Mindset by Carol S. Dweck

Beliefs can powerfully affect our success in life. In her book Mindsets, psychologist Carol S. Dweck describes two prevailing, overarching beliefs that can color our assessments of everything in life and affect our willingness to do what it takes to achieve our goals.

Dweck refers to these two beliefs as the fixed mindset and the growth mindset. The fixed mindset is the belief that intelligence, character, and personality are unchanging. You have the talent or knack for something or you don’t. The contrasting growth mindset is that people can improve their abilities by their efforts. If you’re willing to do the work, you can learn and get better.

These mindsets affect the way we view ourselves and interpret everything that happens in our lives. People with a fixed mindset see problems, setbacks and failures as a reflection on who they are. If they have difficulty with a subject, maybe they aren’t smart enough. If a relationship is troubled, maybe it just wasn’t meant to be. The fixed mindset comes with a lens of judgment, through which one sees success as a validation of talent or specialness, and difficulty or failures as proof of inherent shortcomings.

People with a growth mindset see failure as a sign of where they are, or their current status, which they can change. If they have difficulty with a subject, they can study harder or ask for help. If a relationship is troubled, they can reflect on things they or their partner are doing that may be producing negative results. With the growth mindset, failures become opportunities to learn and successes are evidence that your efforts are paying off.

Though written in an informal style, Dweck draws on her own and others’ research. She also draws examples from business, education and sports. She illustrates the mindsets in the lives of CEOs, teachers, students and coaches.

There are few points I’d particularly like to remember from this book. First, the fixed mindset is essentially rooted in pride. A person with a fixed mindset sees himself as special or superior to others, and much of he does is oriented to proving that point, at least to himself. A person with a growth mindset doesn’t expect to be good at anything, at least at the start, because he has much to learn and much effort to put into improving; he is humble.

It is important to praise rightly. Praising someone’s talent or ability tends to put them into the fixed mindset. This may make them less likely to take on challenges or put forth effort in the future. Instead, praise the effort, which puts people into the growth mindset and makes them or open to taking on challenging work, even at the risk of failure, in order to learn and improve.

Change is not easy. In particular, one with a fixed mindset must put aside the idea that he is special and let go of the strategies he used to protect that status. He must embrace a new, less idealized, image of himself that is open to challenges, setbacks, and even failures for the sake of learning—all things the fixed mindset guards against. When you adopt growth-minded strategies that produce positive changes, you can’t let up on practice and learning. People can easily slide back into old habit, and the fixed-minded judgment of the backslide can be worse than the judgment of the perceived failures before the change.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in

Future Bright by Martin E. Martinez

The Genius in All of Us by David Shenk

9 Things You Must Do by Henry Cloud

Succeed by Heidi Grant Halvorson

Your Intelligence Makeover by Edward F. Droge, Jr.

Dweck, Carol S. Mindset: The New Psychology of Success. New York: Random House, 2006.

Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell

Prior to reading Malcolm Gladwell’s book Outliers, I had seen it referenced by others in relation to the so-called “10,000-hour rule.” This is the concept that mastery of a complex skill takes about 10,000 hours of practice. This idea is not original to Gladwell, but his book popularized the concept.

That is not at all the point of Outliers. Instead, Gladwell takes on myths of success, especially the myths of genius and the self-made man. Certainly people of extraordinary achievement are intelligent and hard-working, but Gladwell shows that they also the beneficiaries of opportunities provided by their culture, sometimes very unique opportunities.

To start, Gladwell tackles our enchantment with intelligence (or talent). He describes research that shows that intelligence matters very little after it reaches some threshold. Once someone has enough intelligence to succeed at something, whether he succeeds for the degree of his achievement is not determined by intelligence. Other things are more important.

One of those other things is the amount of work someone puts into improving a skill (going back to the 10,000-hour rule). Even for a very motivated person, it is hard to put 10,000 hours into learning and improving any complex skill, especially while relatively young. Drawing from many cases (including Bill Gates and Mozart), high-achievers were enabled by opportunities provided by the culture (family, economic situation, law, technological development, etc.). In addition, they gained their mastery at a time when those abilities were highly valued (another cultural contribution that is often time-limited).

After establishing this foundation, Gladwell looks at other aspects of culture and success. Culture can contribute to success and hinder it. Cultures are persistent, yet some have found ways, at least in certain contexts, of overcoming limits to opportunities and opening the doors to success.

Culture matters. We like stories of the lone genius or plucky rag-to-riches go-getter. Without discounting their talent or effort, Gladwell shows that these stories typically veil the many opportunities and lucky breaks that were available to these successful people that very often were not available to others.

