Introspection: How do I want to engage with the world?

[steuard]

This isn't so much another cruise post as a cruise-inspired post. It's about me, and about some introspection that I began in its aftermath. I'll get to the point, and leave notes on specific inspirations to the end.

At some point in my distant past (I'm thinking maybe high school?), I more or less consciously decided on a multi-layered approach to interacting with the world. The idea was that I should appear to be more or less "normal" and respectable at a casual glance, so I could go about daily life with minimal social friction. A closer look or spending more time around me would quickly reveal my unexpectedly quirky/weird/funny personality, which would resonate with kindred spirits and make spending time together more fun for everyone involved. And beneath that, those who really got to know me would recognize my shining core of awesome and know that I was wildly competent and unshakably trustworthy. (Nope, I've never been full of myself at all. :) )

That all sounded like a great idea at the time (particularly if you can keep from rolling your eyes at the "awesome" bits). But I've begun to realize some fundamental flaws in this strategy. Most obviously, who are these layers for? Who in my life really gets below layer 2 to see the core of who I am? Heck, how many people have ever even seen past layer 1? The trouble with having an outer "normal" layer is that (by design) even people you'd love to meet are unlikely to give you a second glance. My high school self may have been eager to avoid unsolicited attention, but I'm coming to the conclusion that people who welcome it (or at least accept it) often lead more interesting lives.

But it's worse than that. When that "normal" layer is my primary interface with other people, it inevitably gets a considerable share of my energy and attention, not just out of the need to maintain it but simply out of habit. And that almost certainly sucks some of the life and vividness out of the core of me, where it's most needed. I don't think I'm willing to accept that, now that I've recognized that it's going on.

I haven't figured out what to do about it yet, and even once I have a plan it's awfully hard to reconfigure one's established habits while buried in the daily pressures of the academic year. But I know I want to make some changes. Broadly speaking, I think I'd like to strip off that outer layer (and keep it around as an optional cloak rather than a constant camouflage), and I'd like to devote more energy to expanding and strengthening that inner core and using it for good. (Miles Vorkosigan would strip off the second layer, too, but I don't think I could handle the intensity of "all awesome core, all the time".) It's going to be a long journey to figure it out, but I'm grateful to have realized that I need to travel at all. (Now I just need to make sure my plan is compatible with getting tenure...)

---

So what did the JoCo cruise have to do with all this? A lot of little things came together to get me thinking about this stuff. There were of course the handful of "nerds that I don't want to grow up to be", but that was a relatively minor factor.

A larger one was realizing that my shyness and hesitation about approaching strangers would be moot if I were even a fraction as overtly unique and creative as Sara "chicazul" was (shown here in one of the many homemade outfits she wore every day), because a lot more strangers would be inspired to make that first move for me. Not that I'm creative in that same way, but the point is that she was vividly memorable to pretty much everyone on the cruise. She made an impression, and her self-assurance and personality were visible at a glance. I'd like to figure out what core aspects of my personality might be able to produce something akin to that effect.

Another event that made a lasting impression on me was the rise of Famous Tracy (in the first three minutes or so of this video). As previously described, at the Q&A session Tracy mentioned pretending to be famous. When John Hodgman joked that she was famous enough to be on stage, too, she immediately got up and joined them. It was awesome, and I immediately had two thoughts: 1) I sincerely hoped that I would have leapt at that opportunity with as little hesitation as she did, and 2) I wasn't sure that I would have. (I suspect it would have depended on my mood, and I'd rather it didn't.)

A factor which I know was central in getting these thoughts flowing was John Roderick's concert on Thursday night. No one song was a specific trigger, but everything he sang was tinged with regret and sorrow. The specific topics weren't necessarily what connected with me, but all together he left me fed up with unproductive emotions like angst and regret. (To pick two samples out of many, here are videos of "Seven" and
"Stupid".) I walked out of his performance convinced that "there's a better way to live one's life than that" and looking inside myself to see if I was falling into any similar traps.

My conclusion from all that? "Good cruise!" I expected it to be fun, but this variety of inspiration was a (welcome) surprise.

Comments

[jon-leonard.livejournal.com]

I have a different model: I have a bunch of aspects, and some subset of them are appropriate in different contexts.

So while I behave differently in the grocery store than I do at a game night, and both of those are different from how I act when I'm working, none of those are really an "outer layer". My appreciation for math shows when I'm doing tutoring, and somewhat on game nights, etc.

What's appealing about something like the cruise is that it's a different context, and one where geeky things are much more appreciated.

So anyway, I think it's more a question of "I'd like to, when can I ...?" than layers.

But maybe I'm missing something important.

