You perfectly described my problem and I was really hoping you were going to end with a solution. But what a problem to have. To find myself inundated with the amount of thoughtful, engaging, useful, artful, poetic, insightful and moving words that are coming from an immediate circle of human beings that I have actually had conversations with . . . I'm feeling some hope for humanity through this circle of authors. But how to decide who to stop imbibing in depth seems impossible. Something's gotta give and I'm too old for that thing to be sleep.
Totally, Rick. I was hoping to come up with a solution myself too! Usually writing helps me get to things like that: a solution to a problem, a thought that I didn't even know it was there, a sudden important realization, etc. And, like you, I don't want to lose or weaken this beautiful thing that we've built here. "I'm feeling some hope for humanity through this circle of authors. But how to decide who to stop imbibing in depth seems impossible." -- It is, sadly. Without the help of Substack itself, I guess it's impossible to devise a way to keep up "intelligently". Oh well.
I've been feeling the same way about all my unread Substacks (and books!) I keep planning to set aside an hour or two on one of my days off to catch up on Subs, but then life inevitably happens. I do feel like I need some kind of (enjoyable) ritual in order to keep up, even if keeping up just means reading a sampling of everything that lands in my inbox. And, like you, I want to like, comment, and restack things too, not just read passively.
I know, right? It really seems an impossible task. And as you say, "life inevitably happens", with all that this implies. The idea of sampling might work, but then again on what criteria? It's just a conundrum to me. :)
Reading through the comments and it appears we’re all in the same boat, trying to figure out how to navigate so much wonderful writing available to us! It’s actually quite amusing haha. If someone had told me, over a year ago, that I would be struggling to find time to read a bunch of newsletters I would be so confused. I wasn’t subscribed to any until I made mine. But it’s been a joy to have access to so many different points of view and insights, like yours.
Yes! It is confusing. The overwhelming beauty of this whole experience is bound to be left as it is: just overwhelming! There's no solution here, unless Substack itself does something about it. Maybe through AI. We shall see! Thank you, Sandra, for being here! :)
Your ending parable reminds me of a parable we tell in Mexico about a fisherman and a businessman. I’ll have to send it to you but the wisdom is the same. We are the ones we are waiting for.
Whatever you do, don’t stop writing. This has given me much thought to keeping my posts short and easy to digest.
Yes, Oscar told me about this. I didn't know. But I guess the underlying message is the same. And please, do send it to me: now I'm super intrigued. "We are the ones we are waiting for" -- what an awesome line, thank you! "This has given me much thought to keeping my posts short and easy to digest." -- your posts are perfect as they are, Steven. Please don't touch anything! :)
Jun 14, 2023·edited Jun 14, 2023Liked by Silvio Castelletti
As it happens, I was having exactly the same thoughts: too many interesting things to read, too little time to read books (and also do the rest of the things I love or need to do).
Since I am also sensitive to anxiety lately (I don't suffer from it and I don't even want to hear about it) I said to myself that self-induced anxiety is a bit silly and so I found a two-step reading criterion:
1) I read what for some unfathomable reason seems interesting to me and at the same time I don't think that all the substacks I follow are necessarily always interesting
2) I don't feel guilty if I overlook some of them.
In other words: if something attracts me in the titles and excerpts, then I read. I don't know rationally why, I just use my instinct. If you think about it, it also happens with books: a book that doesn't interest you today might interest you in five years' time. The book is still the same but you and the context have changed.
As Borges said, 'If you didn't like it, that's no problem: it wasn't a book for you'.
I remain (we remain, you and I) omnivores and we always seem to leave something behind that could be interesting. But if we did not find it interesting now, perhaps it is not interesting for us at this moment.
PS: One thing I find very useful to be able to follow different substacks is the voiceover of articles. Since it is also available in yours, I use it all the time, so for example I 'read' you while walking the dog. It's not the same as reading but it allows me to follow many more authors.
I didn't know about the "default" voiceover. Interesting. Wow, lots of great ideas and reflections in your comment, Martino. As usual. "I remain (we remain, you and I) omnivores and we always seem to leave something behind that could be interesting. But if we did not find it interesting now, perhaps it is not interesting for us at this moment." -- totally agree. The point is, at least for me, how to ascertain interestingness or potential interestingness and save it for some other time in the future. I've got the feelings that substacks come and go, unlike books, that stay on the shelf (or in your kindle). There must be a way to create a library of substacks that you might want to come back to one day (the antisubstack, that is). Maybe if you and I find a way to do this, they'll give us a nobel prize. Who the heck knows. :)
No idea. I guess it might be a combination of having enough audience, thinking of a new series of writing to launch, and having gotten sufficient feedback that what you write has value for someone. Tough call. For me, probably it's going to be only a function of time. But who knows.
Oh man, Silvio...it’s like you are reading my mind. I think quite a few of us are experiencing a bit of Substack indigestion. Just too much good stuff (hence why I’m reading this nearly a week after its release).
I also feel like my book reading is faltering, and I’m going to prioritize that a little bit. Speaking personally, I don’t expect people like you to read all my essays—I feel like it would be presumpteous to think so. As long as I know you are in my corner, I find relief in that. So take that for what it’s worth.