The implication is that we rely on luck to produced highly successful people, and luck doesn’t strike often. We could create cultures that provide more opportunities for more people. There are plenty of smart-enough people. Many of them are willing to work hard at something meaningful (itself something that is a cultural heritage). We might have many more successful people, and even more of those extraordinary performers, if we got serious about providing opportunities for everyone.

Malcolm Gladwell also wrote

Blink

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in

The First 20 Hours by Josh Kaufman

The Genius in All of Us by David Shenk

Mindset by Carol S. Dweck

The Organized Mind by Daniel J. Levitin

Rapt by Winifred Gallagher

Succeed by Heidi Grant Halvorson

Your Intelligence Makeover by Edward F. Droge, Jr.

Gladwell, Malcolm. Outliers: The Story of Success. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2008.

The Genius in All of Us by David Shenk

David Shenk has good news. Geniuses aren’t born, and very few of us have genetic limitation on our capacities.  Just to make sure you get it, his book is entitled The Genius in All of Us.

Shenk challenges the notion that genius, talent, and the potential to excel in a field is something a few people are born with, lucky people who hit the jackpot in the genetic lottery.  He is not entirely an advocate of nurture in the nature-versus-nurture debate.  He looks at new science that suggests that that is a false notion to begin with.  Traits, including intelligence, develop form the interaction of genes and the environment.

Genes are not a blueprint that determine out traits.  Genes influence our reaction to the environment.   The environment influences the expression of our genes.  It’s complex.  Shenk devote a chapter to epigenetics.  This is material in our cells that protect and support the function of our genes.  Our epigenes influence the expression of our genes, are influenced by the environment, and most astounding are hereditable.  Environmental and behavioral factors can change the epigenes in ways that are passed on to offspring for generations and affect the expression of genes in those offspring.

Unless we have some unusual genetic disorder, the lesson of this book is that our genes are just one card in the hand we are dealt, and genes are not necessarily the most important card.  Genes are important, but so are a lot of other things.  Our traits are malleable, shaped by genes, environment, and behavior, and to the degree that we can influence those things we can change our traits.  We can become geniuses.

The bad news is the road to genius is not an easy one.  Mozart and Michael Jordon have in common that they put in a lot of time over a many years deliberately practicing and improving their skills.  Beethoven and Yo-Yo Ma may seem like born prodigies, but they were surrounded my music, music teachers, encouragement, challenges, competition, high expectations, and opportunities from birth.  Abundant practice and continuing improvement from early childhood helped them become very competent musicians as children, and many more years of deliberate practice, commitment, and mentoring resulted in the genius they exhibited as adults.

Based on this, Shenk presents a chapter on how to become a genius.  Genius may not be quite the right word, especially if you starting something later in life after years of thinking you had little ability.  However, I think his advice is likely to lead to great improvement, even above normal success and excellence.  The first piece of advice is to find your motivation.  If you have the motivation to devote a lot of time to practice, and the commitment push yourself to always seek improvement, you will get better and with time will be excellent.  Shenk also has a lot to say about how this information can help parents and educators see the potential in children and contribute to the development of their traits and their success in any field.

I was very impressed with this surprisingly short book.  Actually, if you include the extensive notes, which are worth reading, it is not a short book.  It opened my eyes to a new, and I think more fruitful, way of looking at the way people develop.

Shenk, David.  The Genius in All of Us:  Why Everything You’ve Been Told About Genetic, Talent, and IQ Is Wrong.  New York: Doubleday, 2010.

Google

The Gentleman Scientists by Tom Schachtman

The period of time around the American Revolution coincided with the Enlightenment. In Gentleman Scientists and Revolutionaries, Tom Schachtman endeavors to present a history of American science during this time and show how scientific ideas influenced the founding fathers.

Shachtman starts with the colonial period. Because many of the formally educated people in America, including clergyman, had studied in Europe, Enlightenment science was taught to many of the founding fathers to some degree in their youths. As frontiersman, even in American cities and upper class, practical knowledge was considered to be an acceptable subject along with classical subjects. At the time, they wouldn’t have used the word “science,” nor would they have strongly distinguished the study of science from the professions of engineering, architecture and medicine or even agriculture and skilled trades.

Americans were well-read, and the many newspapers of the time introduced common people to scientific debate. In particular, Philadelphia newspapers (including one operated by Benjamin Franklin’s brother) sensationalized the debate over variolation (inoculation) to prevent small pox. The American reputation for science was slow to develop in the colonial period, but Franklin’s success in studying electricity proved that the colonies could produce scientists to match the European adepts.

The Revolutionary War did not bring scientific study to a stop, but it necessarily diverted a lot of attention. Even so, people continued to seek scientific and technological advances, especially if they might help the war effort.

