The Dirty "C" Word, Part II

When we last left our heroine, she was sticking her toe in the contentious waters of Debunk, calling an unclothed emperor naked...about the "dirty word" that so much of creatives' social media is quick to abase. I'm sure you've all seen the posts that go something like this:

"The longer I write, the more I know the secret of really being successful in it--realizing we're not in competition with each other. We're all in this together. What benefits one of us benefits all of us. So when you succeed, I celebrate!"

Doesn't this sound wonderful? Doesn't this sound unselfish, and noble, and accomplished?

Yeah. It does. Only when I see one of these "evolved" souls spouting this sentiment, I have all I can do not to type back:

"Well, Petunia, I'm thrilled you want to celebrate my success, and I'm happy for yours. But don't think for a minute that that means we're not in competition with each other. We are, and we will be until the day one of us kicks the bucket. So stop trying to pretend you've reached some exalted level of enlightenment, and admit it."

By now, many of you may think I'm mistaken about which "dirty C word" I'm talking, and I'm actually dealing in cynicism. If I am, it's because another perfectly good, innocent word has taken way too much undeserved rap, and I'm simply fed up with nodding and smiling along to something I know originates from the posterior end of a bull.

The question is how competition became such a "dirty word."

The obvious answer is that we're being manipulated to feel like we should take the "enlightened" road. We should be mellow, and detached, and unfailingly positive. Above all, we're told repeatedly, we live in an "infinite universe" of possibility, and success isn't like a pie--giving someone else a slice doesn't mean there's less left for me. "A rising tide raises all boats." Right?

Um. How do I put this tactfully?

WRONG. 

 

The plain fact is that we don't live in an "infinite universe" of possibility. 

Yes, human beings have infinite potential (given to us by an infinite God). But our world is FINITE. As in, it has LIMITS. 

If a NYT bestselling author or some celebrity with a tell-all signs an 8-figure contract, that does nothing for me. 

That particular "rising tide" doesn't raise my boat; it swamps it.

Because the money that goes for that book...by definition...cannot also go for mine.

Harsh, but true.

We all know this. So why are we afraid to say it? If we openly admit we're competing, and that we want to "come out on top"...does that somehow taint our art? Make us an evil person? Render us "less worthy" for the universe to reward?

CAN wanting to come out on top taint your art? Sure. If your "want" becomes such a driving force that you're ruthless about bending or ignoring rules, cheating, walking over people and/or using them to get your end results.  Heck, it's not just tainting your art in that case; it's tainting your life.

CAN competition "make" us evil? Only in the sense above. But even that's not competition's fault. Remember the adage "Adversity doesn't make the man; it merely reveals what he truly is"? The same goes for competition. It doesn't "make" someone evil unless he or she's got a streak of evil already inside that's just waiting for an excuse to take over. And even then, in a person with sufficient character, that evil won't get enough of a foothold before he or she draws a line in the sand and calls her/himself to account.

CAN competing in the marketplace--wanting to win--render us "less worthy," somehow, of "cosmic reward"?  Put aside for the moment the fact that the "universe" can't give out rewards in the first place (because it's a created thing without power of its own); that alone negates the question. But even without that consideration, if the notion that you're not "worthy" of something unless you pretend not to desire it sounds silly to you...it's because it is. Even the Bible says, "Ye have not because ye ask not." Competition--setting our sights for something, declaring a clear want, and determining a course of action to win it--not only isn't evil; it's Scriptural. If you doubt this, look up the Epistles and count how many times Paul talks about "running the race" and "winning the crown."

"But there's enough to go around for everybody!" you cry. "Why do we have to talk about 'winning' and 'losing'? Why can't we just 'compete' with ourselves?"

Because the truth is when it comes to material success in the marketplace, we know--because we have common sense--that, many times, there really isn't enough "opportunity" to go around for everybody. 

Probably the clearest illustration of this I can give you is traditional publishing.

Publishers have X number of slots available for X type of books. If mine and yours are both the same kind of book, and they're being shopped to the same publisher...it's only human nature for you to hope your book "wins" and mine "loses."

Is that because you wish me ill? I hope not. Is it because you're an evil person? I would assume not. It's because only one of us is going to get that slot.

That's not "scarcity thinking." That's a simple mathematical and economic fact.

Acknowledging that fact and working with it will take you a lot further than trying to resist, fight, decry, condemn, or deny it. And it'll sure take you a whole lot further than the "participation ribbon" crowd thinks you can go.

Best of all, though? The real secret?

Competition is one of the best ways to make--or deepen--some whiz-bang achiever friendships.

It's a well-known phenomenon that athletes can be the best of friends off the field--and enjoy nothing more than beating each other on it. Brothers (or sisters) are the same way. And there's nothing hateful about it: it's a simple desire to "be one better" than those you know the best and respect the most. (Not to mention the good-natured bragging rights element!) If it does become acrimonious in some way, often that's because things happen outside competition that affect the relationship negatively--NOT because one person was striving to be better than the other. 

