This is a tough balance: trying to do stuff that's true to yourself, but that also might be of interest to others. If you do things only for you, chances are others might not be interested. But if you do things only with an audience in mind, you might lose some authenticity and sense of self.
I think the most engaging creators are people who manage to be 100% themselves, but in being themselves they inherently have something interesting to offer others. Hard balance to find within yourself, and then even harder to be found, especially in an oversaturated world of content.
No doubt, it's a dance. And at the same time, the moment we're creating for any reason other than our own self expression, and we seek to grow a community, we're no longer creating in a vacuum. That doesn't mean we become and share less of our authentic selves, it's just means we also consider ways to invite others into the experience, not just as observers, but participants.
This is a nicer way to look at it, instead of "either/or" can it be more "both/and" where you're being yourself, but also looking for ways to invite and integrate others into your experience.
Gotta be honest, this brought a tear to my eyes. The idea of a deeper impact files by heart in the world I wish to live in. For now, I’ve been slowly transcribing my (2) Grandmothers recipes in order to share with all the cousins. That’s something that’s accessible and ripple provoking.
Jonathan, this was great food for thought and the “Love Diffusion” is even more fitting to me, than you know! I write here on Substack and am crawling along ( but soooo happy being a creative every day, now, as I took an early retirement from my teaching career). My Substack is “ growing good” and it is based on Positive psychology and my mission to spread what I’ve learned through life’s experiences of child-rearing, divorce, my Masters work, my Certificate in PP, and my three decades of teaching and leading in Community Schools, to help people be happier, healthier and more connected.
I keep plugging along because I think there MUST be more folks who believe this and understand this stuff. I think I am stuck at phase two, but I’ll keep going and I’ll keep trying to appeal and amaze and nurture my relationship with the early adopters.
The Love Diffusion really struck me because my podcast is called, “Love Sweet Love”, as in the great song, “What the World Needs Now, is…” .
On it, I feature people, programs, orgs who foster/spread love, in all its forms ( like equity, community, service, compassion, care, inclusion, etc.) so that we can focus on what we want to see more of and grow the good— and then create an upward spiral, etc. etc.)
You were a huge catalyst for me starting to do podcasts.
You introduced me to PP, too, and I remember exactly where I was, when I heard the episode ( the first one I listened to), as I searched “ the good life” in the podcast App, as I was going through done huge life changes at the time.
There you were, and the first episode I listened to was with Sonja Lyubomirsky and she talked about the flourishing centre! I looked up Canadian universities who had PP programs and enrolled in Wilfred Laurier’s.
Anyway, I wanted to tell you that you impact my life in many positive ways. My husband and I both listen and talk about the episodes. I’ve learned a lot from you. I appreciate you.
So glad to know you've found a path to creation and connection and impact through positive psychology and creative expression! And, thanks so much for the kind words. Love watching "love, sweet love" the ripple expand!
Your message comes at an opportune time. I have been reflecting on writing a book that reflects on my career in treating breast cancer. I appreciate your advice to write to a focused few. My efforts will center on combining the science of healthcare with Christian values - how do we truly take care of the person in front of us? I am grateful for the inspiration and hope to come back in a year with something tangible. Thank you.
I love how the Law of Diffusion turned into the Love Diffusion. And it wasn’t even your Freudian slip, Jonathan - but the wrong auto-caption.
My first thoughts when reading your article were that the ego plays an important role in the search for a wider audience. Both on the side of the innovator and on the side of the audience. The early adopters look for status and social currency, the early majority “buying into the status and perceived credibility of the early adopters” and the late majority not wanting to be left out. Nothing wrong with that, but I think a large part of the driving force is the ego - both for the innovators and the adaptors.
Right? Some typos were made for revelation! No doubt, ego is a part of this ripple, and the human condition writ large. The fun dance is how to leverage it for positive.
Coming from a country of 2 million speakers of a language that very few foreigners learn, I do believe that a readership of 500-800 people is already rather amazing (that is number of copies that any 1st edition of a book fiction gets- if it gets sold out and people also seek it in a library it may get a reprint). But sure, the more the merrier. Otherwise it may sometimes feel like screaming into the void. But I am currently in a stage where just writing, even to audience of none, is healing. Ok, end of rant. As always, I really like your posts, Jonathan. I am glad you have a wide audience.
This is a tough balance: trying to do stuff that's true to yourself, but that also might be of interest to others. If you do things only for you, chances are others might not be interested. But if you do things only with an audience in mind, you might lose some authenticity and sense of self.