Camilo! Your pieces are always a pleasure to read, and please do not think even for a split second that "I have to read them" because you're my friend. I genuinely enjoy your writing and now I'm thinking that I haven't yet read your last one! Which I will remedy right after I publish tonight (and looking forward to it). Glad you liked my reflections! :)
Great musings on when, what, and why we consume content, applied to a very current and familiar setting, Silvio. It also made me think of the "just in time" vs "just in case" approach to consuming information. Sometimes the first case is better.
Also loved getting to know this version of the fisherman story, which, in a way, illustrates that sometimes doing nothing is the best decision.
Thank you, Oscar. As always, you make me think. I love this contrast between ”just in time" and "just in case". I never thought about it. And yes, I agree that sometimes the first one is better. (I'll have to read this fisherman story, as Steven mentioned it to me as well :)).
I loved this Silvio. I'm struggling with the same thing -- trying to cope with the abundance of information, filter signal from noise, deal with the inevitability that I won't be able to read everything I'd like to read.
My working solution is old-fashioned: I joined a book club. We study some of the greatest books of all time, and the focus is on reading slowly, actively, intentionally and really diving deep, letting yourself fall down rabbit holes of curiosity.
It's early days but it's felt immensely nourishing to focus. To commit. To study one great book, rather than trying to read ten decent books.
Oh thank you, Tommy. This is a great idea. I'll think about how it may be implemented in my life as well. The more I read and enjoy these comments, though, the more I realize that probably what I'm looking for doesn't exist. Maybe AI will help us! Who knows. :)
What I do is I turn my email notifications off for most of the day, so I’m not getting interrupted by posts and feel like I have to read them right then, and then whenever I have downtime I go check out what’s in my inbox. So it’s not a designated time of the day for reading, it’s just getting to them when I feel like it. I read the ones that grab me and leave the ones I don’t. I try not to worry too much about not reading them all because it would just be impossible to read them all. Plus, sometimes a writer I generally like puts out something I’m not interested in, and that’s okay.
Yes, I hear you Dawson. Maybe the right way to do this is to just leave things as they are and focus on the ones that grab our attention somehow. And not worry about what we leave behind. I've got this terrible feeling that all that I leave behind is gone forever on here. But I have to fight this thought and possibly eliminate it. Thanks for you comment! :)
You perfectly described my problem and I was really hoping you were going to end with a solution. But what a problem to have. To find myself inundated with the amount of thoughtful, engaging, useful, artful, poetic, insightful and moving words that are coming from an immediate circle of human beings that I have actually had conversations with . . . I'm feeling some hope for humanity through this circle of authors. But how to decide who to stop imbibing in depth seems impossible. Something's gotta give and I'm too old for that thing to be sleep.
Totally, Rick. I was hoping to come up with a solution myself too! Usually writing helps me get to things like that: a solution to a problem, a thought that I didn't even know it was there, a sudden important realization, etc. And, like you, I don't want to lose or weaken this beautiful thing that we've built here. "I'm feeling some hope for humanity through this circle of authors. But how to decide who to stop imbibing in depth seems impossible." -- It is, sadly. Without the help of Substack itself, I guess it's impossible to devise a way to keep up "intelligently". Oh well.
I feel silly complaining about a problem that has so much upside. It falls in the category of problems with benefits.
I've been feeling the same way about all my unread Substacks (and books!) I keep planning to set aside an hour or two on one of my days off to catch up on Subs, but then life inevitably happens. I do feel like I need some kind of (enjoyable) ritual in order to keep up, even if keeping up just means reading a sampling of everything that lands in my inbox. And, like you, I want to like, comment, and restack things too, not just read passively.
I know, right? It really seems an impossible task. And as you say, "life inevitably happens", with all that this implies. The idea of sampling might work, but then again on what criteria? It's just a conundrum to me. :)
Reading through the comments and it appears we’re all in the same boat, trying to figure out how to navigate so much wonderful writing available to us! It’s actually quite amusing haha. If someone had told me, over a year ago, that I would be struggling to find time to read a bunch of newsletters I would be so confused. I wasn’t subscribed to any until I made mine. But it’s been a joy to have access to so many different points of view and insights, like yours.
Yes! It is confusing. The overwhelming beauty of this whole experience is bound to be left as it is: just overwhelming! There's no solution here, unless Substack itself does something about it. Maybe through AI. We shall see! Thank you, Sandra, for being here! :)
I was hoping to see a solution at the end :) too many wonderful writers, too little time.
I know! I was hoping that too! I guess we have to learn to live with this. :)
Your ending parable reminds me of a parable we tell in Mexico about a fisherman and a businessman. I’ll have to send it to you but the wisdom is the same. We are the ones we are waiting for.
Whatever you do, don’t stop writing. This has given me much thought to keeping my posts short and easy to digest.