After the war, the United States continued to develop its scientific talent. Schacthman culminates his book in the presidency of Thomas Jefferson and the period shortly after it. By this time, the nation had a depth of scientific talent and could mount and expedition to the western edge of the continent, start a steamboat line, and demonstrate that meteors originated in outer space.

Scientific ideas of the time shaped the founders’ political thinking. In particular, the Enlightenment was a period when many people abandoned the notion that knowledge was received from authorities. Knowledge could be discovered through observation of nature and the application of reason. In particular, people might discover the laws of effective government in much the way that Isaac Newton discovered the laws of motion.

A related idea was that knowledge was tested, adjusted and improved by experimentation. They did not imagine that they were creating a perfect government, they were instead applying the lessons they learned from previous experiments in ancient and European governments to a new experiment that may or may not produce the results they hoped for. In some ways, Americans are

still participating in that same experiment.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in

A Professor, a President, and a Meteor by Cathryn J. Prince

Common Sense by Thomas Paine

Defining Noah Webster by K. Alan Snyder

Empires of Light by Jill Jonnes

46 Pages by Scott Liell

The Invention of Air by Steven Johnson

His Excellency by Joseph J. Ellis

Steam by Andrea Sutcliffe 

Undaunted Courage by Stephen Ambrose

Schachtman, Tom. Gentleman Scientists and Revolutionaries: The Founding Fathers in the Age of Enlightenment. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2014.

The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay by Michael Chabon

Chabon, Michael. The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay. New York: Random House, 2000.
ISBN 0-679-45004-1

This novel is partly about comic books. It is more about identity, with corollary themes of family, race, nationality, sexuality, talent, profession, and self-expression.

The title characters, Joe Kavalier and Sam Clay, are cousins and creators of comic books during that medium’s golden age. They are fictional counterparts to the writers and artists who took elements from the popular arts of their day, explored the boundaries of a new medium, and created a form of storytelling. For comics fans, Chabon includes plenty of name-dropping and asides into the industry in that era. These elements don’t bog down the story, but fill in the background.

Joe escapes from Prague as a young man just at the Nazis are beginning to implement the isolation of the Jews there. By happenstance, he was born in the Ukraine and eligible for a Soviet passport. His family’s arrangements fail, and he is sent back to Prague. He enlists the help of Bernard Kornblum, an escape artist who taught Joe his art. Together, they smuggle the golem of Prague out of the country. Joe takes a long journey to New York, where he moves in with his aunt, Sam’s mother, and begins his creative partnership with his cousin.



Joe spends the rest of the book involved in escapes, with varying degrees of success. He tries to escape his survivor’s guilt, his grief, his hatred of those who killed his family, love, his own self-isolation.

Sam is a product of New York, an absent father and a caustic mother. He is a hustler, looking to escape poverty and loneliness, and later looking to escape the difficulties of his sexuality. He sees an opportunity in Joe’s artistic talent. Within a day, he persuades his boss, a seller of novelties, to publish a comic book; within a weekend, he manages to get his friends to produce one.

Joe and Sam are naturals to create a comic book superhero. They struggle to be and do things that seem out of their reach. They are like Tom Mayflower and the Escapist, the hero they created. Mayflower is a crippled kid who can only dream of being the great magician he longs to be. As the Escapist, he has the power do above and beyond what he imagined. Nothing can hold him. Through their creations, Joe and Sam engage in fictions that fulfill their own needs. Joe seeks revenge at first, and later seeks and reconciliation with his past. Sam seeks to end his loneliness, both his need for a father and a desire for a kind of love he could not safely pursue.

In the end, escapism becomes not just away to get a break from troubles, but a way of finding oneself. While Sam never becomes fully reconciled with his art, he finally gives himself the freedom to stop fearing and be himself. Joe embraces the comic book, and the escape it permits, as a way of both relieving the pressures of the world and to imaginatively deal with them.

• If your interested in this book, you may also be interested in The Chinatown Death Cloud Peril by Paul Malmont.

Me Googled

The top Google search results for that were actually me on June 17, 2009, were:
3. Keenan Patterson - EzineArticles.com Expert Author
11. Keenan Patterson
12. Keenan Patterson: ZoomInfo Business People Information
15. Keenan Patterson - Jefferson City / Columbia, MO Facebook
19. Keenan Patterson - Manager - Management Consulting XING
20. Keenan Patterson - Recommendations on BrightFuse - A Talent Community
22. Keenan Patterson - Google Profile
23. [PDF] ABSTRACT Introduction to Asset Management Keenan Patterson, Infra ...
30. Speakers, Presenters and Seminar Professionals XING
33. Effective Meetings - Three Concepts of Parliamentary Procedure for ...

