" 'Real artists ship.' " - Steve Jobs
Could it be that the difference between a generalist and a dabbler is just saying 'this is as done as it's going to be' and shipping the work?
I think maybe yes. If you look at Jefferson, da Vinci, Jobs — they shipped. A lot. I think the dabbler moves on when he's 95% complete, so he never gets the completion, satisfaction, and feedback from completing a work.
Also, by completing a work in a field, you gain some renoqn and prestige, which makes it easier to get in touch with other successful people, which speeds your learning curve.
The dabbler moves on when things get tough. The generalist keeps going until he puts enough work out that he feels complete in a particular field, and then, and only then, is he on to the next thing.
And that's perhaps the difference. I'm still regularly surprised by which of my projects are winners and which are not. It's never the ones I guess or anticipate. By shipping, you have a chance to win. If you don't ship, you don't win. You don't even lose. You don't get the lessons, the feedback, or connect with other people in the field. You don't get the satisfaction and boost that comes from shipping." - Sebastian Marshall, Ikigai
Marshall discusses how we encourage people to specialize, because that leads to a clearer career arc — but many of history's biggest contributions have come from generalists.
A lot of people think they're generalists — great at nothing, but good at a lot of things, and making unique connections between those things — but most "generalists" are dabblers. They do nothing because they're trying to do everything.
I have this problem. It sucks.
He concludes, and I agree, that the difference is actually having something to show for your thinking and work.
Most smart, thoughtful people are perfectionists. Especially in today's oversaturated Internet age. You log on, see the world flooded with hordes of nonsense, and figure it's better to sit in your cave and ship nothing until you're sure it's useful. I admire people who think that way. I think that way.
But it's bullshit. As Marshall writes, you can't predict your best work. You can't wait until it's perfect to ship, because you can't know how perfect it is until you get feedback.
If you're not a perfectionist, maybe you need to ship less. Put more thought in. But most people are the opposite. They're already thoughtful, they just need to realize that making something bad, with good intentions, isn't a sin.
Maybe this sounds mean, but realize I'm saying this to myself, too. Not shipping anything is arrogant and selfish. It claims that you — and me — are such geniuses that we know what's good and bad and perfect, and that if we just wait a bit longer, we'll win our Nobel Prize.
Except, really — we're just afraid of producing something not-great. Even though every successful generalist has 50 decent works and 100 pieces of crap for their one masterpiece.
People can't see how great you are if you complete nothing.
And you won't complete anything great if you don't complete a lot of mediocre work.
So get shipping once it's "good enough."
This post might suck. Sorry.
My book might suck, too.
