as well. And then another person will. And another, until virtually everyone sees it and refuses to accept whatever it is you’re trying to sell or change.

Also, a devil’s advocate who is willing to look at the other side of an argument can show you angles and points of view that you never imagined. And people who share your worldview and agree with everything you say are not very likely to see these angles either.

Of course, there’s a civil way to go about disagreeing. Yelling and cursing and name-calling is not the most effective way to get a message across. But if you can find someone who can calmly debate with you, I see no harm in befriending him. In fact, I see a great opportunity. I see benefit.

There are so many social networks floating about on the Internet. I am currently a member of Twitter, Facebook, Brazen Careerist, YouTube, and BrightFuse. I might be a member of more networks, but those are all that I can remember at the moment. And there are so many more that I am completely clueless about. But it’s safe to say that they all have one thing in common — they all expect you to have a profile.

A profile has a purpose. It is meant to be a summary of you, a little snippet that gives people an idea of who you are. Your profile is supposed to make you interesting and attractive. In the social networking world, your profile is one of the most basic marketing tools you have.

However, I hate making online profiles. The only exception is Twitter, because I just throw in a few keywords and interests and wait for people to connect with me. But on those other networks, I struggle to build a proper profile. Why? Because whatever I say sounds silly to me.

One reason is because, as I’ve said previously, some people wrongly perceive certain aspects of their personalities. Because of this, certain words and identifiers have been bastardized and sound desperate when used. Think of a term such as perfectionist. There are so many perfectionists out there, yet there are so few. My best friend, a graphic designer, truly is a perfectionist. However, if he identifies himself as such, everyone would laugh at him. Who isn’t a perfectionist? Isn’t everyone? Yeah. And no.

I recently ranted about this to an old friend, and he said he’d define me as truly being “outside of the box”. Even if I wanted to, I could never use such a statement. Who doesn’t think he’s outside of the box? Who doesn’t think he’s brilliant and creative? Who doesn’t want others to think that about himself? And so that phrase means nothing.

When I see a profile that says something like I have a fun personality or I’m really easy to get along with, I wonder if such statements are true. Such statements are greatly overplayed and don’t truly add any value to your profile. They don’t tell me anything about you.

And there are those phrases that pretty much apply to everyone.

Phrases like I’m a really nice person until you piss me off. Sure, there are some people who are assholes 100% of the time. But such people are few, and even fewer of them would actually admit it.

Or phrases like I get pissed off at people who hurt my friends. Yeah, most of us do. And even if we won’t rush to defend their honor, we’re likely not going to admit otherwise.

To me, it’s just like the person who says: “If you ever need anything, give me a call. If you go to the bar and get drunk — I don’t care if it’s 3 o’clock in the morning – call me, I’ll come pick you up.” I’ve never uttered such a sentence because the truth is that I’m not that guy. If you call me in such a situation, I might have the intention of hopping out of bed and coming to your rescue. But the reality is that I’m more likely to go back to sleep and forget you ever called. And I’m probably more likely to be pissed that you disturbed me during my beauty rest, especially if I have something to do the next morning (like work).

I know such a statement is absurd, so I don’t even try to fake it. I don’t want to paint myself as something I am not.

But how are people supposed to get to know you? How will they ever know who you are?

I’d prefer that people observe my interactions on these networks.

Don’t worry about what I say about myself. Worry about my actions, because they speak louder than words. What kind of content do I share? Do I interact with others? That will tell you so much more than a paragraph or two in my profile section.

And do this with others. And also, do this offline.

People can tell you whatever they want. And sometimes they may tell you how they’d like to be perceived, rather than tell who they actually are. I don’t want to do that. I don’t want to insult your intelligence.

I am what I am, not what I say I am. And the sooner I allow you to see that, the sooner you can accept me for me.

In my post Why We Can’t Afford To Get Stuck In The Past, I argued why we can’t allow ourselves to fall victim to permanent nostalgia. From time to time, I like to play the devil’s advocate and felt that I needed to contradict myself just a bit.

While we can’t afford to get stuck in our own past — hanging on to the days of high school and college or the days when we were the captain of our sports teams or cheerleading squads — we also should not allow ourselves to completely ignore the past and the offerings of previous generations.

For example, I hate when young people say they dislike something because “it’s old”. If it’s bad, then it’s bad — and that’s fine. But to discount something because of its age? That is not acceptable. That is no better than an older person not liking something because it’s new.

This discrimination is usually found in music. Many kids, if they can’t remember the day the song was released, don’t care to give it a chance. I listen to new music and I listen to older music. Many of my favorite bands were formed before I was born or were popular before “my day”. When people argue that there’s no good music out there today, I’m quick to remind them that it’s there, but they have to search through more bullshit than they used to. But it would be unfair if I said there was only good music out there today. There’s good music from every decade, every generation.

