Why it's ok to be obvious
I get occasional feedback that what I said or wrote was obvious. "I liked that post Scott, but it I've heard it before" or "Chapter 5 was interesting, but there's nothing new here." I've learned this can be an empty critique. Here's why:
1. Repeating a message can be necessary
It seems we still haven't learned the Ten Commandments, the First Amendment, or most of this planets basic laws and precepts. Being reminded of important ideas is necessary because:
We need to hear some things several times before we understand
We need well told reminders to put ideas into practice
We forget
Rather than worry if something is obvious or not, the better questions are:
Is the writer making good points?
Are the stories interesting?
Are they compelling?
Is there an angle or framework for that's being offered that's helpful?
Can I make use of what I'm learning?
Does this explain an obvious point in a way I can share easily with others?
Being obvious is certainly a mistake if none of the above apply, but otherwise there is value. As a writer, when I'm told a reader couldn't apply what I'd said, or the stories didn't relate to their lives, that's more useful criticism. But "that's obvious" doesn't on its own suggest I should have changed anything.
2. For some topics, being radically new and different probably means you are wrong.
A book on basic math will, at some point, explain that 2 + 2 =4. Any writing that attacks universal themes (love, happiness, progress) will cover ground others have before. The better questions are:
Does the writing provoke?
Does it motivate?
Does it inspire?
Is it convincing you to do something better for yourself or the world?
I don't believe radical new theories on innovation or public speaking are necessary. No theory will do the hard work or take the risks for you. This is perhaps my meta-theory. It explains why I'm unlikely to write a book called "The radical new amazing theory on X". I don't believe such things exist for the interesting challenges in this world, and books that claim there is one focus more on novelty than utility. Even when popular, these books have little influence relative to their sales.
Artist Nina Paley said "Don't be original; be obvious. When you state the obvious, you actually seem original… Likewise, the more specific the feelings, experiences, stories – the more universal they appear."
3. If it's old to you, it might be new to someone else
One of my favorite stories from Confessions of a Public speaker is the often quoted study on how people are more afraid of speaking to a crowd than dying (read the excerpt here). Everyone's heard this, and many believe it, but few knows the source. It was a thrill to dig up the actual research and show how empty it was. But I did have someone tell me, "I'd heard that debunking before Scott", to which I wanted to reply "but what about the 99% of the population that hasn't?"
In The Myths of Innovation, a similiar thing happened with Newton and the apple. I was stunned during research to discover how apocryphal the apple story was. I'd been reading about invention and science my whole life, and hadn't encountered that before. I figured even if more people than I realized knew about this, it was a stellar reference for making larger points about epiphany stories. Just because you might find a story obvious, doesn't mean the larger point it's being used to make isn't important, meaningful or relevant.
Ideas can be both obvious and potent, and surprising and impotent.
Related posts:How to call bullshit on a guru
How Apple got everything right
How do you teach leadership in high school?
This week in pm-clinic: Managing proof of concept
Understanding Apple (Apple now the #1 Music retailer)
