Pursuing Happiness

The pursuit of happiness. Nice idea, but it’s a phrase that’s fraught with pitfalls, and all the more in our age of advertising and social media.

What exactly is happiness, and should it even be a goal? I spoke with a friend of mine a few months back who questioned whether people’s desire to be “happy” hasn’t blocked the perhaps more important pursuit to live life “meaningfully.” Are we basically trading in difficult, long-range pursuits for short-term pleasures? What about working hard at something? Of struggling? Of accomplishing something you didn’t think you could do? Of being resilient under difficult conditions? For those types of challenges, at any given moment you aren’t likely to say that you’re “happy,” but it may be those types of experiences that lead to the greatest feelings of achievement and satisfaction.

In today’s world of social media and advertising, it’s hard not to fall in the trap of constantly comparing one’s life to others. Case in point: I have numerous friends who travel extensively around the world, and when we get together it’s natural for our discussions to include some details about their experiences. I often leave these conversations questioning why I don’t travel more.

But the answer is, because I don’t really want to. I have other stuff I want to do. So why then do I still have that nagging feeling? It probably has something to do with the way humans are wired. There’s a good reason why The Ten Commandments include the edict: “Thou shall not covet.” This isn’t a new thing.

I read an interview with comedian/writer Samantha Irby in The New York Times a while back, and she said something very affirming for me:

The thing where whatever you aspire to is a thing we all should aspire to — I hate it. That kind of messaging just exists to make people feel bad. When you flatten everything into “be happy,” it’s like, what does that mean? It means a different thing for you than it does for me.

Her message really hit home. We don’t all have to be doing the same thing. And we don’t have to take other people’s experiences as models to subscribe to.

But this can be easier said than done. I’ve had numerous discussions with friends and family members who’ve distanced themselves from social media due to its ability to make users feel inadequate and unhappy, and I think this should be STEP ONE in the FEAR OF MISSING OUT RECOVERY PROGRAM. When you’re not constantly being bombarded with photos of what a wonderful time other people are having, it’s easier to pursue the stuff that you want to do without the nagging sense that you should be doing something else.

(An aside: it’s also important to note that what you see on social media isn’t the full story. No one is taking photos of family quarrels, delayed flights or child tantrums.)

The 1980’s version of social media was advertising. I think of the old Carnival Cruise commercial with Kathie Lee Gifford singing, “If they could see me now.” (Talk about selling FOMO!)

I remember watching this commercial wondering why my family didn’t get to go on cruises. (Answer: because it would have been a disaster!). For decades, advertising kept telling me how amazing cruises were, and several friends said the same thing. Then, one day, I actually went on a cruise. It was okay. It met the needs of my particular circumstances, but I won’t be going on another one.

Sometimes what’s being sold to you isn’t actually what’s best for you. Go figure.

So go do what’s best for you, what’s meaningful to you, and try do so with a sense of confidence.

Music vs Lyrics

In episode 10 of our podcast 1000 Greatest Misses, Christopher Grey and I discuss music and lyrics, and whether one is more important when falling in love with a composition.  I concluded that with some exceptions, music is most important to me, and that as long as a lyric isn’t overtly lame (“Hey baby let’s go out tonight, Hey baby, I’m feeling alright”) a good melody will carry the tune to the finish line for me.  But a lyric that’s embarrassingly bad will often ruin an otherwise good song.

A few weeks ago, John McWhorter of the New York Times reviewed an upcoming book called Quantum Criminals: Ramblers, Wild Gamblers and Other Survivors from the Songs of Steely Dan, and concluded that the book “is a reminder that one can be massively fulfilled by language one doesn’t fully comprehend.”  I love this summation because it perfectly captures my sentiment for a band like Yes, whose lyrics are complete nonsense to me, but that still manage to be profoundly evocative.

Consider a song most everyone knows: “Roundabout.”  The lyric of the chorus is:

In and around the lake
Mountains come out of the sky
And they stand there

Nothing crazy there. Kind of poetic, maybe.  But nothing overtly comprehensible.  Now imagine if singer Jon Anderson had instead leaned on rock and roll’s worst lyrical instincts and composed the following over the same melody:

I’ve got to see you, babe
You know you’re all I crave
In the evening

Not exactly what I’m looking for in a song! And surely “Roundabout” wouldn’t be a classic if its lyrics were such garbage. It’s the same reason why a band like The Babys are hard for me to listen to. An otherwise competent song like “Every Time I Think of You” isn’t helped when John Waite sings:

People say a love like ours will surely pass
But I know a love like ours will last and last

Ugh, who farted, right? And the Babys actually outsourced this tune, written by Jack Conrad and Ray Kennedy. You’d think someone could have come up with a better lyric. Terrible.

But then you’ll get words that are kind of lame but are backed up by such a terrific groove, that it hardly matters what’s being said. I think of a song like “New Sensation” by INXS.  I dig this song despite its lyrics:

Live, baby, live
Now that the day is over
I got a new sensation
Mm, perfect moments
That's so impossible to refuse

Somehow, this works for me. I can’t explain it, and I certainly can’t defend it. But I really like the song.

