What a sensational piece. As a full-time novelist in the US, and the only income producer in the family, I spend a lot of time considering all of the above. I love how you brought Brian Eno into it. For me, it is indeed about striking a balance. I need to stay in my lane to some degree, meaning I can't abruptly change genres or write something that doesn't have page-turning momentum without risking my income, but I can't simply fall into a cookie-cutter pattern or I risk casting my soul into the depths of Hades. In the end, I find I have to keep mixing it up, pushing myself, taking giant risks, so long as those risks are calculated in a way that I can continue to make a living as a writer. Thanks for sharing such eloquent thought, Henrik! Glad I found you.
Henrik, thank you for this exposition, the idea of 'mode collapse' so beautifully described. I love the implicit exposition of your inner process, appreciating the roots of interest, curiosity and desire as they reach into conceptual mapping, strategy and verbal expression, where they might just homogenize into the collective chorus. I rode along with you easily, and sure enough, in the last few paragraphs you referenced the promptings in your own experience that keep creativity robust and potent: the intuitive juice, the attraction and excitement, regardless of fear, that keeps you awake and alive. There's today's multicolored hedgehog with 47 legs! Wahoooooooo!
Thank you, I like this a lot. The idea of "mode collapse" I hadn't heard of before and really captured something I have been thinking about; the balance between making something to maximise a parameter versus creating something that is purely from your own perspective. Kids still just have their own perspective. Whereas once you are out in the commercial world it's hard not to chase profit maximising. Now with the internet, AI and analytics, that feedback loop becomes even tighter and gives loads of immediate metrics that can be chased after. As soon as you start chasing some metric is it even art anymore or is it just a product? But then we all need to pay the bills. It's a tricky balance and I am not sure how people escape that trap
This reminds me of something David Graeber said once. When you write a successful book (Debt: The First 5,000 Years in his case), the world makes it really difficult to do anything worse. A hit means giving the same talk about the same book as many times as possible.
He made the opposite decision and cashed in his new cultural capital to write a book about bullshit jobs, something that was deeply transformative for me. It not only helped articulate my own struggles in pointless employment but sparked a growing interest in sociology, economics, and more. I’m incredibly grateful that he made that choice. And I’m excited you’re thinking the same way.
Selfishly, I think the Proust book club would be awesome and that essays the size of cathedrals, as a programming+writing project, would be really cool to see. Unselfishly, the last option is palpably the most intriguing to you, and it’s probably the most eno-esque in that it slightly scares you and is more for you than it would be for your readers. Feeling called to something even though you aren’t sure it will have tangible output is such a green flag.
Some twenty years ago, when I went to film school in Brussels, I actually had no clue what I was doing. However, I made some of my best work during those days (at least that's what I thought). Later, we were of course taught to use a predefined film language and certain formulaic structures for writing. And yep, I then became trapped in that container, unable to work outside those boundaries. All the spontaneity and experimentation started to fade away.
I still believe I've never reached the same feeling I was able to create whilst I was still 'ignorant' of how a good film should be made. So now I at least try to let go of those stubborn conventions in my writing.
I think this whole discussion is about personality, too. Some of us, like Eno, need variety to stay alive creatively. And although I'm also more of an "Eno type," I do need to mention that I have immense admiration for artists who stubbornly pursue a singular vision. The photographer, always taking the same kind of image of a landscape. The entire oeuvre, then, becomes one big collection in the same catalogue. For me, that's a reminder that we don't always need to reinvent ourselves to remain authentic or even original.
I'd love to see some data on whether people who have a job take more creative risks and so does more interesting work. In entrepeneurship, in general, I know there are studies showing that there is a bigger success rate when people start companies on the side rather than quit their job to start something new. For similar reasons: the people with a job can afford to be more longtermist and openended in their search.
I was about to write a comment pointing this out, in case you hadn't noticed it!
This is quite a random recommendation, but you might enjoy reading Unquiet Landscape by Christopher Neve. Partly for what he took from conversing with artists, partly for his approach to writing about painting by not writing about it.
Anyway, thanks for writing this. I could do with taking on this exercise of listing out possibilities, both now and repeatedly.
