What "No" Really Means
I was inspired by a brief article entitled The Function of Failure by Dr. Cheryl Lentz (RefractiveThinker.com). Dr. Cheryl's basic premise
in this wise and succinct piece is "fail faster to succeed sooner."
Her allegory stars an imaginary plumber by the name of Peter. We are aghast
that this dude has the brass to charge $100 for what looks like a mere 15
minutes of work. Yet, the good doctor reminds us, we are not only paying Pete
for the work he's done today to unclog our toilet, but for the many times he failed
to fix similar problems in the past. In other words, Peter's time and expertise
comes at a premium rate now only because we can depend on him to get the job
done once and for all in a single, quick visit. And, he's earned his sterling
reputation for reliability as well as his high price tag by failing to get 'er
done a number of times previously.
"The quicker Peter failed (Translation: learned how not to fix
something)," Lentz concludes, "the sooner he succeeded -- and
learned." We writers are usually not called upon to "fix"
something. In fact, the vast majority of us are not "called upon" at
all. We write, fueled by compelling creative impulses and blind faith. Then,
ultimately, we have to go and sell our poetry door to door (not literally, but
that's what it feels like). The second part of the equation amounts to a gig
with a ridiculously high rate of failure.
Every profession has its inherent expectations for success. A major league left
fielder is at the top of his game if he gets a hit 30% of the time or more.
Pete the plumber wouldn't have a prayer of sustaining a thriving business with
that batting average. A veteran NBA shooting guard is guaranteed tens of
millions every season for making a mere 45% of his shots from the field. A
plumber is expected to perform at a 95% clip at the very least. And, if he
doesn't get it right today, he is obliged to return pronto to make good on his
shortfall.
According to Jimmy Webb (one of the most successful pop song crafters in
history), "...best case scenario," for songwriters, "90% of our
work will be completely ignored by the public." Here's the hard-to-face,
bottom-line truth: as a tunesmith, you can keep workin' at it for a lifetime --
in fact, you could even be the most brilliant melodist and/or lyricist in the
entire Universe -- and there is still no guarantee you will ever see an iota of
success. Not one dime of income, not one smidgeon of recognition, not even a
pat on the back -- other than from your parents, a supportive aunt, cousin, or
a dewy-eyed, admiring next-door neighbor. This same reality, I think you'll
agree, applies to nearly every artistic pursuit. There IS one guarantee,
however: IF you stop practicing your craft, stop doing the work, if you pack it
in, you will NOT succeed. Hmmmm.
So, in order to keep those creative juices flowing and survive (if you can call
a series of inevitable rejections "flow"), we writers need to
continue to work smarter, always seeking excellence, persevere, gut it out, and
look at every "no" as what it actually is: another step closer to a
"yes." Corny as Nebraska in June, I know. But, that's the absolute
minimum amount of faith required here. It's hard, but nobody's gonna cut those
tunes if they don't hear 'em. And, if they do hear 'em, you will definitely get
a whole lot more passes than cuts, even if you're one of the Top Dogs like
Jimmy Webb. When my friend, Hall of Famer Rory Bourke, was asked if it ever got
easier, he responded thusly: "No, you just hear 'no' faster."
We all tend to take rejection personally. But, here's an absolute fact: a
"no" is less a reflection on you or your work than it is a revelation
of the state of mind of the gatekeeper giving you a two-thumbs down. As a
songwriter, novelist, playwright, screenwriter, poet, or whatever your creative
aspiration is, "no" doesn't necessarily mean that your work is not up
to par, or that you are incapable of delivering the goods. If you have any
talent at all and you're actively doing everything you can to hone your skills,
what "no" means is that the person on the other side of the desk is
simply not looking for what you're putting in front of her at this very minute.
However, take heart, brothers and sisters because there is good news: IT CAN
TURN ON A DIME. Tomorrow (I kid you not), the same piece that just received a
boisterous raspberry could suddenly become the flavor of the month.
This is not to say that everything we create is flawless, that we shouldn't
continue to seek coaching, listen to and apply feedback, always striving to
sharpen our tools. Yes, every one of us has his or her own direct connection,
as it were, to the gods of inspiration. But, ultimately, for most of us, great
writing is re-writing, re-writing, re-writing. Only a dogged,
nose-to-the-grindstone pursuit of excellence can achieve a truly competitive
result. In other words, we have to fail time and time again to finally succeed.