Of course, the best result is the perfect marriage of music and lyrics, an alchemy that’s rarely achieved, but when it happens it can move me to my core, and it’s why I admire artists like Jackson Brown, Randy Newman, Bruce Springsteen, Rickie Lee Jones, Paul Simon, etc. When Jones sings “And I can hear him
In every footstep's passing sigh/He goes crazy these nights/Watching heartbeats go by” or when Springsteen sings “There were ghosts in the eyes of all the boys you sent away/They haunt this dusty beach road in the skeleton frames of burned-out Chevrolets”…well, damn. I’m all in. Tears, every time.

For my own compositions, just as I try to avoid musical clichés, I try to avoid pedestrian lyrics. Occasionally, I hit the mark, combining melody, harmony, groove and words that convey an emotion together that could never be achieved by their separate parts.

The beauty of song.

Joan Didion questions the Simple Life

File this under a quick addendum to by blog from two weeks ago in which I discuss the very reasonable desire to life a happy, normal life, but how we as a society benefit greatly from those who are willing to go all-in on selfish pursuits, often at the expense of their coworkers, friends and family.

I had never heard of Joan Didion until today. Clearly my oversite, as The New York Times today reported on the New York Public Library’s acquisition of Joan Didion’s archives. I read the article and I now know that you could fill yet another room with things I don’t know (the mansion keeps expanding). But beyond that, I was taken with a quote by Miss Didion.

Jennifer Schussler writes, "Didion, 22 at the time and less than a year out of the University of California, Berkeley, also added her thoughts on a book she had recently read that lamented the conformism of her peers. ‘All anyone in this generation wants is security and group belonging,” she wrote, “and what will happen to the world if nobody is willing to risk that security to gain the big things?’”

What indeed! One can hardly be blamed for desiring security and belonging, but it’s true that most of us will be mourned only by our friends and family and not by larger society. It’s a trade-off most of us make happily. Fortunately and unfortunately, there are plenty of ambitious souls on the planet willing to risk everything in the name of glory.

The Costs of Work-Life Balance

Roxane Gay of the New York Times has an interesting piece this week on work-life balance, in which she commends the recent trend of people saying no to employers who ask for limitless sacrifices. After confessing that she is a workaholic, she writes, “The expectation that we should go above and beyond for employers who feel no reciprocal responsibility is a grand, incredibly destructive lie” and “it’s why an entire discourse rose around labeling people who are simply doing the jobs they were hired for, nothing more and nothing less, as ‘quiet quitting.’”

My HR professional wife has had to contend with this new way of thinking in our post-shutdown world (I hope post-shutdown). She has managers who are complaining about staff, calling them “lazy” or “not team players” solely because they do the work that’s been asked of them from home rather than in the office. My wife has had to push back.

“Do they do their work well?” 

“Yes.”

“Are they friendly with their co-workers and clients?”

“Yes.” 

“When you ask them to do something do they do it?”

“Yes.”

At which point my wife slaps her palm against her forehead. 

Do we really want people to stop making solid work-life choices that allow them to eat dinner with their children and make it to their after-school activities, if they also meet the essential objectives of their jobs?

Working from home may have some detrimental outcomes – we’ll see how this experiment goes – but so does working oneself to death, and the trend of young people resisting employers who want them to sacrifice their lives is a positive one. At least, it’s positive for the individual and for that individual’s family. I also try to consider things on a more macro level, because as a society we have benefitted greatly from people who are shitty parents but who have a drive to achieve greatness. 

I think of the lyrics to Rush’s song “Mission,” in which lyricist Neil Peart admires the drive and creativity of those who’ve contribute great works of art, film and architecture to our benefit while conceding that there is a cost to the individual, and by extension, that individual’s family.

We each pay a fabulous price
For our visions of paradise

Beethoven, Picasso, Einstein, Hemingway, Frank Lloyd Wright, Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, etc. – they’ve all benefitted our society in profound ways, but in many cases they left a trail of oppression and neglect in their wakes.

I view the myopic drive for greatness as akin to owning a boat. I’m glad to have a friend who owns one, but I’d never want the headache of owning one myself. The same can be said of a career that supersedes family. I’m glad some families have had to endure that hardship insofar as the result benefitted the greater good, but I’m sure glad mine isn’t one of them.

WORDLE STRATEGIES

My daughter introduced me to Wordle last week, and in short order I determined that it was probably best to have a strategy or at least consciously choose how I want to play the game going forward. Others have undoubtedly already done this work, but I thought it would be a fun mental exercise to try to come up with the most efficient and successful methods.

To help make these decisions, I thought it best to learn what the 20 most-used letters are in the English language in order of usage. They are:

E A R I O T N S L C U D P M H G B F Y W

(NOTE: an even better bit of information would be to discover the most-used letters in five-letter words, but I’m not sure how to find this information.)