[steuard.livejournal.com]

Back when I sorta-consciously came up with this system (I'm working on very vague memories here, but I think they're accurate), one of my design principles was a desire to avoid having significantly different behaviors in different contexts. (I'd rather be one solid consistent "me" all the time, and I was actively trying not to set myself up for inconsistencies if two contexts happened to overlap. I suspect you've implemented the "aspects" idea in a way that avoids those issues, of course.) So the idea of my layered approach was that I'd act more or less the same way everywhere, and what people saw would depend mostly on how hard they bothered to look. (So maybe part of what I'm hoping to do is re-tune those "hard look" thresholds.)

As for the cruise being a different context where geeky things are appreciated, that was certainly true. Chicazul herself said something to that effect when we talked (well, tweeted) about some related things after everyone got home: 'I strive to be unapologetically "me", but it is easier to do when I'm surrounded by awesome people.'

[beth_leonard]

I don't know which layer you thought you were using in college, but I always thought you were wildly competent and unshakably trustworthy.

I guess it depends on what one's definition of "normal" is for the normal layer as to whether or not to wear it during most social interactions. Professor Moody comes to mind. He was in many ways more socially "normal" than many academic types, but he was still sufficiently quirky to let his inner core shine through. Even in grocery stores I'm sure.

--Beth

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

I never got the feeling he had layers. He just always seemed to be comfortable with everyone, including himself, all the time.

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

Normal exteriors!

So I have been getting more into style these last few years. I read fashion blogs. I have taken a nerd's attention to detail and analytical prowess to internalizing this unfamiliar field of data.

I realized, at some point, I am not in high school, and there is not actually a contradiction between caring how I look and being a nerd. Also that even if I am wearing nice clothes it is not as if people won't notice I'm a nerd. For instance, they could talk to me for, say, five seconds.

There will be some people in the "nerd" category who don't approach me because they won't think I'm in the "nerd" category. But I think, if people are that bound by categories, I was not all that interested in getting to know them anyway.

There will be some people who talk to me because I look safe and then discover I am not normal at all. *rubs hands in glee*

I revel in the thought of making people's stereotypes -- both normal people *and* nerd people -- clash up against each other that way.

On the other hand, I am actually interested in the clothes. And the stereotype clashes. This stuff is fun for me. Sounds like your outer layer is not fun, just self-defense. I'm in favor of smacking down that sort of adaptation.

[zathrus.livejournal.com]

I was initially surprised, once I reconnected with you online, to discover this interest in fashion and clothes and shoes. It was, at first, a little bit confusing. But we nerds do have bodies just like everyone else, we do need to clothe them somehow (unless we intend to provoke an entirely different set of interesting reactions, which I note would be dangerously cold in our respective locales at this time of year), and I find that it is a relief to have outgrown the high school nerd's need to ignore all things physical. It was a useful protective strategy for a while, allowing me to belong to a group that struggled greatly with low self-esteem and huge self-doubt and thus needed the propping up of believing themselves superior in some way: "We don't waste our time on that silly 'appearance' stuff!" But we're not high schoolers any more, and it's a relief to have outgrown both the self-doubt and the denial of the physical. I do have a body, people are going to base their reactions to me in part on what I look like, and I might as well acknowledge this and give my body and clothes some attention. (Which is not to say that I will be joining you on your journey into fashion any time soon; style and fashion still befuddle me to a great degree, and I don't really want another field of data to analyze just now. I look for clothes that make me happy with how I look and that fit into my life functionally, and I no longer feel superficial or weird for discussing hand lotion or the like with other women. After all, any product that can save my hands from cracking open and bleeding in the cold is worth talking about; likewise, things that make me feel more accepting of and at home in my body.)

And that last bit right there -- feeling accepting of and at home in my body -- that, I think, is what a lot of this is all about. Being comfortable with our exteriors (whether physical or the personalities we project), and liking what they say about our interiors; liking our interiors enough to want other people to see them; and having the self-confidence to let them be seen when we don't know what the reactions to them will be. I still struggle with parts of this; I know, for instance, that many of the employed women in my community look down on the SAHMs they meet, and do so more when they perceive a significant gap in clothing/image, which is part of my "happy with how I look" calculation above. Can I dress such that I am welcomed into normal female conversations in the community without sacrificing my other criteria? Can Steuard strip off that outer layer and still get tenure? Some fear of rejection still lurks there, and justifiably so; the balance between slavish efacement of self and isolating devotion to self regardless of cost is something I still struggle with, however much more comfortable I may have become with who I am.

Newt

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

I was initially surprised, once I reconnected with you online, to discover this interest in fashion and clothes and shoes. It was, at first, a little bit confusing.