The same is true of literature. Movies.

And advice.

What if I’d never read How To Win Friends And Influence People by Dale Carnegie because it was originally published in the 1930′s? I would have missed out on so many great stories and so much wisdom and priceless advice that is still relevant today.

The Art of War by Sun Tzu is old. Centuries old. Millenia old. Yet it’s still a significant reference for generals in the 21st century. As complex as war may be today, the fundamentals, as identified by Tzu, are still relevant.

I don’t believing in hailing the classics only because they’re older and you feel pressured to appreciate them. But I also don’t believe in ignoring them just because they’re not the “freshest”.

When it comes to art and advice and wisdom, age truly is just a number. And relevance is in no way tied to age.

That goes for all of us, both young and old. And for those of you who may feel that you’re somewhere in the middle.

I was at Starbucks when two parents started talking about their children and technology. I’m sure you’ve heard similar conversations. They go something like this: “These kids today are so smart with technology. My 5-year-old daughter taught me how to use my iPhone! I guess it’s because these kids grow up with technology.”

Is that really why kids are so good with technology? They grew up with it? I think adults underestimate how knowledgeable they are about technology. They’ve grown up with it, just in different ways. They grew up with TV and VCR, is DVD really so different?

No, the reason that kids are so “smart” with technology is that they’re curious. And also, they’re not afraid.

I remember when my mom bought our first computer. I was 13, and dial-up was where it was at! I didn’t know anything about computers; I’d seldom had an opportunity to use one. But it didn’t take me long to figure out what I was doing because I jumped in and learned. Users manual? I don’t need no stinkin’ users manual!

My mom, on the other hand, waited for me to figure things out and explain them to her. She had a hesitation, she was afraid. I remember one time, my mom asked me how to do something on the computer. I cannot remember the exact task, but she had asked me how to do it a million times. I asked her how she thought she should execute the task. And she told me exactly how to do it. See, she knew what to do but lacked the confidence to rely on herself. She was afraid to try anything, for fear that she might cause the computer to lock down or blow up.

To use the excuse that I was “born surrounded with technology” is absurd. My mom was always a laggard. That’s not an insult, it’s just the truth. We didn’t get new, trendy gadgets while they were still hot and fresh. While you can say that I grew up with TV and VCR, I’d argue that my mom actually had more years and experience with the same technology!

So, it’s not a lack of familiarity that holds us behind when it comes to throwing out the old and welcoming the new. It’s fear, and a lack of curiosity. We get set in our ways and stop to wonder what the world could be like if it were different. We merely accept things as they are and we stop dreaming.

Now, I want to ask you a question that is completely rhetorical — How do we maintain a childlike curiosity? How do we remind ourselves that while most changes may bring about a different world, they will not bring about the end of the world?

Having read and enjoyed Trust Agents: Using the Web to Build Influence, Improve Reputation, and Earn Trust by Chris Brogan and Julien Smith, I decided to try to find some videos of the authors talking more about their philosophies on social media. During the Q&A section of this (50-minute) video, an audience member made a great point. To paraphrase, the audience member made the point that when the Internet was first catching on, the great thing about it was that it was private. People could browse and engage via the Internet while maintaining a level of anonymity. Now, the Internet is becoming more and more transparent. Many of our activities on the Internet are forever — it’s there for all to see, thanks to our friend Google. And it’s no secret that Facebook is doing all that it can to become more open every single day. Think of your interactions on the Web as your “permanent record” now.

After the audience member made up great point, he followed with this question: How do you make people move from that privacy-mindset about the Internet to the open mindset that we’re now moving toward?

Brogan eventually concluded that that’s a tough issue and was unable to give a straight-forward answer to the issue. That’s because you can’t make someone accept it. People don’t like change; some are always going to cling to the way things were.

But they need to accept it. Because the Internet’s opening up, whether we like it or not. There’s no use in talking about whether it’s fair or unfair. This is one of those cases where you’re better off forgetting about “fair” and worrying about what is and what is not.

It is what it is.

I understand the concerns with the open Web. It’s not just about security and identity issues. It’s also about having the freedom to express ourselves without consequences. If someone wants to learn about you, chances are that he’s going to research you through Google, Facebook, or Twitter first. The problem with this transparency is that you never know what will turn someone off. How personal should you be? If someone gets a chance to discover your religious or political views before getting a chance to know you, will he even give you a chance? What if you’re profane or vulgar in an intimate setting but know how to flip the switch over when in a corporate setting? Will someone get the wrong impression about you? By the way, if you think having different personas in these scenarios is simply being two-faced, I’d argue that all of us act differently in different settings with different people. You likely do the same thing; perhaps you’re not aware of it.

