I am wary of falling into the same trap with this blog that I did with my photography, namely, letting the product spoil the process. Several years ago, when I decided to try to sell my photos, I found I enjoyed shooting less and less. My outings became more about creating product than creating art. Before a shot, I would ask myself, “Would someone buy this and hang it on their wall?” Most of the time I would answer “no” and then walk away. Eventually, I shot about as many photos as I sold, which is very few. I’m “taking a break” from photography now, to see if I can get back some of my eye and my enthusiasm.
Turning to this blog, I am well aware that only a handful of people read what I write here. Face it, this isn’t Facebook. On the one hand, I question whether it is time well-spent doing something that floats off into nowhere, seen by no one. On the other, do I really want this to be about building and maintaining readership? I’m afraid that if I impose some measure of success or economic goal onto this effort, I’ll kill it.
There’s a tension here. I enjoy the process of writing but take more pleasure in sharing and interacting. One is an avenue to the other. I’m not the kind of person who could, say, put an easel and paint and canvas in a studio and spend years in isolation working to find his muse and perfect his art. For me, not shared is about the same as not done.
I’m not one to quote the Bible (or Shakespeare or Nietzsche either) but this sums up my views on human creative effort: “Neither do men light a candle and put it under a bushel, but upon a candlestick, that it may shine to all that are in the house.” I need to focus on keeping the candle lit and stop counting how many people are in the house.
In the news today (from the Wall Street Journal):
“Eastman Kodak Co. said Chief Executive Antonio Perez received total compensation valued at $5.7 million in 2010, less than half of what he earned a year earlier as he missed the company’s performance targets.”
I worked at Kodak for 30 years. I still have a mild interest in its future, though 90% of the people I knew there have left or have been laid off.
“This isn’t the first time Perez didn’t meet performance targets. In 2008, he received none of his performance bonus. This year he was eligible for 40% of the bonus, but after considering shareholder input, the compensation committee halved the award to 20%.”
Poor Mr. Perez. Since he joined the company in April 2003, Kodak stock has fallen from $31.47 to $3.47, a loss of 89%. If you were a retiree with $90,000 of Kodak stock when Perez came on board, you would have $10,000 today. Congratulations, and good luck with those health insurance premiums.
“Kodak, which forecast another year of losses this year amid continued weakness in its film business, expects to become profitable in 2012.”
Yet another “wait til next year” for (remaining) Eastman Kodak investors and employees. You might think that a board of directors, after seven years of such performance, might do something more than cut their CEO’s “award” from 40% to 20%.
Even the Pittsburgh Pirates, who have had 18 straight losing seasons, changed managers six times over this span. I think the Pirates have better prospects.