*g*

A couple of things playing into that, some of which you noted:

1) Just because the Western tradition is obsessed with mind/body duality doesn't make it true. OK, I'm still one of the most cerebral people I know, but one need not devalue the body to value the mind, or vice versa.

2) As steuard also noted, we send signals with our appearance whether we mean to or not. That high school ill-fitting-T-shirt and jeans thing indicated things about our social roles just as surely as up-to-the-minute fashion would have.

3) If I think about fashion as showing off my body -- in particular as trying to make it appear tall and thin -- it's intimidating and depressing. (Times when I will actually be tall and thin: never.) If I think about it as showing off me, it's a lot more fun. I actually do like me and I want other people to interact with me and think I'm interesting. Maybe I should not dress in so much brown. Rawr!

4) As I mentioned, it's fun screwing with people's expectations. Like I screwwed with yours :).

[stereotype441.livejournal.com]

3) If I think about fashion as showing off my body -- in particular as trying to make it appear tall and thin -- it's intimidating and depressing. (Times when I will actually be tall and thin: never.) If I think about it as showing off me, it's a lot more fun.

I really like this idea. Thanks for pointing it out.

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

(But yes, the acquisition of the knowledge took years -- years of reading relevant texts, watching makeover shows when I was sick or needed something mindless in the background, analyzing the outfits of random people on the street and what I did/didn't like about them and how I would change them. Analyzing it nerd-core. And this was just to develop the basic competency of what mainstream women's fashion sanctions; I'm still working through how to apply that to both my body and my personality successfully, and I have barely even considered what the canons of non-mainstream fashion might be (not least because there are fewer books). I also have not the faintest idea of how men's fashion worked, because there is no reason for me to devote that kind of analysis to it.)

Can Steuard strip off that outer layer and still get tenure?

Given that your previous sentence pertained to clothing...I'm intrigued.

[steuard.livejournal.com]

Wow: "intrigued" is a more positive reaction than I would have expected. :)

But every joke I try to come up with as a followup to that just ends up making me feel cold, considering what's outside right now.

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

I should say that, the context being tenure, I was thinking, perhaps in the cafeteria, in front of the dean?

See? Intriguing.

[zathrus.livejournal.com]

I've gotten as far as discovering that there are styles that emphasize my not-tall-and-thin-ness, and others that work better with my body type and allow me to look reasonably human and me-ish. I've even developed the ability to recognize which is which when I'm wearing them and looking in a fitting room mirror. Figuring out which is which while looking at clothing on the rack, OTOH, I still fail at. And since much of the clothing I really like isn't available in stores (at least at prices I consider reasonable), I end up sewing a lot, which makes it harder to try it on and look at it in a mirror before committing to it. :) Which is to say, if there's any one book you know of that will tell me some reasonably straightforward way to tell beforehand what sort of clothing looks decent on someone with our body type, that would totally rock and be worth my time.

Or, you know, maybe I should get over my shyness and reticence and actually go to one of those mid-to-high-end department stores (which ones are those, BTW?) and ask them for help, with the expectation that I'll buy one rediculously expensive outfit as an investment in knowing what to design for myself for much much cheaper.

Gah. In theory, I'm all for rejecting the mind/body duality. In practice, the whole area of body and clothing maintenance bugs me. I want my body to work, dangit, without having to swallow pills or put time into mindless exercise or go for annual physicals or whatever, and I want my closet to magically contain clothing that fits, looks good on me, and that I like, without having to go all angsty over what other people will think of it. And when you add in the issues of wardrobe maintenance -- laundry, mending, replacing, etc. -- ugh. Just ugh.

(And yesterday is probably making more than usually cranky about everything right now. My apologies.)

Newt

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

with the expectation that I'll buy one rediculously expensive outfit as an investment in knowing what to design for myself for much much cheaper.

Yeah, I confess I have not done the personal shopper thing, though I *have* done the "buy an extremely expensive bra in order to accurately learn my size". And I think of it, not as spending that much on clothes, but as engaging some of a specialized consultant's time. And I don't expect specialized consultants to be cheap. Then, of course, I can take the knowledge and apply it elsewhere.

(That said, friends + thrift stores can be equally effective for knowledge acquisition, if one has the right friends.)

[steuard.livejournal.com]

That's an intriguing set of observations you've got there. I have very little interest in clothes or style for their own sake, but there have been a few occasions when I've seen people (string theorists, even!) who dressed in a particularly sharp or striking way and thought, "Huh, that makes a stronger impression on people than just talking physics alone would." Maybe what I need is a style consultant on retainer. :)

And as for that last bit, I suppose it's not that my outer layer is actively anti-fun, but rather that it's just kinda dull. It's probably getting pulled out more often these days for dealing with college administration folks or other "grown up" sorts of situations. Or maybe this whole thing is just my version of a mid-life crisis wondering why I'm not world famous yet. :) (Or perhaps, worrying that I don't see a clear path toward being world-famous in front of me at all. Not that I'm dying to be world famous per se, but it would be rather pleasant to deserve to be.)

