Essentially, the biggest problem that stands in the way of...

[hmpf]

my finding a job is myself.

It kind of follows that I'd need to find a job that basically *consists of* being myself. Sadly, being myself is not a skill that's very sought-after on the job market.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

However, in the long run, would you really profit from a having a job in which you can't be yourself? I imagine that might result in a breakdown, sooner or later. At least if it's a full-time job, which doesn't leave room for doing the things that are important for you, for essentially being who you are.

[kimboosan.livejournal.com]

I have to ditto this. It is difficult right now when you NEED a job to think of it this way, but if you are a square peg how long are you going to last in a job that is a round hole? Yeah, jobs that fit you are not many on the job market, but as long as you keep doing the "sensible thing" by looking for "normal jobs" you'll never fit in, you'll learn to hate your work, and quite honestly you'll probably not even get hired. :(

Keep the faith,though. You are smart and skilled and educated; you will find your place as long as you keep looking for it!

I was being unnecessarily obscure yesterday -

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

mainly due to being tired. I'm afraid my post wasn't really comprehensible to anyone who doesn't live in my head. ;-)

What I really meant by "myself" yesterday, wasn't anything to do with skills or interests or even being true to myself (i.e. to my principles, dreams, etc.) Rather, I was talking about my personality type, my character - something much more fundamental than my interests and skills and principles and dreams and so on. Basically, I have a really crappy personality type for someone who wants to work in the fields in which I want to work. (In fact, I have a crappy personality type for *most* jobs, but especially for those that I'm most interested in.) So, I need a job that fits my personality, and not just my skills, interests etc. And I can't even imagine what kind of job that might be. Or rather, I can imagine some - but none of them even remotely involve anything I want to do.

I've kind of known all this for a while, but the last three months have really driven it home, hard.

Re: I was being unnecessarily obscure yesterday -

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, I know how that is. In many ways, it's quite similar for me. All 'interesting' jobs in my field seem to require character traits I don't have (being fast and flexible, good at teamwork, an 'outgoing' personality type etc.). Additionally, I'm rather uneven in 'efficiency' and 'productivity', which would also be a problem in most 'qualified' jobs I might apply for. So, when I'm honest to myself, everything I can realistically think of would be some rather boring routine job - which, again, I can't imagine settling for, at least on a full-time basis, because that wouldn't leave enough time to do the things I'm interested in (I don't have enough energy to simply do that 'on the side').

As doing something I find personally fulfilling is essential to me, I'm looking for some sort of 'compromise' - possibly a 'portfolio' career with two or three part-time rather than one full-time job, which leaves me more freedom. Can't say I've found the solution yet, though.

Are you my long-lost twin sibling?

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

Because every word of your comment could have come from me, exactly.

(Seriously, though: do I know you?)

Yes, we do, in fact

[(Anonymous)]

... just sent you a PM.

And yeah, I can identify with many of your job hunting issues. I still have that idea that I want to and am able to make a valuable 'contribution', and would be 'wasted' in some boring job that wouldn't leave any time for other, more interesting matters. On the one hand, I sometimes wonder why most other people seem to be able to 'settle' for that and be content (which somehow just seems 'wrong' to me). Then again, this doesn't seem to be a major concern for most other people, possibly because they a. have more energy, and b. don't have a problem with teamwork and group dynamics.

Re: Yes, we do, in fact

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

For a lot of people, doing something meaningful or important or even something particularly interesting simply isn't such a high priority, I think.

Thanks for the PM, btw. And welcome. :-)

Re: Yes, we do, in fact

[(Anonymous)]

Thanks.:) And yeah, I agree. Apart from the group and energy issues, this mainly seems to be a question of priorities. And about different opinions of what 'growing up and doing important things' really means.;)

[anduranova.livejournal.com]

*hugs*
Somehow I am happy that I don't have to do the whole 'Job Hunting' thing.
I think I would not be good at it. :(
But still I also do not use my free time at home enough.
Btw when you are back in Frankfurt you need to meet my two new kitten. ;)

Become an author

[(Anonymous)]

Maybe you should try to become an author, a paid one, I mean. Write a novel, a real novel, something that is marketable. That excludes fan fiction, I'm afraid, but there's no reason you couldn't create characters very similar to your favourites. According to "On Writing" it takes Stephen King 3 months to write the first draft for a 1000 pages novel. And after winning NaNoWriMo last year I see that this number makes perfect sense. If you devote your life to writing you can write 3 novels per year without problems. Sure, editing the first draft into something ready to publish may take years but if you manage to sell your story, the publisher will have a professional editor help with that.
Of course writing professionaly does require that you make compromises regarding your artistic vision. But I guess it's as close as you can get to earning money "being yourself".

Matthias

Re: Become an author

[(Anonymous)]

Well ... about one in 1000 unsolicited manucripts is eventually published with a 'real' publisher (i.e. not on the internet or with a 'vanity press'). About one in 50 published authors manages to make a living from writing alone. That doesn't mean anyone should be discouraged, but it isn't a career choice, but, in most cases, something you do for its own sake, as a passion, not to make money. Rather, the question usually is how to choose a day job that leaves enough room and energy for writing.

PS

[(Anonymous)]

By the way, hmpf, with your particular skills, I don't see any reason why you couldn't become a successful freelancer. After all, you could combine part-time freelance careers as a goldsmith and journalist, plus teach the occasional English or Arts & Crafts course. With bilingual teaching being so popular at the moment, I'm sure there would be demand for someone able to teach Arts & Crafts in English. And I imagine this would be way more interesting and fulfilling then some dead-end office job, and thus also leave you for more energy for both writing and activism. Additionally, the activism and journalism might even be combined.