Yes, Oscar told me about this. I didn't know. But I guess the underlying message is the same. And please, do send it to me: now I'm super intrigued. "We are the ones we are waiting for" -- what an awesome line, thank you! "This has given me much thought to keeping my posts short and easy to digest." -- your posts are perfect as they are, Steven. Please don't touch anything! :)
Yes, a compassionate thought, but I dread the idea that you’d share less of your insights, so don’t let brevity dim the brilliance.
As it happens, I was having exactly the same thoughts: too many interesting things to read, too little time to read books (and also do the rest of the things I love or need to do).
Since I am also sensitive to anxiety lately (I don't suffer from it and I don't even want to hear about it) I said to myself that self-induced anxiety is a bit silly and so I found a two-step reading criterion:
1) I read what for some unfathomable reason seems interesting to me and at the same time I don't think that all the substacks I follow are necessarily always interesting
2) I don't feel guilty if I overlook some of them.
In other words: if something attracts me in the titles and excerpts, then I read. I don't know rationally why, I just use my instinct. If you think about it, it also happens with books: a book that doesn't interest you today might interest you in five years' time. The book is still the same but you and the context have changed.
As Borges said, 'If you didn't like it, that's no problem: it wasn't a book for you'.
I remain (we remain, you and I) omnivores and we always seem to leave something behind that could be interesting. But if we did not find it interesting now, perhaps it is not interesting for us at this moment.
PS: One thing I find very useful to be able to follow different substacks is the voiceover of articles. Since it is also available in yours, I use it all the time, so for example I 'read' you while walking the dog. It's not the same as reading but it allows me to follow many more authors.
I didn't know about the "default" voiceover. Interesting. Wow, lots of great ideas and reflections in your comment, Martino. As usual. "I remain (we remain, you and I) omnivores and we always seem to leave something behind that could be interesting. But if we did not find it interesting now, perhaps it is not interesting for us at this moment." -- totally agree. The point is, at least for me, how to ascertain interestingness or potential interestingness and save it for some other time in the future. I've got the feelings that substacks come and go, unlike books, that stay on the shelf (or in your kindle). There must be a way to create a library of substacks that you might want to come back to one day (the antisubstack, that is). Maybe if you and I find a way to do this, they'll give us a nobel prize. Who the heck knows. :)
Under what circumstances do you think one should monetise their writing?
No idea. I guess it might be a combination of having enough audience, thinking of a new series of writing to launch, and having gotten sufficient feedback that what you write has value for someone. Tough call. For me, probably it's going to be only a function of time. But who knows.
Oh man, Silvio...it’s like you are reading my mind. I think quite a few of us are experiencing a bit of Substack indigestion. Just too much good stuff (hence why I’m reading this nearly a week after its release).
I also feel like my book reading is faltering, and I’m going to prioritize that a little bit. Speaking personally, I don’t expect people like you to read all my essays—I feel like it would be presumpteous to think so. As long as I know you are in my corner, I find relief in that. So take that for what it’s worth.
Camilo! Your pieces are always a pleasure to read, and please do not think even for a split second that "I have to read them" because you're my friend. I genuinely enjoy your writing and now I'm thinking that I haven't yet read your last one! Which I will remedy right after I publish tonight (and looking forward to it). Glad you liked my reflections! :)
Great musings on when, what, and why we consume content, applied to a very current and familiar setting, Silvio. It also made me think of the "just in time" vs "just in case" approach to consuming information. Sometimes the first case is better.
Also loved getting to know this version of the fisherman story, which, in a way, illustrates that sometimes doing nothing is the best decision.
Thank you, Oscar. As always, you make me think. I love this contrast between ”just in time" and "just in case". I never thought about it. And yes, I agree that sometimes the first one is better. (I'll have to read this fisherman story, as Steven mentioned it to me as well :)).
I loved this Silvio. I'm struggling with the same thing -- trying to cope with the abundance of information, filter signal from noise, deal with the inevitability that I won't be able to read everything I'd like to read.
My working solution is old-fashioned: I joined a book club. We study some of the greatest books of all time, and the focus is on reading slowly, actively, intentionally and really diving deep, letting yourself fall down rabbit holes of curiosity.
It's early days but it's felt immensely nourishing to focus. To commit. To study one great book, rather than trying to read ten decent books.
Oh thank you, Tommy. This is a great idea. I'll think about how it may be implemented in my life as well. The more I read and enjoy these comments, though, the more I realize that probably what I'm looking for doesn't exist. Maybe AI will help us! Who knows. :)
What I do is I turn my email notifications off for most of the day, so I’m not getting interrupted by posts and feel like I have to read them right then, and then whenever I have downtime I go check out what’s in my inbox. So it’s not a designated time of the day for reading, it’s just getting to them when I feel like it. I read the ones that grab me and leave the ones I don’t. I try not to worry too much about not reading them all because it would just be impossible to read them all. Plus, sometimes a writer I generally like puts out something I’m not interested in, and that’s okay.
Yes, I hear you Dawson. Maybe the right way to do this is to just leave things as they are and focus on the ones that grab our attention somehow. And not worry about what we leave behind. I've got this terrible feeling that all that I leave behind is gone forever on here. But I have to fight this thought and possibly eliminate it. Thanks for you comment! :)
Love the Taleb antisubstack connection. Im right there with you on that!