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

The mid-to-high-end department stores seem to all offer free personal shopping services these days. Style consultants are not hard to acquire.

But yeah, I've also realized that, fair or not, the way I look *is* part of the message I'm conveying. And maybe it would be nice if that tool were under my control.

[steuard.livejournal.com]

And here I thought I was kidding. (Mind you, I'm not sure where my nearest mid-to-high-end department stores are these days. And I'm really, really not used to spending a lot on clothes. I'm almost tempted to try it.)

[kirin]

It's hard to have an objective perspective about this, since I know you well enough that I think I just see right through your "normal" layer. In fact, I have to think pretty hard to conjure up instances in my memory where you were presenting it. Granted, I've spent a lot more time around your in casual situations than formal ones. Actually, no, the more I think about it, the more I see exactly what you're describing, but like I said, I see right through it so I never paid it much mind.

Though I think one thing going in your favor here is that, barring accidentally pissing off anyone with relevance to your tenure, our society actually has quite a lot of tolerance for "quirkiness" in your chosen profession.

[steuard.livejournal.com]

That's a fair point about quirky professors. :) I probably shouldn't be as concerned about that aspect of things as I've tended to be. (See also my comment to former student lordhylas below.)

[stereotype441.livejournal.com]

This reminds me of some good conversations I've had with my therapist about more effective strategies for finding new friends (and dates), the gist of which went something like this: "Paul, you're a quirky guy. And in your life you are going to run across people who are compatible with, and even love, your particular quirks, and you may not even know it when you meet them. The only way you're going to recognize when you meet those people is if you let your quirks hang out, even to strangers and casual acquaintances, so that those people who dig you for the quirky person you are can notice you and say 'I really dig that person'."

I'm getting better at it, and I've discovered that a wonderful side benefit of giving myself permission to be quirky around strangers and casual acquaintances is that I feel more relaxed and more comfortable, because the way I'm behaving is in better concert with how I feel inside. Of course, it's not without its risks (e.g. one of my quirks is my frequent shoelessness, and that has created some uncomfortable situations), but on the whole it's been totally worth it.

[lordhylas.livejournal.com]

Well, you clearly know that I don't wear a mask now, and haven't for quite some time (effectively ever). I came to the conclusion quite a long time ago, that, while most people where masks (very few people really show their true self to the majority of the world), I just simply didn't want to do so. Why should I? For whom was the mask? There can really only be two answers to that questions, and both involve insecurity. the first answer: the mask is for everyone else. Well, why? This implies a need to please everyone else, which most certainly would come out of certain insecurities. Also, it's, as you said, energy devoted to pleasing people about whom, honestly, I could not care much less. The second answer: to hide imperfections in my own character. This again implies insecurities. Well, yes, I have character flaws, but, why hide them? They are part of *me*, and, if they're so horrible they need to be hidden, then why not just strive to correct them rather than hiding them behind a mask? So, I came to the conclusion that wearing a mask for the rest of the world, trying to take on that semblance of normality, was just a great big waste of time and energy. So, screw it. No mask. If people can't accept me for me, then, they're not worth my time. And by not putting up a front of normality, they get exposed to *me* that much quicker, and waste that much less of my time. Consider it a filtration process. Those who are worth your time are going to like the real you layer.

When I first met you, I obviously met the outer layer, the "normal" you. I could tell there was something under there, but you did present a bit more conservative a you than I would have cared to be friends with. I'm certainly glad I got to see more of the real you, and that I've come to know you better. I just wish we lived closer together so we could hang out.

[steuard.livejournal.com]

I think that I've ramped up my "normal" layer somewhat since I started teaching (especially while I'm teaching). As a professor, I feel like I have something of a responsibility not to alienate any of my students (even the ones who I probably wouldn't get along with particularly well as friends). So I aim for "slightly goofy but approachable", and I generally avoid talking much about politics or acting so weird that I drive people away (away from my help, or worse, away from physics). I won't swear that's the only reasonable way to approach the job, but it's what has felt right to me thus far.

On the other hand "(potential) teaching time" accounts for rather a lot of my average day, which may be why that "normal" layer has felt a bit more prominent lately. I need to find ways of bringing my core self to the fore without compromising my more or less professional relationship with (any of) my students.

[lordhylas.livejournal.com]

Agreed! And you definitely do a good job of being approachable.