OPENING WORDS

For starters, it might make sense to guess a word that uses as many of the top-five letters as possible.  The word I came up with is RATIO, which is comprised of four of the top-five letters (A R I and O), and also the sixth (T), leaving out only E. Certainly, there are times when none of these letters will be helpful, but if you’re playing the odds, it might be a good method to follow.

Another possible first word might be one with as many highly-used consonants as possible, since vowels might not be as helpful in guessing a word. STERN would likely be a good one, as it uses the four most highly used consonants, plus the most popular vowel.

STRATEGY #1

It seems to me that the most “honest” approach to solving Wordle is to guess an initial word and then use any letters that you’ve guessed correctly in each subsequent guess. For example, if you guessed the word RATIO and Wordle tells you that the A is in the correct place and that there is a T in the word, your second guess would have to keep the A in the second position and use a T somewhere in the word. So perhaps I would guess TAMED for my second entry. This strategy certainly poses challenging scenarios, as sometimes it’s very difficult to come up with a word that uses the correctly-guessed letters, especially after three or more guesses. But that’s not how the game works; Wordle doesn’t force you to use letters that you’ve guessed correctly in subsequent guesses, which opens up the following very interesting scenarios.

STRATEGY #2

Even if I stand firm on using the word RATIO as my first guess, it might now make sense to ignore whatever letters I may or may not guess correctly in my first word and now use as many of the remaining top-ten letters as possible. I can do this by entering the word CLUES as my second guess. The words RATIO and CLUES will use up nine of the top ten most-used letters, substituting U – the 11th most-used letter – for N, so it employs ten of the top eleven letters. If I don’t get the results I’m looking for, a good third guess might be the word HANDY, which uses A once again, but now adds the heretofore unused H, N, D and Y, that latter of which is often a sneaky overlooked vowel in words like CYNIC.

Starting with RATIO, then CLUES and then HANDY, if necessary, might be a good strategy, but it doesn’t use the top fifteen letters; it uses 13 of the top 15 letters, plus Y (and A twice). There might be a better way.

STRATEGY #3

What about trying to use all of the top-15 letters in the first three guesses, regardless of how many letters you guess correctly? If I were to apply this scenario, I could guess the words MENUS, CHARD and PILOT. All fifteen top-15 letters are used. I wouldn’t worry about what letters I guessed correctly in my first two guesses; I’d simply enter these three words and then spend guesses four through six on getting the correct word.

STRATEGY #4

Finally, I might decide that I really want to include the letter Y in one of my first three guesses, since this letter can often be used as a vowel. In this case, I might enter the following words: PRICE, LUSTY and MANGO, which encompasses 13 of the top 15 letters, plus G and Y in place of D and H.

THE HYPOTHESIS

There may be two objectives in determining which strategy to employ: the one that’s most successful and the one that’s most challenging, as sometimes it’s good to make the brain work hard. I believe STRATEGY #1 will be the most challenging, but my guess is STRATEGY #3 will probably be the most successful.

To find out, I’m going to play five games of Wordle using all four methods (plus an additional attempt at Strategy 1 using a different word). Sure, the results won’t be statistically significant, but it’ll be at least a clue into how best to approach the game.

THE RESULTS

I played twenty-five Wordle games, and given my limitation as a wordsmith, here are the results:

Strategy 1A (Starting with RATIO and sticking with correctly-guessed letters) is definitely the hardest, as expected. I got four of five words, but it took a long while, ranging from 100 seconds to over seven minutes (yeah, I know. I was stumped). Now, this strategy may work for someone who’s very quick and clever with words, but for me this didn’t work.

Strategy 1B (Starting with STERN and sticking with correctly-guessed letters) had better results. I got four of five words again, but my times were quicker: from 55 seconds to just over two minutes.

Strategy 2 (Starting with RATIO and CLUES) was very quick when it worked, but it only worked 3 of 5 times. When I guessed correctly, my times ranged from twenty-one seconds to a bit under two minutes. 

Strategy 3 (Starting with MENUS, CHARD and PILOT) was the most successful. I got all five correct – three of them in four turns, which is of course the fewest turns this strategy allows. Additionally, my times were pretty good, with three under a minute, one at 90 seconds, and one that took just over three minutes (and shouldn’t have taken that long. I was being dim.)

Strategy 4 (Starting with PRICE, MANGO and LUSTY) worked pretty well, but not as successfully at Strategy 3. I got four of five correct, ranging from 33 seconds to just under three minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

So which method is best?  In terms of brainpower, I think I would go with Strategy 1A: use RATIO as my first guess and then use any correctly-guessed letters ongoing. If I don’t want to exert myself quite so much, STERN would probably be a better bet.

For speed and wins, Strategy 3 (Starting with MENUS, CHARD and PILOT) appears to be best, though I only tested the methods five times. It may be that strategies 2 or 4 are better over the long haul.

Of course, there are words that will be a challenge regardless of strategy, and sometimes I come upon a word that I simply don’t know. I imagine other players employ slightly different methods for solving their puzzles, but having a strategy is probably a better bet than just winging it.

I’ll likely immerse myself in Wordle for a week or two and then go back to my dreaded crossword puzzles, an art form that I will never remotely master.