In Memory Yet Green by Isaac Asimov

When I was a kid, my interest in science fiction was fed by reading many short stories from the heyday of science fiction magazines in the 1940s and 1950s. I particularly remember reading I, Robot, a collection of stories written by Isaac Asimov. (The book is still in bookstores after more than four decades. Will Smith is on the cover; his 2004 movie of the same title was based on one of the stories.)

Asimov wrote an extensive autobiography. The first volume, In Memory Yet Green, covers the first 34 years of his life. As you would expect, his life in that timeframe was similar to many other. He grew up, completed his formal education, started his career and started a family.

Like other famous people, Asimov had fortunate timing, talent, and willingness to work hard to achieve something. He is best known for his achievements as a science fiction writer. Writing was not his sole profession during this part of his life, but he was a fairly prolific writer and was well known in science fiction circles. He had a reputation in science fiction fandom before he ever published a fiction story. He was a fan of the early science fiction magazines and regularly wrote letters to them. He made friends with other fans, several of whom became successful writers along with him, particularly fellow Futurians.

As he put time into writing stories, his participation in fandom waned. His other career as an academic chemist also took up a lot of time. Though it is well known among science fiction fans, others may not be aware that had a Ph.D. in chemistry and was a professor at a medical school. He co-wrote two biochemistry textbooks during this period.

The book covers many aspects of his life, both professional and personal. He begins with his birth in Russia and ends as a husband (to Gertrude) and father (to David) on the verge of a career transition. In between he lived through two world wars, the Great Depression, and many other upheavals of the first half of the 20^th Century. Asimov shares his experiences and views of these events.

Asimov’s style in his autobiography is much as it is in his other writings: straightforward and often jovial. He is not shy about his accomplishments, but he is often humorously self-deprecating and willing to confess to his boneheaded moments.

The book will probably appeal mostly to science fiction fans. Asimov got in on the ground floor. He knew many of the other writers, editors, and publishers of his generation including Ian and Betty Ballantine, John Campbell, L. Sprague de Camp, Lester Del Rey, Robert Heinlein and Frederik Pohl.

If you’re interested in reading this book, you may also be interested in

The Ancient Engineers by L. Sprague de Camp

The Astounding, the Amazing, and the Unknown by Paul Malmont

Caves of Steel by Isaac Asimov

The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Robert Heinlein

Asimov, Isaac. In Memory Yet Green: The Autobiography of Isaac Asimov, 1920-1954. New York: Doubleday, 1979.

On a Grander Scale by Lisa Jardine

Christopher Wren (1632-1723) is famous as an architect. In particular, he is known for the mark he made on the architectural landscape of London after the Great Fire of 1666. St. Paul’s cathedral, where he is buried, may be the crowning example of his work, but he designed and built many churches and public buildings in what may have been an early model for a modern architectural and construction firm.

As any biographer of Wren must, Lisa Jardine covers his career as an architect in On a Grander Scale. She also emphasizes other aspects of his life, specifically the effect political upheaval may have had on his personal outlook and career, and his involvement in scientific pursuits leading to the establishment of the Royal Society.

Wren has a privileged lifestyle as a child. His father (also Christopher) and uncle had posts as Anglican clergy that brought the close to Charles I. Wren spent some important years of his childhood in a house in the walls of Whitehall. His family remained royalists during the Commonwealth and Protectorate periods, leaving them little access to the favored clerical and political positions they had enjoyed. The young Wren effectively operated as a secretary and assistant to academically minded, ousted royalists who turned to science and invention to establish their fortunes. His mathematical sharpness, mechanical handiness, and facility for drawing gained him favor in this group of Renaissance physicians, physicists, chemists and astronomers. While still a young man, he joined them as a peer and gained an appointment as an astronomy professor.

Wren remained active in these scientific circles, even when he was much in demand as an architect and royal construction manager (Surveyor-General of the King’s Works). With his good friend Robert Hooke (curator of experiments for the Royal Society as well as a designer in Wren’s office), he looked for opportunities to incorporate scientific study into buildings. The work of the precursor of the Royal Society was very collaborative, and Jardine shows how Wren took that into his later scientific and architectural practices. His willingness to collaborate with people he trusted was probably a contributing factor to his success as an administrator of so many building, scientific, business, public and political projects.

When the monarchy was restored, Charles II attempted to reward those who had been loyal to his father, or their sons. Wren never became greatly wealthy or powerful through preferment, but he did rise to some prominence and had a successful career in public service. Charles I made him Surveyor-General, and he was reappointed by James II, co-monarchs William and Mary, Queen Anne, and George I. He was charming, astute, cautious and conscientious, which served him well on his long career. He was perhaps too cautious (or upright), because he never gained the wealth many of his mentors and peers achieved.