For a writer, it's not just "fail faster to succeed sooner," it's
fail enough to find any success at all.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Eddie Heinzelman on -
Great points, Rand, and so true. How many times have songs been turned down (multiple times) only to then be cut sometimes years later and end up as huge hits? Like Billy Yates' story about pitching "Choices" to George Jones...it's so funny when Billy tells it, and such a great example. I think the difficulty these days is the flux of the business and everyone (writers, musicians, publishers, labels...everyone) is searching for the next "how" and often get tied up thinking about that to the point where it interferes with their output and action.
Thanks again for sharing your insight and encouragement!
-
Permalink Reply by Rick Millward on -
Keith Urban's latest #1 (by Radney Foster) is another example of a song that's been around a while and even had cuts and never took off...by coincidence I first heard that song 10 years ago...and I didn't think it was a hit, either...So there seems to be a certain randomness that makes it interesting to say the least...
It's always comforting for me to remind myself that the arts are different. Ultimately, there's no "good" or "bad", aside from technical issues, and it seems that with the explosion of talent we've seen in recent history that musical ability is as natural to humans as breathing. Commercial success can't be one's prime motivator, though along with the impulse to create is the impulse to share and people who will pay to listen, so we have a market of sorts. Why not try to earn money with your music? Well, as a business model, it's hard to justify...you need other reasons.
My favorite is "Winners never quit, and quitters never win!"
-
Permalink Reply by Rand Bishop on -
Michael, are you talking actual Big Foot sightings are just claims of sightings?
Assuming that all songs are equal (unsafe assumption, I know, but for the sake of argument), there are two primary reasons why one song is chosen over another: it either bears the name or names of proven, hit writers (i.e. writers who, like Pete the Plumber, have won reputations as reliable, go-to tunesmiths) or there is some political, economic, or ego-driven reason for a decision maker to prefer it (i.e. the artist, producer, or somebody close to the project has something to gain from the song's success).
This is not a new phenomenon in the music business. In fact, this brand of politics has ruled pop, rock, r&b, and hip hop forever. And now, even on Music Row, the quality and uniqueness of the song is less important than who wrote it. That's why I pretty much restrict my writing to collaborations with young/upcoming or established artists and producers. Although I love writing with other pros, there are fewer and fewer opportunities for our songs, unless the artist, producer is involved with their creation.
A writer can either face that reality or struggle against an increasingly strengthening current. I'd rather go with the flow than fight it.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe Pasquale on -
"And with the current state of our industry and the broader economy, who can blame people for cutting songs because they have a piece of (or wholly own) the publishing?"
This succinctly sums it up michael!!! bravo- now the next step after identifying the problem is to address the industry "bien-pesants" and make changes- good luck on that - circuity will most likely be the route to success and that is already happening ;)
cheers!
-
Permalink Reply by Bret Teegarden on -
Joe, did you mean Circuit City was the route to success? LOL!
-
Permalink Reply by Rand Bishop on
-
Ah, Circuit City, the perfect corporate model: spend millions on every store, millions in monthly overhead, a ton on transporting products from location to location, big bucks on advertising, yet expect to be profitable on volume sales alone, at tiny mark-ups.
Btw, I hope I've made it absolutely clear that I have nothing against any artist or producer who chooses to cut his or her own songs -- especially if that artist and/or producer co-writes the song with me. In fact, that route is and has always been the most direct route to songwriting success. Since it is highly unlikely that most of us will be able to book a co-write with Toby Keith or Keith Urban or Miranda Lambert or Taylor Swift, we'd be smart to keep our eyes and ears peeled for the next breakout artist and get with him, her, or them. My friend Jon Robin wrote the #1 "I Breathe In I Breathe Out" with Chris Cagle, when Cagle was tending bar. Most of Liz Rose's T-Swift hits were written five years ago, before the kid had a record deal. Kent Blazy wrote "If Tomorrow Never Comes" with a boot salesman/janitor wannabe named Garth Brooks. Patience, persistence, vision, as well as the capability of rising to the occasion when you're called upon to perform -- those are some of the key qualities that can turn the key.
And, here's the best part: if you write with the artist, you've eliminated ALL of the "No People." Altho it doesn't guarantee that your number's gonna come up, it gives you a whole lot better chance.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Mitchell on -
Thanks for these thoughts.
-
Permalink Reply by J. Rickey Patin on -
WOW~ Informative and inspirational article! A must read for everyone in this town.
Latest Activity
© 2013 Created by Bret Teegarden.