I think the most engaging creators are people who manage to be 100% themselves, but in being themselves they inherently have something interesting to offer others. Hard balance to find within yourself, and then even harder to be found, especially in an oversaturated world of content.
No doubt, it's a dance. And at the same time, the moment we're creating for any reason other than our own self expression, and we seek to grow a community, we're no longer creating in a vacuum. That doesn't mean we become and share less of our authentic selves, it's just means we also consider ways to invite others into the experience, not just as observers, but participants.
This is a nicer way to look at it, instead of "either/or" can it be more "both/and" where you're being yourself, but also looking for ways to invite and integrate others into your experience.
Exactly, it's not about dilution, it's about inclusion.
Really thoughtful piece, thank you! So much to take on and think about this weekend.
Glad your found value in it!
Gotta be honest, this brought a tear to my eyes. The idea of a deeper impact files by heart in the world I wish to live in. For now, I’ve been slowly transcribing my (2) Grandmothers recipes in order to share with all the cousins. That’s something that’s accessible and ripple provoking.
Ah, love that. Such a beautiful act of co-creation and sharing.
Jonathan, this was great food for thought and the “Love Diffusion” is even more fitting to me, than you know! I write here on Substack and am crawling along ( but soooo happy being a creative every day, now, as I took an early retirement from my teaching career). My Substack is “ growing good” and it is based on Positive psychology and my mission to spread what I’ve learned through life’s experiences of child-rearing, divorce, my Masters work, my Certificate in PP, and my three decades of teaching and leading in Community Schools, to help people be happier, healthier and more connected.
I keep plugging along because I think there MUST be more folks who believe this and understand this stuff. I think I am stuck at phase two, but I’ll keep going and I’ll keep trying to appeal and amaze and nurture my relationship with the early adopters.
The Love Diffusion really struck me because my podcast is called, “Love Sweet Love”, as in the great song, “What the World Needs Now, is…” .
On it, I feature people, programs, orgs who foster/spread love, in all its forms ( like equity, community, service, compassion, care, inclusion, etc.) so that we can focus on what we want to see more of and grow the good— and then create an upward spiral, etc. etc.)
You were a huge catalyst for me starting to do podcasts.
You introduced me to PP, too, and I remember exactly where I was, when I heard the episode ( the first one I listened to), as I searched “ the good life” in the podcast App, as I was going through done huge life changes at the time.
There you were, and the first episode I listened to was with Sonja Lyubomirsky and she talked about the flourishing centre! I looked up Canadian universities who had PP programs and enrolled in Wilfred Laurier’s.
Anyway, I wanted to tell you that you impact my life in many positive ways. My husband and I both listen and talk about the episodes. I’ve learned a lot from you. I appreciate you.
So glad to know you've found a path to creation and connection and impact through positive psychology and creative expression! And, thanks so much for the kind words. Love watching "love, sweet love" the ripple expand!
Thanks, Jonathan! I’m having the time of my life!
Your message comes at an opportune time. I have been reflecting on writing a book that reflects on my career in treating breast cancer. I appreciate your advice to write to a focused few. My efforts will center on combining the science of healthcare with Christian values - how do we truly take care of the person in front of us? I am grateful for the inspiration and hope to come back in a year with something tangible. Thank you.
Glad it resonated, it's a fun challenge to explore the sweet spot between self-expression and impact.
I love how the Law of Diffusion turned into the Love Diffusion. And it wasn’t even your Freudian slip, Jonathan - but the wrong auto-caption.
My first thoughts when reading your article were that the ego plays an important role in the search for a wider audience. Both on the side of the innovator and on the side of the audience. The early adopters look for status and social currency, the early majority “buying into the status and perceived credibility of the early adopters” and the late majority not wanting to be left out. Nothing wrong with that, but I think a large part of the driving force is the ego - both for the innovators and the adaptors.
Right? Some typos were made for revelation! No doubt, ego is a part of this ripple, and the human condition writ large. The fun dance is how to leverage it for positive.
Coming from a country of 2 million speakers of a language that very few foreigners learn, I do believe that a readership of 500-800 people is already rather amazing (that is number of copies that any 1st edition of a book fiction gets- if it gets sold out and people also seek it in a library it may get a reprint). But sure, the more the merrier. Otherwise it may sometimes feel like screaming into the void. But I am currently in a stage where just writing, even to audience of none, is healing. Ok, end of rant. As always, I really like your posts, Jonathan. I am glad you have a wide audience.
Absolutey, Liza. Scale in entirely relative. And, as I shared, there's also absolutely nothing wrong with creating purely for the joy of creation.