I'm in for a reading club. Can be Proust, whos In Search of Lost Time I've already read, but would be open to revisit in a nice reading club situation (my former reading ended with me being invited to the 80th birthday of the German translator of the complete Tadie edition, for we where in contact about many of the footnotes and stuff like that).
But: what about Robert Musil and his Man with no Qualities, or, since that also lies around at home, what about James Joyce' Ulysses?
I just wrote about the parallels between human and model collapse, and my own life experience learning how to uncollapse myself. Once you see the parallel, it is clear. Society wants humans and machines to narrow our focus and be deterministic, that’s how we become value generators in this world. But what makes us human is knowing when and how to fight the collapse.
This was an absolutely refreshing read that resonated. Thank you for sharing these thoughts and your ideas on what to do next (I also like the last one!). We look forward to it.
I am notorious for having a very interconnected and curious brain. As a result, I read a varied set of book and essay genres, I talk to a lot of people including strangers and occupy my time with questions that are not "useful" by any standards. These definitely fill up my inspiration batteries.
However, the game changer has been analog writing, pen and paper. It reduces distraction and forces my brain to slow down and process each thought better. I found this does produce more original and creative essays.
Reminded me of this from Bezos’ final shareholder letter:
> We are all taught to "be yourself." What I'm really asking you to do is to embrace and be realistic about how much energy it takes to maintain that distinctiveness. The world wants you to be typical - in a thousand ways, it pulls at you. Don't let it happen. You have to pay a price for your distinctiveness, and it's worth it.
The fairy tale version of "be yourself" is that all the pain stops as soon as you allow your distinctiveness to shine. That version is misleading. Being yourself is worth it, but don't expect it to be easy or free. You'll have to put energy into it continuously.
(...)
Never, never, never let the universe smooth you into your surroundings.
The struggle never really ends. So even after you have your freedom to write, you can still get stuck in the mode collapse. Wishing you luck as you implement your ideas.
What a sensational piece. As a full-time novelist in the US, and the only income producer in the family, I spend a lot of time considering all of the above. I love how you brought Brian Eno into it. For me, it is indeed about striking a balance. I need to stay in my lane to some degree, meaning I can't abruptly change genres or write something that doesn't have page-turning momentum without risking my income, but I can't simply fall into a cookie-cutter pattern or I risk casting my soul into the depths of Hades. In the end, I find I have to keep mixing it up, pushing myself, taking giant risks, so long as those risks are calculated in a way that I can continue to make a living as a writer. Thanks for sharing such eloquent thought, Henrik! Glad I found you.
Henrik, thank you for this exposition, the idea of 'mode collapse' so beautifully described. I love the implicit exposition of your inner process, appreciating the roots of interest, curiosity and desire as they reach into conceptual mapping, strategy and verbal expression, where they might just homogenize into the collective chorus. I rode along with you easily, and sure enough, in the last few paragraphs you referenced the promptings in your own experience that keep creativity robust and potent: the intuitive juice, the attraction and excitement, regardless of fear, that keeps you awake and alive. There's today's multicolored hedgehog with 47 legs! Wahoooooooo!
Thank you, I like this a lot. The idea of "mode collapse" I hadn't heard of before and really captured something I have been thinking about; the balance between making something to maximise a parameter versus creating something that is purely from your own perspective. Kids still just have their own perspective. Whereas once you are out in the commercial world it's hard not to chase profit maximising. Now with the internet, AI and analytics, that feedback loop becomes even tighter and gives loads of immediate metrics that can be chased after. As soon as you start chasing some metric is it even art anymore or is it just a product? But then we all need to pay the bills. It's a tricky balance and I am not sure how people escape that trap
This reminds me of something David Graeber said once. When you write a successful book (Debt: The First 5,000 Years in his case), the world makes it really difficult to do anything worse. A hit means giving the same talk about the same book as many times as possible.
He made the opposite decision and cashed in his new cultural capital to write a book about bullshit jobs, something that was deeply transformative for me. It not only helped articulate my own struggles in pointless employment but sparked a growing interest in sociology, economics, and more. I’m incredibly grateful that he made that choice. And I’m excited you’re thinking the same way.
