Re: [silk] The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

[Ingrid]

On 14 June 2011 10:03, J. Alfred Prufrock wrote:

> *Chestnut alert - "If you can get paid for doing what you enjoy, you never
> have to work another day in your life."
>
> I have a 5 year deadline to get to that state.
> *
>

Can absolutely vouch for that old chestnut. Have been the beneficiary of
such a state for all but 18 months of the past 25 years. 

Re: [silk] The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

[Mahesh Murthy]

>> After much soul-searching and profound thinking, I have found that the
>> only acceptable level of trade-off is what your spouse/significant
>> other/kids allow you to get away with.

I've found the contrary to be true. Live life with no trade-off whatsoever
and the near and dear around you love you even more for it, making
allowances for you and your proclivities.

Re: [silk] The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

[Radhika, Y.]

>
> After much soul-searching and profound thinking, I have found that the
> only acceptable level of trade-off is what your spouse/significant
> other/kids allow you to get away with.


AMEN.

-- 
“Be careful what you water your dreams with. Water them with worry and fear
and you will produce weeds that choke the life from your dream. Water them
with optimism and solutions and you will cultivate success. Always be on the
lookout for ways to turn a problem into an opportunity for success. Always
be on the lookout for ways to nurture your dream." ~ Lao Tzu
(courtesy -Peacefrog)

Re: [silk] The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

[Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay]

On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 8:45 PM, Udhay Shankar N  wrote:
> I got recommended a book called "The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work"[1]
> today. I am unlikely to get hold of it due to a couple of adverse
> reviews I read

It isn't specifically a bad read. I was a bit intrigued by the
reviews. The book picks up specific occupations and, not too diverse
at that, and thereafter provides some narrative to the pleasures and
sorrows part.

Worth a read if you pick it up from somewhere.

-- 
sankarshan mukhopadhyay

Re: [silk] The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

[J. Alfred Prufrock]

*Chestnut alert - "If you can get paid for doing what you enjoy, you never
have to work another day in your life."

I have a 5 year deadline to get to that state.


-- 
J. Alfred Prufrock

"Gliding wrapt in a brown mantle, hooded
I do not know whether a man or a woman
- But who is that on the other side of you?"*

Re: [silk] The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

[Charles Haynes]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Shoba Narayan  wrote:
>> From: Udhay Shankar N 

>> internal dialogue. What is the acceptable level of trade-off? How does
>> one define "acceptable", anyway?

>> So, how does everybody else deal with this?

> After much soul-searching and profound thinking, I have found that the
> only acceptable level of trade-off is what your spouse/significant
> other/kids allow you to get away with.

Is the relationship reflexive? I.E. is their only acceptable tradeoff
what you allow them to get away with? If so, turn the question around
- how much is acceptable (by you) for them?

If not, why does someone else decide what's acceptable both for you
and for them?

-- Charles

Re: [silk] The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

[Shoba Narayan]

>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 20:45:58 +0530
> From: Udhay Shankar N 
> To: Silk List 
> Subject: [silk] The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work
> Message-ID: <4df4d82e.8060...@pobox.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> I got recommended a book called "The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work"[1]
> today. I am unlikely to get hold of it due to a couple of adverse
> reviews I read, but the topic is if great interest to me. Quoting from
> an old blogpost of mine on the topic [2]:
>
> 
>
> [...] presumably, an order of magnitude more people who are debating
> this question with themselves: Is it worth it, really? (for whatever
> values of "it" seem reasonable to you.)
>
> Speaking for myself, I'm grappling with the question too. I went through
> the "live at work, define yourself by your job, burn out spectacularly"
> phase along with various other people during the dotcom boom; and
> promised myself that it wouldn't happen again.
>
> Actually being serious about that promise had various implications. Here
> are some:
>
> Spending only a reasonable amount of time at work implied that one would
> have sufficiently interesting things to do outside of work, which again
> meant that the constant cultivation of interesting friends and ideas was
> a necessity, not just a hobby.
>
> Realising that being a B player was not just not-a-bad-thing, but that
> there were contexts within which it was an excellent idea.
>
> 
>
> And, of course, the fact that I acquired a family along the way - a
> wife, and then a daughter - makes the above all the more important as an
> internal dialogue. What is the acceptable level of trade-off? How does
> one define "acceptable", anyway?
>
> Interesting times (there's that word again!)
>
> So, how does everybody else deal with this?
>
> [1] http://www.amazon.com/dp/0307277259
> [2] http://udhay.livejournal.com/924.html
> --
> ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))


After much soul-searching and profound thinking, I have found that the
only acceptable level of trade-off is what your spouse/significant
other/kids allow you to get away with.

[silk] The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work

[Udhay Shankar N]

I got recommended a book called "The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work"[1]
today. I am unlikely to get hold of it due to a couple of adverse
reviews I read, but the topic is if great interest to me. Quoting from
an old blogpost of mine on the topic [2]:



[...] presumably, an order of magnitude more people who are debating
this question with themselves: Is it worth it, really? (for whatever
values of "it" seem reasonable to you.)

Speaking for myself, I'm grappling with the question too. I went through
the "live at work, define yourself by your job, burn out spectacularly"
phase along with various other people during the dotcom boom; and
promised myself that it wouldn't happen again.

Actually being serious about that promise had various implications. Here
are some:

Spending only a reasonable amount of time at work implied that one would
have sufficiently interesting things to do outside of work, which again
meant that the constant cultivation of interesting friends and ideas was
a necessity, not just a hobby.

Realising that being a B player was not just not-a-bad-thing, but that
there were contexts within which it was an excellent idea.



And, of course, the fact that I acquired a family along the way - a
wife, and then a daughter - makes the above all the more important as an
internal dialogue. What is the acceptable level of trade-off? How does
one define "acceptable", anyway?

Interesting times (there's that word again!)

So, how does everybody else deal with this?

[1] http://www.amazon.com/dp/0307277259
[2] http://udhay.livejournal.com/924.html
-- 
((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))