As I said, I understand these concerns because they’re some of the same concerns that I have. However, I feel that these fears cause us to be less human. Some of us may tend to hide certain parts of ourselves that we may not hide so much in offline interactions. If I unintentionally say something insensitive or politically incorrect among my friends in an offline setting, word of my slip-up might stop at that group of friends. Or maybe we’ll tell our significant others or some friends outside of the group, but chances are that the whole world won’t be notified. But if I make the same mistake on Facebook or Twitter or somewhere else online, it’s chronicled for all to see, and concrete proof of my slip-up is readily available for distribution.

So we hold back. We reserve. We make sure to conduct ourselves in a corporate-friendly manner, and as a result, we dehumanize ourselves and our networks.

But when the Web opens all of us up to everyone, can that humanity be restored? When everyone is under the same microscope and living under the same fear, can a simple slip-up or differences of philosophy be forgiven and forgotten? Could it teach us to be more tolerant? Or will the open Web only feed our ignorance and prejudices?

This is all just thought with no definite answer. Obviously, I hope that the open Web can add a degree of humanity to our online interactions. But I can’t predict one way or the other.

If there were only one thing that I took away from reading Trust Agents, it would be this: the fundamentals of communication and building trust have not changed. The world of TV, newspaper, and radio advertising that we grew up with were actually quite brief when you look at the history of business and mankind. The best way to build trust now is to get back to basics, to treat people like people and remember that they are people. (Remember, they are not perfect; neither are you).

I’ve accepted that my friends are not perfect offline. Why should I expect them to be perfect online? Why should we expect anyone to be such?

What are your thoughts on this? Could the open Web bring a fundamental shift, or am I just daydreaming?

Recently I took a look back at some of my old blog posts. I started with the very early posts and worked my way forward. The experience was both amusing and enlightening. It was amusing because no matter how you feel about my current work, those early posts were very unpolished. As I reread the posts, I found it incredibly obvious that I was trying to find my voice.

The funny thing is that I don’t remember writing some of the posts. That might be a bit frightening because the oldest of the posts is about a year old, and since I am only 25 years old, I should not be so forgetful. For me, this brief exercise in reflection was evidence of my growth and development. It was fun to see some of the things I wrote about back then.

I hate to call myself a “writer” because that implies that I’m established at the craft, but I’ve always been a person who writes. Even in my elementary days, I was writing short stories like crazy. In middle school and high school, I wrote horrible depressing poems and a few short stories. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve started novels in my life. Obviously, they never materialized. Just as I made the shift from fiction to non-fiction in my reading, so have I in my writing.

I still have some of those old poems and short stories. From time to time, I go back and read them, just as I did with my blog posts. And the feelings the act invokes are very similar to how it felt to look back at the early works on my blog. By looking back, I get a snapshot of who I was and what mattered to me at the time. And in some ways, it makes me appreciate who I am now so much more.

So many times I catch myself saying What the hell was I talking about? What the hell was I thinking? Again, it’s refreshing to look back at how I once wrote and see evidence of my progress. However, I do sometimes look back at writings that I once thought were horrible and change my opinion. The delivery might not have been the best, but the idea and effort were there. And maybe the same can happen to you with your blog posts, or with other ideas that you have floating around. Maybe the idea you had and threw away wasn’t bad; maybe it just didn’t pop up at the right time. There are some posts that I wish I could go back and rewrite, but it would be pointless. We all develop, we all grow; one day I’ll look back at my current works and feel differently than I do right now.

Normally, I would say that you shouldn’t look back and that you should always be looking forward. Of course, it can be okay to break your own rules as long as the results are positive. So, I encourage you to take a look into the past. If you’re a writer, look back at some of your early writings. If you’re a salesman, compare your old sales numbers to your current numbers. If you feel that your current work is better than your old work, good — that’s what you want. If you look back and feel that your old work was better — that you’ve lost that fire that you once had — ask yourself what you can do to get it back. Hopefully, when you take the time to reflect, you will walk away more aware of yourself than you were before.

There’s a video on YouTube that I’ve watched again and again over the years. The video is a collection of images shot at Elliott Smith’s memorial wall in Los Angeles. Just for the sake of a little background, on October 21, 2003, Elliott Smith took his own life by stabbing himself in the heart. As tragic as that is, this post is not about his death as much as it’s about people’s reaction to it. On Smith’s memorial wall, numerous people left pictures and notes in an attempt to let people know how much Smith meant to them. My favorite line comes at the end: “Your music got me through my own personal hell.”

Anyone who’s ever listened to Elliott Smith’s music knows that it’s very personal and intimate. And those who listen to Smith are truly touched by his art. It’s no wonder that he would be so dearly missed. He did something special and touched people in a way most of us never will.

But what about you and me?