Jardine shows how Wren was among a group of men who pinned their hopes on a restored monarchy that was never as glorious as they hoped it would be. Even so, Wren was resourceful, as were his family and sponsors, and he rose to a career that his talent for science and hard work made possible. She sets him in the context of his time and particularly of his relationships. These relationships were with other men whose fathers fell from favor with the monarchy, mentors and peers in the scientific community (especially his close friend Hooke), and trusted assistants in his architectural practice. Wren is regarded as genius, and Jardine would agree, but he is also very much a part of a community of similar people who, to varying degrees, shared his fate and aided his success.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in

Descarte’s Secret Notebook by Amir D. Aczel

The Feud that Sparked the Renaissance by Paul Robert Walker

The Science of Leonardo by Fritjof Capra

Jardine, Lisa. On a Grander Scale: The Outstanding Life of Christopher Wren. New York: HarperCollins, 2002.

Blink by Malcolm Gladwell

Gladwell, Malcolm. Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. New York: Back Bay, 2007.

We make a great number of snap judgments regarding very complex issues and often these decisions are better than we might have made with much analysis. Gladwell is interested in how this counterintuitive situation could be.

The key is what Gladwell calls thin-slicing. We can make good decisions with very little information because our unconscious mind has a knack for identifying and using the information that make a difference. Too much information may even be a detriment to good decision-making because it obscures the important details.

Blinks are often good decisions, yet they can fail. There are times when the unconscious can make bad decisions. Often this is because the unconscious is biased with misinformation; Gladwell discusses a test for hidden racial bias in which even he, with a Jamaican mother, showed preference for whites. This test and others show that stress and lack of time can reduce the unconscious’ ability to make good decisions; it’s fast but not instant. The unconscious also isn’t so good at decisions where there are relatively few factors to consider and the stakes are low; conscious analysis does better then.

Understanding snap judgments and how they work, even if the details are hidden from our conscious minds, allows us to improve our decision making. First, we can recognize areas where our snap judgments are weak or strong and arrange to use the most appropriate type of thinking. Second, we can inform our unconscious minds. We can train ourselves to make better snap judgments. Gladwell demonstrates this through the informed, but quick and largely unconscious, judgments of experts.


In the afterward to the 2007 edition of the book, Gladwell calls for action, or at least reflection, base on the concept of the blink. One area was the disparity of conviction and imprisonment of blacks and whites. He tells the story of how screens that block musicians from judges resulted in more women breaking into major orchestras. People couldn’t hear the important evidence of a performer’s musical skill and talent once they had seen she was a woman and unconscious bias tainted their judgment. Likewise, programs that attack conscious prejudice may have little impact on unconscious racial bias, and to hide the race of defendants from juries might actually help them make better decisions by eliminating information that is less relevant.

Succeed by Heidi Grant Halvorson

Grant Halvorson, Heidi.  Succeed: How We Can Reach Our Goals.  New York: Hudson Street Press, 2010.

Psychologist Heidi Grant Halvorson discusses the latest research on what works in goal setting in her book Succeed.  The way we think about and construct our goals has a lot to do with whether we achieve them.

There a few things that a strongly related to successful goal pursuit.  One is to have goals focused on “getting better” rather than on “being good.”  Many people focus on being good and operate from a theory that talent, ability and personal traits are fixed.  This can lead to discouragement and giving up in the face of difficulties (if you’re not succeeding now, you probably won’t later).  The more fruitful, and it turns out more true, theory is that many personal traits are flexible, even intelligence and personality.  If we make our goal to get better at something, it takes the pressure off of having to do things well at the start (of course you won’t do a new thing well the first time), and gives you the perspective of a learner who can be resilient when experiencing set-backs.

Another important aspect of successful goal pursuit is planning.  Grant Halvorson describes a type of simple planning that helps people achieve goals.  One of the especially powerful things about these plans is that you can foresee temptations and obstacles and plan your response.  If you plan in advance what you’ll do when someone brings doughnuts to the office (I once was acquainted with someone famous for shouting out “Who brought the damn doughnuts?”), you’ll be more like to do it and avoid eating one (or three).

Succeed includes many other strategies for improving goal pursuit.  The effectiveness of these strategies varies depending on what motivates the individual person or the type of goal being pursued.  Grant Halvorson provides simple tests to help the reader discover which strategies will work best for them.  I was not at all surprised by the type of things that motivate me.  I had not previously tried to structure my goals to take advantage of it.  I’m looking forward to putting that idea to the test.

