I've been struggling with this too in terms of trying to build capacity in people to thinking differently about education and schooling primarily because of what the future portends. Is the inherent value simply in sharing the ideas because you believe in them even if it feels like most aren't there with you? If money is the driver, is it worth it to dilute the ideas (or the presentation) in order to get more "sales"? Is an audience of 600 worth the effort?
It does all come down to how we define "success" and the fidelity we keep to our beliefs and ideas. Really appreciate you sharing your own struggles with this.
This resonates so much! I often need to remind myself that it's not necessarily how many, but who you connect with -- and I simply cannot stomach the idea of changing/diluting the ideas in order to increase attention (this is deeply engrained in me as an academic who believes that ideas/insights should be built on rigorous analysis and thinking, and not on sycophantically regurgitating what is popular or gets you traction)
I think defining success with humility is a good start -- just so hard to do sometimes :)
I went through this in my own more limited manner here on Substack. When I first came here I tried to write on topics that seemed important to the future, nuclear weapons, the knowledge explosion, violent men (tannytalk.com). It went nowhere. I tried to stop writing for awhile and focus on promoting in Notes. Got more subscribers, but not more engagement. What good are readers if they don't engage?
So I closed that first blog, gave up on the audience, and started making hippy cartoons and AI content (hippytoons.com). If nobody is going to engage, at least I should have more fun.
What I'm working on now is taking some of the big topics on tannytalk, and trying to convert them in to video presentations on hippytoons. I'm trying to blend the silly with the serious to make the ideas more engaging. Not sure if it's going to work. Example here: https://hippytoons.com/p/world-peace-table-of-contents
Trying to connect with both academics and the general public seems a tricky business. Maybe trying to write one book that can reach both audiences is a mistake? I dunno.
Maybe academia needs to welcome a new speciality, marketing? As example, what if philosophy departments had specialists whose function was to take sophisticated books and convert them in to a more accessible YouTube format?
One of my projects was to dumb down some great work done by Alex Wellerstein. He created a sophisticated tool for estimating the impact of various nuclear weapons on any city in the world. It's a very useful tool, but is perhaps a little too sophisticated for the general public.
I dunno. Perhaps the bottom line is that there are only so many people interested in such big picture ideas as the future. Other topics on Substack seem far more popular, as example. Perhaps we should encourage Britney Spears to write a book about the future?
Finally, it's become less and less clear to me that we can impact the overall course of the modern world with our thinking and writing, no matter how prominent, sophisticated or articulate we might be. As I get older if feels ever more like we are riders on the bus of history, and not the driver of the bus. There are fundamental elements of the human condition that have been unfolding since before we were even human. Trying to edit such ancient factors with mere culture may be an exercise in wishful thinking.
Would love to -- and I think there's a lot to talk about here, from why people write books, to misconceptions around why they write them, to the attitudes and support of colleagues etc (I was told to stop self-prompting!), to how important messages can cut through the noise when the book market *is* rife with self promotion and mediocre content that is, nevertheless, well-promoted, to how grounded ideas, perspectives and understanding are spread through society when there's such resistance to experts speaking out sometimes ...
Andrew, as usual, your thoughts and insights are honest and quite helpful. I too struggle with how to best take what I know and disseminate it to those who can benefit from it. (I’ve even started a TikTok for teachers and students to learn about AI). I think what you just described in your post is a good strategy— meet your audience where it is- Be it YouTube, Substack, LinkedIn, Reddit, or a hardbound book. In fact, perhaps the book is your best instrument to illuminate your ideas by talking about them on podcasts- so the book is the vehicle that opens the door! Keep writing!
I've been struggling with this too in terms of trying to build capacity in people to thinking differently about education and schooling primarily because of what the future portends. Is the inherent value simply in sharing the ideas because you believe in them even if it feels like most aren't there with you? If money is the driver, is it worth it to dilute the ideas (or the presentation) in order to get more "sales"? Is an audience of 600 worth the effort?
It does all come down to how we define "success" and the fidelity we keep to our beliefs and ideas. Really appreciate you sharing your own struggles with this.
This resonates so much! I often need to remind myself that it's not necessarily how many, but who you connect with -- and I simply cannot stomach the idea of changing/diluting the ideas in order to increase attention (this is deeply engrained in me as an academic who believes that ideas/insights should be built on rigorous analysis and thinking, and not on sycophantically regurgitating what is popular or gets you traction)
I think defining success with humility is a good start -- just so hard to do sometimes :)
I went through this in my own more limited manner here on Substack. When I first came here I tried to write on topics that seemed important to the future, nuclear weapons, the knowledge explosion, violent men (tannytalk.com). It went nowhere. I tried to stop writing for awhile and focus on promoting in Notes. Got more subscribers, but not more engagement. What good are readers if they don't engage?
So I closed that first blog, gave up on the audience, and started making hippy cartoons and AI content (hippytoons.com). If nobody is going to engage, at least I should have more fun.
What I'm working on now is taking some of the big topics on tannytalk, and trying to convert them in to video presentations on hippytoons. I'm trying to blend the silly with the serious to make the ideas more engaging. Not sure if it's going to work. Example here: https://hippytoons.com/p/world-peace-table-of-contents
Trying to connect with both academics and the general public seems a tricky business. Maybe trying to write one book that can reach both audiences is a mistake? I dunno.
Maybe academia needs to welcome a new speciality, marketing? As example, what if philosophy departments had specialists whose function was to take sophisticated books and convert them in to a more accessible YouTube format?
One of my projects was to dumb down some great work done by Alex Wellerstein. He created a sophisticated tool for estimating the impact of various nuclear weapons on any city in the world. It's a very useful tool, but is perhaps a little too sophisticated for the general public.
NUKEMAP: https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
I offered a simpler version of his work here: https://www.tannytalk.com/p/nukes-the-impact-of-nuclear-weapons
I dunno. Perhaps the bottom line is that there are only so many people interested in such big picture ideas as the future. Other topics on Substack seem far more popular, as example. Perhaps we should encourage Britney Spears to write a book about the future?
Finally, it's become less and less clear to me that we can impact the overall course of the modern world with our thinking and writing, no matter how prominent, sophisticated or articulate we might be. As I get older if feels ever more like we are riders on the bus of history, and not the driver of the bus. There are fundamental elements of the human condition that have been unfolding since before we were even human. Trying to edit such ancient factors with mere culture may be an exercise in wishful thinking.
Boy, this is a sobering piece to read as I consider re-entering book world. Why don’t you come on my sustain? What show to talk about all of this?
Would love to -- and I think there's a lot to talk about here, from why people write books, to misconceptions around why they write them, to the attitudes and support of colleagues etc (I was told to stop self-prompting!), to how important messages can cut through the noise when the book market *is* rife with self promotion and mediocre content that is, nevertheless, well-promoted, to how grounded ideas, perspectives and understanding are spread through society when there's such resistance to experts speaking out sometimes ...
Andrew, as usual, your thoughts and insights are honest and quite helpful. I too struggle with how to best take what I know and disseminate it to those who can benefit from it. (I’ve even started a TikTok for teachers and students to learn about AI). I think what you just described in your post is a good strategy— meet your audience where it is- Be it YouTube, Substack, LinkedIn, Reddit, or a hardbound book. In fact, perhaps the book is your best instrument to illuminate your ideas by talking about them on podcasts- so the book is the vehicle that opens the door! Keep writing!
The future hasn’t failed yet! It’s a great feeling to read your previous book and think that the words have become more true and/or necessary still.
Thanks Jeff!