All too often, we don’t give ourselves enough credit. We go through the motions of our lives, convinced that we can’t make a difference anywhere. We have no influence. We have no affect on anyone, right? Wrong.

I want you to take a little time and truly consider what I am about to ask you. On an average day (let’s make that an average workday), how many people do you interact with? If you’re married, you probably interact with your significant other before and after work. Do you stop at that gas station or donut shop near your job just before starting your day’s work? Then, there are your bosses, co-workers, and clients. Do you have children? Do you call friends and family on a regular basis? What about your neighbors?

Oh my god, the list can go on and on!

Think about this: Every time you interact with one of these people, you’re giving yourself an opportunity to be remembered. To be remembered and loved or to be remembered and despised. Of course, you can be forgotten as well. There’s no guarantee that you’ll stand out in any way.

Sure, after you’re gone, you may not be remembered by your friends, family, and acquaitances in the same way that these people remembered Elliott Smith. But people may smile when they say your name. And speak well of you.

The truth is that you affect people’s moods and days and lives more than you realize. Sometimes, something so simple as getting service with a smile brightens the rest of my day. Does that sound silly? Maybe it is. But I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels this way, whether others realize it or not.

You don’t have to be a musician to leave behind a positive legacy and to better people’s lives. Just be kind.

As I’ve told you numerous times on this blog, I’m an introvert at heart. I’d say that up until a couple of years ago, I was an extreme introvert. I never felt comfortable anywhere I went and interactions were awkward. (Now, I’d just say that I am awkward, but my interactions, not necessarily.)

Over time, I’ve gotten more social. I’ve learned to effectively communicate and open up and express myself. I’ve made so much progress, I’m now an open person, right?

Not if you ask my wife.

While we were having one of those little quarrels that lovers sometimes have, she made the point that I can be hard to read when I’m angry. I shut down and don’t let anyone in. And no one knows what’s going through my head.

When I took a bit of time to think about what she had said, I realized that she was right. And then I realized that although I believe I’ve made much progress on opening up and not being so much of an introvert, I still have much more progress left to be made.

Which brings me to be my point…

“Better” does not mean “Good”. Or “Good enough”.

Am I better communicator than I was a few years ago? Yes. Am I a good communicator? I guess that depends on whom you ask or the situation.

I know that this is a very personal example that I’m giving, but this rule applies to areas other than relationships and lover’s quarrels. It applies to you as a professional, your company or business, you as an athlete, you as a writer, a blogger, whatever the hell it is that you dedicate your time to.

Just because you’re better at something does not mean that you are good at it. It just means that you’re better at it than you once were.

It seems that at some point in life, everyone wants to be an artist. We all want to do something that will ensure that we’ll be cherished and remembered far beyond our days on this planet. We may seek to achieve this any number of ways: by being a rock star or an author. Or a painter or an entrepreneur. Or a big-hearted philanthropist. Whatever our method, we all seek to stand out from the pack, at some point in our existence.

Some of us reach those heights. However, the rest of us aren’t so lucky. The rest of us slip into the abyss of mediocrity with everyone else. Why? Perhaps we’re not good enough, we’re not talented enough (which is highly doubtful). Maybe Destiny or Lady Luck didn’t give us their blessing. Was it written in the stars? Were we not dealt a fair hand?

I can’t speak for everyone else. But I can speak for myself. And the one thing that constantly holds me back is a fear of not being original enough.

For some reason, there’s this pressure to always be original. 100% totally new! Something no one else has ever heard of before…

Yet many of the artists we idolize aren’t all that original. And the truth is that no one’s as original as we’d like to believe, even the most original people.

We’re all influenced by others, to some degree.

Despite my feelings about the band, The Beatles are often credited as the most influential and most original band of all-time. But let’s face it — they had influences. They didn’t come up with this whole music thing on their own. Someone blazed paths before them. Like all of us, they took what was already there and built on it.

Every artist — every actor, painter, musician, author, etc. — borrows from others.

I cannot claim to be the most original person, nor can I claim to be an artist. But if I were to say that the things I share on my blog and social networks were completely original, I’d be kidding myself. But I can’t let that stop me. Like everyone else, I take my influences and tweak their offerings a bit to my liking.

Even Seth Godin, the golden marketer, is not 100% original. He gives credit to Malcolm Gladwell, Tom Peters, Zig Ziglar, and many others. Surely, we’ve all heard the accusations of Shakespeare’s lack of originality. But does that make him any less immortal in literature?

Do us all a favor: quit pressuring yourself to be so original. Just because you’re not all that original doesn’t mean that you have to sentence yourself to a lifetime of complacency. If you have an idea, run with it. See what happens. If it catches on, why should you worry about how original you are? And for those of you who think you’re uniquely original, drop the act and stop flattering yourself. And give credit where it’s due.