Name:
Location: Columbus, Ohio, United States

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Studio 60, Championship Lacrosse, and Bad Leadership (alternative title: The Limitation of Talent)

Every Monday night I catch up on paper work and flip to Studio 60. I'm like the Joads without the quest, but with the same milky dissapointment.
No. Not at all. What a horrid analogy.
The whole show does what I just did--bend over backwards to try to showcase some trite literary or cultural knowledge without actually saying or doing anything. Any story, to actually be a story requires conflict, and motion, and action. Each scene requires a drive shaft. Lit crit wonks can go nine rounds on the elements of style, but the bottom line is that if you say something it should actually say something. People watch verbs.
In addition to the rancor with which it blows what pisses me off about Studio 60 is that it has some potential to be awesome. There is an unbelievable level of talent and a writer who I truly believe has a once-in-a-generation mind for narrative and style. It then proceeds to piss that potential down its leg. It's fine merlot used to cook spam.
My JV lacrosse team was dissapointing last night. They didn't hustle. They are not displaying skill. They are not displaying unity. I was ashamed and expect much more.
At heart the team and the show had the same problem.
Champions do the stuff that doesn't take talent. In writing that's defining a broad vision, working on character development, creating scenes that are cohesive and have a drive shaft, and editing until the prose is what it needs to be. In lacrosse that's hustle, and skill development, and film study, and discipline.
In High School they find kids with nice hair who can spell and they call them leaders. They then define leadership as the ability to paint broad vision. That's part of it, but it's not what makes leaders fail or succeed. Teams of any kind win when they get people to buy in to the stuff that doesn't take talent.
I failed at that a little bit the other day. That was bad leadership.

3 Comments:

Blogger Justin said...

"The bottom line is that if you say something you should actually say something."

Yup. I lose this sometimes. I write to write...I write to stretch, and to flex, and to feel it come out of me. And that's fine. But when I bother to publish it on my blog...I hope it's more than just auto-literoticism. (By god, that's awful).

Clever phrasing and word choice is pretty. But you're right...if you're going to bother saying something on a mass scale (like prime-time TV)...it's good if you can say something.


"People watch verbs."

I could hug you for this one.



"There is an unbelievable level of talent and a writer who I truly believe has a once-in-a-generation mind for narrative and style. It then proceeds to piss that potential down its leg. It's fine merlot used to cook spam."

As I watched a repeat of a late-model Simpsons last night, I felt the same way. I would write more about this, but I already did (about 3 blog posts ago), and this isn't about the Simpsons. The point is, talent like that dropped into a bad commercial enteprise and motivated by bad leadership ends up being a really sad waste.

"Teams of any kind win when they get people to buy in to the stuff that doesn't take talent."

This makes total sense to me. Look at Chris Henry and Deltha O'Neal. Both LOADED with talent. Both only barely making a showing. Then look at Rudy Johnson. LOADED with talent...but what makes him a great player is that he spends a lot of time learning how to stand up when you have five guys on you, and then how to keep standing when that sixth hits your legs. This is not talent. This is raw hard work...and it's probably not that fun...and it's what makes Rudy a great player.

Does this mean Marvin Lewis is a good coach? I don't know. Good coaches produce Rudy Johnson and Chad Johnson, who get up early to run and stay late to watch game films...neither of which require talent. Bad coaches produce Chris Henry and Deltha O'Neal, who drink and drive the night before the big game, get pissed when they get disciplined, and generally believe that their talent supercedes their need for rules and self-motivation.

What was your bad leadership?

Peace,
Justin

6:33 AM  
Blogger RA Cook said...

J--
Bad leadership when my team lost.
They weren't convinced of the need for the stuff that didn't take talent.
They weren't convinced because I failed to convince them.
So they lost. And what's worse they lost a chance to improve.

6:51 AM  
Blogger Keith W said...

you two should write a book; "If I Did It"

"leaderships seacrets of a loosing lacrosse team"

(losing is purposluey misspelled in response to your tirade about words... and purpos..... whatever.)

KW

5:53 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home