The book also addresses positive thinking and optimism.  I’ve read quite a bit of self-help and you’ll find in some of that literature suggested that positive thinking and optimism is unmitigated good and the essence of achieving dreams.  Grant Halvorson says that imagining you will succeed is very good, but imagining it will be easy is not.  We need to recognize that the road to success has many obstacles, and realistically assessing the obstacles will help us deal with them.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in

The Procrastination Equation by Piers Steel

Secrets You Keep from Yourself by Dan Neuharth

Google

Dr. Horrible, the Hamlet of Nerds

Okay, comparing Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog to Hamlet, one of the greatest plays in the English language, is the type of hyperbole writers, especially on the Internet, use to draw in a reader.  I presume it worked on you.

There are points of comparison. Both are tragedies. Both feature lead characters giving themselves over to being people they might not really have wanted to become, at least not at the beginning. Both carry a sense of terrifying inevitability.

Having hooked you with Hamlet, I’m going to carry on about Dr. Horrible.  The film plays on concepts of nerdiness, jocks, and what is the potential tragedy of a world in which nerds can’t find a place for themselves (though they seem to be everywhere). It does so in the nerdy context of superhero films and musicals, the mash up of these genres being geeky itself.

About the Film

Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog was produced as a serial for the Internet.  The film was written by Joss Whedon, his brothers Zack and Jed, and Maurissa Tancharoen to produce something during the 2007-2008 strike by the Writer’s Guild.  It appeared on the Dr. Horrible Web site in three parts in July 2008 and is now available on DVD.

The familiar star of the film is Neil Patrick Harris, who plays Barney on How I Met Your Mother. I don’t enjoy that show much, but fortunately Harris has found other outlets for his performing talent. It is unfair to say Dr. Horrible launched her career, but I think it helped Felicia Day achieve a new level, especially on the Internet.  She is everywhere now and produces the Geek & Sundry YouTube channel.

Plot Summary

Dr. Horrible (Harris) is an aspiring supervillain.  He is seeking entry into the Evil League of Evil, but his prospects are threatened by superhero Captain Hammer (Nathan Fillion).

The pursuit of supervillainy is complicated by Dr. Horrible’s double-mindedness even more than his nemesis.  As his alter ego Billy, the doctor is smitten with Penny (Day), a girl he meets at the Laundromat.  She meets and begins to date Captain Hammer. Hammer recognizes his enemy and flaunts the affair.

Dr. Horrible retreats from the situation and focuses on the League.  They are not impressed with his recent failures, but he can prove himself by killing someone in one of his capers.  He plans to kill Hammer. Things go wrong when Horrible sees Penny at the event where he plans to exact his revenge and begins to experience a change of heart.  Hammer gains control of Horrible’s death ray, which is overloading. In spite of Horrible’s warning, Hammer uses the weapon, which explodes, causing him pain but no apparent injury. Fragments of the death ray hit the crowd and kill Penny.

In one stroke, Horrible loses his love and gains his dead victim.  He is admitted to the League. He abandons hope and embraces evil.  It’s dark stuff for a musical comedy.

Dr. Horrible: Protagonist, Villain, Nerd

Dr. Horrible is a nerd.  As support of this notion, if it isn’t readily apparent, I turn to the characteristics of nerds identified by Benjamin Nugent in American Nerd.  He suggests that people associated nerds with machine like qualities. Nerds seem machine like in that they

• like working with machines, having interest in technical subjects or complex hobbies, and
• prefer direct, logical, rule-bound communication to indirect, emotional communication.

In his first appearance, Dr. Horrible is recording a vlog entry in his lab. Throughout the film, he talks about his inventions and uses them. He is clearly at home in the realm of technology. Not only that, he identifies himself with science and technology with his costume: long white (lab) coat, long rubber gloves, and goggles.

While comfortable with technology and talking about it, he is uncomfortable with emotional communication. He has trouble expressing his feelings to Penny, and he has trouble reading the signs that she might be attracted to him. In light of this, he is oddly eloquent on his vlog.  In Quiet, Susan Cain noted that introverts often communicate a lot through social media, and rise to leadership in online communities.  They communicate very well when relieved of the pressures and distractions of face-to-face communications. Nerdiness and introversion aren’t synonymous, but I think it strengthens the case for Dr. Horrible’s nerdiness in his preference for technologically mediated communication that is formalized through a script (an unscripted vlog would not be eloquent) and music (with rules for rhythm, pitch, and rhyme).

Captain Hammer: Antagonist, Hero, Jock

Captain Hammer is the antithesis of a nerd: a jock.  I turn again to American Nerd to help make this diagnosis. Nugent notes that the nerd image was at one time associated with immigrant communities that were rising in population and status. Immigrant pursuit of New World opportunities was shaped by their Old World perspective, so they sought upward mobility in artistic and intellectual professions.