Selfishly, I think the Proust book club would be awesome and that essays the size of cathedrals, as a programming+writing project, would be really cool to see. Unselfishly, the last option is palpably the most intriguing to you, and it’s probably the most eno-esque in that it slightly scares you and is more for you than it would be for your readers. Feeling called to something even though you aren’t sure it will have tangible output is such a green flag.
Some twenty years ago, when I went to film school in Brussels, I actually had no clue what I was doing. However, I made some of my best work during those days (at least that's what I thought). Later, we were of course taught to use a predefined film language and certain formulaic structures for writing. And yep, I then became trapped in that container, unable to work outside those boundaries. All the spontaneity and experimentation started to fade away.
I still believe I've never reached the same feeling I was able to create whilst I was still 'ignorant' of how a good film should be made. So now I at least try to let go of those stubborn conventions in my writing.
I think this whole discussion is about personality, too. Some of us, like Eno, need variety to stay alive creatively. And although I'm also more of an "Eno type," I do need to mention that I have immense admiration for artists who stubbornly pursue a singular vision. The photographer, always taking the same kind of image of a landscape. The entire oeuvre, then, becomes one big collection in the same catalogue. For me, that's a reminder that we don't always need to reinvent ourselves to remain authentic or even original.
I love your way of thinking. You’re going against the grain… full-time jobs allow for more risk in creative work? Thank you, happy new year!
I'd love to see some data on whether people who have a job take more creative risks and so does more interesting work. In entrepeneurship, in general, I know there are studies showing that there is a bigger success rate when people start companies on the side rather than quit their job to start something new. For similar reasons: the people with a job can afford to be more longtermist and openended in their search.
Code a map for subscribers to connect with others who are nearby?
i love this way of thinking! for now it is best newsletter in my list
"I note that the last idea attracts me the most."
I was about to write a comment pointing this out, in case you hadn't noticed it!
This is quite a random recommendation, but you might enjoy reading Unquiet Landscape by Christopher Neve. Partly for what he took from conversing with artists, partly for his approach to writing about painting by not writing about it.
Anyway, thanks for writing this. I could do with taking on this exercise of listing out possibilities, both now and repeatedly.
I'm in for a reading club. Can be Proust, whos In Search of Lost Time I've already read, but would be open to revisit in a nice reading club situation (my former reading ended with me being invited to the 80th birthday of the German translator of the complete Tadie edition, for we where in contact about many of the footnotes and stuff like that).
But: what about Robert Musil and his Man with no Qualities, or, since that also lies around at home, what about James Joyce' Ulysses?
Henrik, great piece.
I just wrote about the parallels between human and model collapse, and my own life experience learning how to uncollapse myself. Once you see the parallel, it is clear. Society wants humans and machines to narrow our focus and be deterministic, that’s how we become value generators in this world. But what makes us human is knowing when and how to fight the collapse.
https://open.substack.com/pub/manosai/p/fighting-the-collapse-is-a-form-of?r=2ip8t&utm_medium=ios
This was an absolutely refreshing read that resonated. Thank you for sharing these thoughts and your ideas on what to do next (I also like the last one!). We look forward to it.
I am notorious for having a very interconnected and curious brain. As a result, I read a varied set of book and essay genres, I talk to a lot of people including strangers and occupy my time with questions that are not "useful" by any standards. These definitely fill up my inspiration batteries.
However, the game changer has been analog writing, pen and paper. It reduces distraction and forces my brain to slow down and process each thought better. I found this does produce more original and creative essays.
Reminded me of this from Bezos’ final shareholder letter:
> We are all taught to "be yourself." What I'm really asking you to do is to embrace and be realistic about how much energy it takes to maintain that distinctiveness. The world wants you to be typical - in a thousand ways, it pulls at you. Don't let it happen. You have to pay a price for your distinctiveness, and it's worth it.
The fairy tale version of "be yourself" is that all the pain stops as soon as you allow your distinctiveness to shine. That version is misleading. Being yourself is worth it, but don't expect it to be easy or free. You'll have to put energy into it continuously.
(...)
Never, never, never let the universe smooth you into your surroundings.
The struggle never really ends. So even after you have your freedom to write, you can still get stuck in the mode collapse. Wishing you luck as you implement your ideas.
I really hope you become the peripatetic interviewer. Exactly the kind of thing I’d want to read