15.08.2019 Views

Deep Work_ Rules for focused success in a distracted world ( PDFDrive.com )

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

here succ<strong>in</strong>ctly: All of my time and attention are spoken <strong>for</strong>—several times<br />

over. Please do not ask <strong>for</strong> them.<br />

To further justify this policy, Stephenson wrote an essay titled “Why I Am a Bad<br />

Correspondent.” At the core of his explanation <strong>for</strong> his <strong>in</strong>accessibility is the follow<strong>in</strong>g<br />

decision:<br />

The productivity equation is a non-l<strong>in</strong>ear one, <strong>in</strong> other words. This accounts<br />

<strong>for</strong> why I am a bad correspondent and why I very rarely accept speak<strong>in</strong>g<br />

engagements. If I organize my life <strong>in</strong> such a way that I get lots of long,<br />

consecutive, un<strong>in</strong>terrupted time-chunks, I can write novels. But as those<br />

chunks get separated and fragmented, my productivity as a novelist drops<br />

spectacularly.<br />

Stephenson sees two mutually exclusive options: He can write good novels at a<br />

regular rate, or he can answer a lot of <strong>in</strong>dividual e-mails and attend conferences, and<br />

as a result produce lower-quality novels at a slower rate. He chose the <strong>for</strong>mer option,<br />

and this choice requires him to avoid as much as possible any source of shallow work<br />

<strong>in</strong> his professional life. (This issue is so important to Stephenson that he went on to<br />

explore its implications—positive and negative—<strong>in</strong> his 2008 science fiction epic,<br />

Anathem, which considers a <strong>world</strong> where an <strong>in</strong>tellectual elite live <strong>in</strong> monastic orders,<br />

isolated from the <strong>distracted</strong> masses and technology, th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g deep thoughts.)<br />

In my experience, the monastic philosophy makes many knowledge workers<br />

defensive. The clarity with which its adherents identify their value to the <strong>world</strong>, I<br />

suspect, touches a raw nerve <strong>for</strong> those whose contribution to the <strong>in</strong><strong>for</strong>mation economy<br />

is more <strong>com</strong>plex. Notice, of course, that “more <strong>com</strong>plex” does not mean “lesser.” A<br />

high-level manager, <strong>for</strong> example, might play a vital role <strong>in</strong> the function<strong>in</strong>g of a billiondollar<br />

<strong>com</strong>pany, even if she cannot po<strong>in</strong>t to someth<strong>in</strong>g discrete, like a <strong>com</strong>pleted<br />

novel, and say, “This is what I produced this year.” There<strong>for</strong>e, the pool of <strong>in</strong>dividuals<br />

to whom the monastic philosophy applies is limited—and that’s okay. If you’re<br />

outside this pool, its radical simplicity shouldn’t ev<strong>in</strong>ce too much envy. On the other<br />

hand, if you’re <strong>in</strong>side this pool—someone whose contribution to the <strong>world</strong> is discrete,<br />

clear, and <strong>in</strong>dividualized * —then you should give this philosophy serious<br />

consideration, as it might be the decid<strong>in</strong>g factor between an average career and one<br />

that will be remembered.<br />

The Bimodal Philosophy of <strong>Deep</strong> <strong>Work</strong> Schedul<strong>in</strong>g<br />

This book opened with a story about the revolutionary psychologist and th<strong>in</strong>ker Carl

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!