The established upper class wanted to both maintain its dominance and distinguish itself from lower classes, especially immigrants. They adopted a preference for athleticism and a suspicion of excessive intellectualism. Book-learning had its place, but a boy who would take his place as active leader in business, political, and military affairs needed to learn how to win. Sporting fields and athletic competitions were seen as the classroom for these skills. Athleticism as associated with a certain class (because such vigorous leisure required time and resources).  This magnified the upper class sense of superiority.

We can see this in reflected Captain Hammer. His superhuman physical superiority seems to be a justification for his overall sense of being superior to others, especially the weaker and physically cowardly Horrible. Even his activities as a do-gooder seem to lack a moral motivation outside a vague noblesse oblige. He seems more interested in establishing and maintaining his status. For instance, his support of Penny’s campaign to end homelessness is motivated by the positive publicity he receives, not by love of his fellow man—he does not perceive value in homeless people.

The Tragedy of Dr. Horrible

Dr. Horrible, then, is a classic conflict between a typical nerd and a typical jock, except they are a supervillain and a superhero in a comic book-style world where such people exist. Where is the tragedy?

We’ve already noted the death of Penny. That is enough to make the film a tragedy, but not necessarily a nerdy one.

The tragedy of the nerd is to be trapped in alienation. Admittedly, nerds seem to be increasingly popular nowadays, but the more traditional image of a nerd is of one alienated from popular society because his machine-like qualities are not valued in a culture that sees emotional display and sensitivity as more worthy and human.

Nerds are not naturally loners, though. They have a long history of building their own communities. Science fiction fandom is a good example. Long before the Internet, sci-fi fans built communities of letter writing and zines around popular magazines. Before long, they began gathering at clubs and conventions. This culture carried over into comic book fandom (for more on this check out Men of Tomorrow by Gerard Jones). Nugent notes how a similar community of nerds, also readers popular magazines, formed around ham radio, where technological skill and rule-bound communication were prized.

We’ve noted that Dr. Horrible also seeks connection to a community. He specifically identifies his desire to be part of the League.  His quest for world domination is also motivated by a desire to connect with the wider community of humanity. He wants to take over the world not because he hates people, but because he longs for a logical meritocracy that would rid the world of all the trouble cause by emotionalism, celebrity culture, and doublespeak. In his fantasy, he would naturally rise to the top of such a society.

Captain Hammer frustrates these efforts at connection. He reinforces a culture of athleticism and emotional communication that Horrible cannot participate in. When he finds a sympathetic soul who may be able to help him make that connection, Hammer sweeps her away. At last, Horrible wins entry into a community, but the League is evil and inhumane, and can only serve to further dehumanize its members. The cost to Horrible to finally belong is high; he must turn his back on the rest of humanity and give up the hope of ever loving or being loved by another. He is completely alienated, cut off from meaningful and fulfilling connections to others.

The Sequel

A sequel is reported in the works and expected to be released this year.  I would expect most of the major characters to return.

I imagine many fans would like to see Day reprise her role as Penny, though the character died in the first film.  Because this is a superhero movie, there are several ways around this: time travel, cloning, robotic or holographic doubleganger (it’s a word, and it doesn’t need an umlaut), or reanimation (no zombies, please).  Maybe Dr. Horrible will try all of these things, each effort going more wrong than the last. He could be forced to team up with Captain Hammer to fend off an army of time-travel replicated, cyborg zombie Pennies, but I probably wouldn’t watch it because I’m creeped out by the walking dead.

Making Your Connection

You may be nerd seeking connection, too.  I’ve provided a little information below where you can find out about the people behind this film and the books I mentioned. They’re involved in other things and you may find that work interesting. Please do not cyberstalk them.  I don’t want that on my conscience.

Susan Cain

Book: Quiet (review)

Facebook: AuthorSusanCain

Twitter: @susancain

Web site: www.thepowerofintroverts.com

Felicia Day

Facebook: Felicia Day

Google+: +Felicia Day

IMDb: Felicia Day

Twitter: @feliciaday

Web site: feliciaday.com

YouTube: Geek & Sundry

Nathan Fillion

IMDb: Nathan Fillion

Twitter: @NathanFillion

Neil Patrick Harris

IBDB: Neil Patrick Harris

IMDb: Neil Patrick Harris

Twitter: @ActuallyNPH

YouTube: Neil’s Puppet Dreams on Nerdist

Gerard Jones

Book: Men of Tomorrow (review)

ComicBookDB: Gerard Jones

IMDb: Gerard Jones

Red Room: Gerard Jones

Web site: www.gerardjones.com

Benjamin Nugent

Book: American Nerd (review)

Web site: www.benjaminnugent.com, www.americannerdbook.com

Maurissa Tancharoen

IMDb: Maurissa Tancharoen

Jed Whedon

IMDb: Jed Whedon

Twitter: @jedwhedon

Joss Whedon

IMDb: Joss Whedon

Web site: whedonesque.com

Zack Whedon

IMDb: Zack Whedon

Twitter: @ZDubDub

Google

The 80/20 Manager by Richard Koch

Richard Koch is an author and former business consultant who has emphasized the Pareto Rule, which he has branded the 80/20 principle, as a basis for personal improvement, management and organizational development. In The 80/20 Manager, he particularly focuses on managers in businesses.