The problem with freelancing...

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

is that it only works if you are

1.) very well organised and strong-willed
2.) good with people (because you need to self-promote *constantly*)

I lack both the self-discipline and the people skills.

I've actually been kinda sorta freelancing this year (on a very low income level - some teaching, some writing, and some researching for a museum - total of money made that way this year: about 1100 euro) - and so far, I haven't even been able to make myself write a bill for my last 'job', which was back in July. Even though I desperately need the money.

Re: The problem with freelancing...

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, I have to agree on this. In fact, I have the same set of problems (as I sketched above). Additionally, while I am able to produce quality work, I'm *very* slow, and I completely suck at 'multitasking' - and thus don't think the 'journalism' or in fact any other 'freelancing' option could realistically work for me. I don't think I'd 'function' anywhere where much teamwork is required either, though. With my degree, the 'sensible' option would probably be school teaching - but the mere thought of going back to school for good (or at least for my working life), and as a full-time career, fills me with sheer horror.

Consequently, the 'answer' might be a combination of some routine job which isn't too stressful and leaves room to think about other matters, and the sort of small-scale freelancing you described above. The latter to pay the rent, the former to do projects you're passionate about.:)

The latter to pay the rent ...

[(Anonymous)]

correction: that should be the other way round, obviously.;)

I'm currently finishing less than two *short stories* per year, on average.

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

And that's fanfic, where I don't have to come up with a world of my own etc., just take what's already there and change some of the variables. Also, I'm still far from being able to handle plot. Or even dialogue, really. So, I think it's highly unlikely I'll write anything I could sell anytime soon.

Re: I'm currently finishing less than two *short stories* per year, on average.

[(Anonymous)]

If you allow yourself to have thoughts like that, then you never will. Have you ever won NaNoWriMo? It was an eye opener for me. I tried and failed twice because after a week I didn't like what I was writing, fell behind with my word count because I couldn't stop editing and re-editing. But last year I finally managed to put all of this aside. The website and the pep talks really helped. I managed to put myself into the don't-care-for-quality mood. I wrote my 1600 words each day and when I had no ideas I still wrote. And when I had my 50000 words at the end of november, surprise, surprise, the story was remarkably good. Even the bad parts that I had just written with no inspiration to fill space were not so bad that some editing couldn't save them. Editing is an important part of writing. And there's a reason why it's usually done by professionals other than the author. The author's primary skill is the imagination that produces the story. The editor's skill is to polish it.

So I say, you should write a novel, finish it, without worrying about if it's good. Just fill your word count NaNoWriMo style. And then look at the finished novel and I'm sure you'll find that with some editing it'll be good enough for print.

And another thing, something that I've realized reading "On Writing" by Stephen King (a very encouraging book for aspiring authors) is that you don't have the obligation to copy someone else's style. My "weakness" has always been descriptions. Tolkien has all these detailed descriptions of places and people. I lack that kind of visual imagination. My strength was always dialog. In my heart I'm a drama author. And when I have action I always write it bare bones, just what happens without fancy metaphors, adjectives, similes or whatever. I considered that a deficiency. But reading "On Writing" I realized that actually I didn't like Tolkienesque descriptions. I think it's distracting and boring filling mass. I know several people who stopped reading LOTR because they found it boring. Why should I feel bad for not being able to emulate a style that some people find boring?
My writing is not deficient. It's fast paced like a movie. While Tolkien is still busy describing the landscape, my characters have already escaped death twice and defeated a hundred orcs. My style is not worse, it's just different. Some people will prefer Tolkien's, others won't.

So when you think you have a deficiency, maybe you're just trying too hard to copy someone else's style. If you can't write dialog, then don't. Well, at least keep it to the bare essentials. Maybe that's your style. You shouldn't measure your own writing against TV shows produced by teams of professional script writers who specialize on dialog, who write nothing but dialog. If you can't write scripts, then don't force yourself to do it. Write something else. There are good novels almost devoid of dialog.

BTW, here's the link to my NaNoWriMo novel for this year.

http://www.nanowrimo.org/eng/user/543855


And I'm writing this in addition to my 35h job. It's possible for anyone to write a novel in a month. NaNoWriMo makes it possible!

Matthias

Re: I'm currently finishing less than two *short stories* per year, on average.

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

I don't believe in a one-size-fits-all method for writing. And, for myself, I don't believe in NaNoWriMo.

I've tried both ways of writing, in the past - the quick, deadline-based one, and the slow, mostly inspiration-based one. About a third of my stories, maybe even as many as half of them, were deadline-based. And here's the thing: I was never happy with the deadline-based ones. They always felt half-baked, not living up to their own potential. I tried to improve them by revising, later, but found I couldn't really fix what was wrong by such a superficial method. What was wrong with them went much deeper: they hadn't been thought through properly *while I'd been writing*.

So, eventually, I stopped writing to deadlines. Since then, it often takes me years to finish a story. But - and this is important - ever since then, I've been much happier with the results of my efforts.

I think the only way I can write anything I'm happy with is slowly.

Also,

[hmpf.livejournal.com]

I'm not trying to copy anyone's style. But I *do* try to cultivate style, yes. I often can't progress because a certain sentence doesn't sound "right" yet. Style is important to me, in my writing. I feel it can enhance the emotional effect of a story immensely. And I disagree that imagination is the only/most important thing a writer brings to the table. Style, the skilled, deliberate use of language, is just as important. That doesn't mean it has to be so for every writer. There *are* writers whose main skill and goal is to let their imagination run wild. I even appreciate that kind of writing. But it's not the kind of writing I'm doing, myself.