Long ago, a mentor of mine was asked by her husband why she helped new writers. "You're training your competition," he pointed out. "Why would you want to do that?"

Her answer was genius.

"Because," she replied. "Do I want to be the best writer in a group of mediocre ones, or the best writer in a group of really good ones?"

That, ladies and gentlemen, is why competition isn't a dirty word.

It, in fact, is a gift from God. It keeps us on our mettle. It makes us constantly look over our work, learn and grow, so that when that slot opens up at a publisher, they'll say yes to us. And, yeah, we know that by saying yes to us, they'll say no to someone else.

But there's nothing evil about that, unless we turn it into a way to hurt people.

And it doesn't have to demotivate anybody, unless they're ready to let it.

So maybe we should stop treating our fellow artists like hothouse flowers...and just admit that we'd relish winning a slot in a publisher's catalog--or getting more 5-star reviews for our self-published work--when "pitted against" someone whose talent, work, and personal friendship we esteem highly. And give them the permission to feel the same way right back at us.

That's what we're really "in together." In competition. In a race for a crown.

I'll be glad to cheer you on...but someday, I want it to be my turn, too.

And I'm going to do everything I can to make that happen.

Thoughts?

Janny

The Dirty "C" Word, Part I

Okay, now, don't get too excited.  Of the many "C" words that might occur to you, the word I'm talking about today isn't actually risque--except, perhaps, in the minds of fellow creatives.

That word is...competition.

(Some of you may need to sit down and fan yourselves at this point. Feel free.)

A pretty ridiculous notion has taken over the creative world of late. This wouldn't be surprising, in itself: creative people can be just as ridiculous as uncreative ones. But this notion has been embraced so rapidly, completely, and radically that it borders on the closest thing to religion some of these people have. And fundamentalists ain't got nothin' on them when it comes to upholding this shining credo, and shaming those who dare to challenge it.

The notion?

That as writers, we don't compete with each other, because "we're all in this together."

Whoever came up with that notion? Ought to be taken out back and doused with cold water. In January. In the Northern Hemisphere. 

Because it's simply NOT TRUE.

Let me say that again.

Wonderful, warm, and affirming as it sounds to say that all creatives are "in this together"--and therefore, never, ever, ever, ever, EVER in (gasp) competition with each other--it's NOT TRUE.

Real life experience will prove this over and over and OVER again. It's even common sense, not to mention backed up with fact. 

But just try going on social media and saying that out loud.

Go ahead. I dare you.

This blog post is even stepping out on a ledge.

So where did this cockamamie notion come from? 

I suspect it has its roots in a couple of sources.

First, the influence of New Age thinking, The Secret, and all the rest, which preaches a "limitless universe" and scolds us against a "scarcity mindset." And, in one sense, this has some veracity. Publishing, after all, has become rather limitless; you can put together a book and "publish" yourself, any time you like. You simply have to have the resources to cover all the details involved, from buying ISBNs to cover art to copyright registration (just to be on the safe side), and voila! You're a published author. You're independent, you collect all the profits yourself, and no one stands in your way. 

In terms of publishing "freedom" and "access," this is great. In terms of quality?

Yeah. Sometimes, not so much. 

(But the few times I've said that out loud, I've gotten raked over so many coals that no wonder my skin gets thicker every year. Never mind that it's true; it still gets the kind of knee-jerk vitriol we used to reserve for animal abusers and serial killers. 😒)

Second, I believe it comes straight out of the participation-ribbon mindset: that people should be rewarded and applauded merely for showing up, breathing, and standing upright. That heaven forbid we should dare to say one thing is "better" than another, or that one "wins" and another "loses." The self-esteem damage of losing does terrible things to our young ones' confidence. It demotivates them. It depresses them. It can damage them forever, and forever keep them from achieving their true potential. Potential, according to these people, needs constant affirmation, watering, nurturing, reinforcement, and praise in order to develop fully. Any negative assessment of efforts to do so? Any aspersion cast on them, or evaluation of them that is less than glowing, or constructive criticism of them? Will bring about certain disaster. Maybe even physical damage, but certainly emotional. And, hence, tragedy.

Apparently, potential--be it writing talent, musicianship, artistic endeavor, or anything else--has no strength in itself. If not coddled like the proverbial hothouse flower, it will wither and die before it even takes root. Young (or even not-so-young) artists are to be celebrated for effort, and rejoice in that the only people they're "competing" with are themselves. 

Only problem is...that ain't how the real world works, Karen.

And it's long (DAMN long) past time someone was brave enough to say it out loud.

Before the denial of reality does way, way more damage and breaks way, way more hearts than that evil competition monster could ever do in a thousand lifetimes.

I'm here to tell you that not only is competition not an evil monster...

...but that we're all doing it, all the time. And it's long (DAMN long) past time we realized that, admitted it, and put it to work for us, instead of trying to shame it out of existence.

We'll talk more about that in part II!

Janny