The basic principle is that 80 percent of the results are produced by 20 percent of the inputs. For instance, a great majority of a company’s profits will result from a few of its customers and products. Similarly, 80 percent of the problems are caused by 20 percent of the constraints. A manager can be more productive by focusing his time and energy on the few things that really matter for producing big results and not wasting it on the many other things that don’t have much effect.

Koch identifies ten types of managers who make use of the 80/20 principle. He has a chapter on each type showing how they find and focus on the vital few things the produce big results. An individual manager is unlikely to operate in all these realms equally. Use the principle and find the one or two types that are likely to produce the best results for you and your organization  and concentrate on developing those skills. As you advance, you may add new or more advanced management strategies if they have the potential to work for you.

The book is a bit uneven in the description of these types of managers. In some cases, Koch provided definite strategies or skills, specific ideas or actions, and examples from the experiences of managers. In others, some ideas are presented, but less concretely.

I found some things in this book that resonated with me. These were areas where I already have talent or skill that is particularly valuable in my work. It makes sense that these are areas where I can get the best results by moving from good to excellent while also requiring the least effort. Perhaps that is the best value of Koch’s discussion of the types of manager; it breaks a broad concept down into more discrete, understandable pieces that give you something to hold onto and a place to start.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in

The 4-Hour Workweek by Timothy Ferriss

Koch, Richard. The 80/20 Manager: The Secret to Working Less and Achieving More. New York: Little, Brown and Company, 2013.

The Peter Principle by Laurence J. Peter & Raymond Hull

Peter, Laurence J., & Raymond Hull.  The Peter Principle.  New York: William Morrow, 1969.

It’s very likely you’ve heard the Peter Principle, or some paraphrase of it: “In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence.”  It’s been around for more than 40 years (KBR doesn’t claim to review the latest books).

It’s a cynical thing to say, too.  The humorously pseudo-academic tone used by Laurence J. Peter (an actual academic) and Raymond Hull does little to soften the cynicism.  I don’t think they were trying to be sarcastic.  I think they were a little bit serious.

The Peter Principle makes sense.  Organizations promote people based on their performance in their current job.  Eventually, promotions lead a person into a job for which he is not competent.  I used to work in an organization that had almost no promotion potential except through the ranks of supervisor and managers, though almost all the employees were technical experts of one sort or another.  The talent that made employees excel on the front line had little to do with making good supervisors and managers.  Middle management mediocrity and misery was common.

Corollaries to the Peter Principle predict that misery.  Even incompetents who are too deluded to recognize it feel the stress of their shortcomings and suffer physically and mentally.

Peter and Hull demonstrate the principle and its corollaries through case studies.  They describe the cases humorously, but I suspect they have some basis in reality, especially since many come from educational institutions, Peter’s area of expertise.

They suggest a possible solution in creative incompetence.  That is, do what you do well and enjoy, but be just bad enough at something inconsequential to your work, but important to you boss, to make yourself appear incompetent for promotion.

It goes against the grain.  Bookstore shelves are full of books on getting ahead, getting a promotion, getting a better job, getting richer, and generally getting.  Peter and Hull suggest the opposite: You’ll do more good if you stick to doing what you do well.  You’ll be happier, too.  You may not be richer or more powerful, but if that costs your health and joy, is it worth it?

I think it is easier to opt out of hierarchies than it used to be, thank to advances in communication and information technology.  Even so, large organizations in both the private and public sectors are common for many good reasons and a hierarchy is an efficient way to organize.  If you don’t work for a hierarchy, you still deal with many.  The Peter Principle may help you recognize problems and deal with them with good humor and grace.  It may even help you find ways to avoid becoming part of the problem.  On the other hand, it may just cause you to pull your hair out in frustration.

If you’re interested in this book, you may also be interested in

The 4-Hour Workweek by Timothy Ferriss

The Leadership Triad by Dale E. Zand

Revved! by Harry Paul and Ross Reck

Seamless Government by Russell M. Linden

The Vulnerable Fortress by James R. Taylor and Elizabeth J. Van Every

Google