c. billadeau

Even though I’m not really a programmer, this essay by Paul Graham is still incredibly relevant to me and my process.

“One reason programmers dislike meetings so much is that they’re on a different type of schedule from other people. Meetings cost them more.

“There are two types of schedule, which I’ll call the manager’s schedule and the maker’s schedule. The manager’s schedule is for bosses. It’s embodied in the traditional appointment book, with each day cut into one hour intervals. You can block off several hours for a single task if you need to, but by default you change what you’re doing every hour. …

“Most powerful people are on the manager’s schedule. It’s the schedule of command. But there’s another way of using time that’s common among people who make things, like programmers and writers. They generally prefer to use time in units of half a day at least. You can’t write or program well in units of an hour. That’s barely enough time to get started.

“When you’re operating on the maker’s schedule, meetings are a disaster. A single meeting can blow a whole afternoon, by breaking it into two pieces each too small to do anything hard in. Plus you have to remember to go to the meeting. That’s no problem for someone on the manager’s schedule. There’s always something coming on the next hour; the only question is what. But when someone on the maker’s schedule has a meeting, they have to think about it. …

“I find one meeting can sometimes affect a whole day. A meeting commonly blows at least half a day, by breaking up a morning or afternoon. But in addition there’s sometimes a cascading effect. If I know the afternoon is going to be broken up, I’m slightly less likely to start something ambitious in the morning. I know this may sound oversensitive, but if you’re a maker, think of your own case. Don’t your spirits rise at the thought of having an entire day free to work, with no appointments at all? Well, that means your spirits are correspondingly depressed when you don’t. And ambitious projects are by definition close to the limits of your capacity. A small decrease in morale is enough to kill them off.

“Each type of schedule works fine by itself. Problems arise when they meet. …”

Aha! I knew I schedule my classes the way I do for a reason. Like, okay: I have all four of my classes crammed into three days (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday) next semester, leaving the rest of the week free. It looks bloody insane to other people, but it gives me four whole days to balance between my job and having long stretches of time for schoolwork.
Also, my classes don’t begin until one in the afternoon and then usually end around six (sometimes as late as nine), allowing me to easily stay up until three or four in the morning to work without actually depriving myself of sleep.

The best part is that it works. I am someone who tends to map out the generals in a project before I dig into the final piece, but I still need time while working to make decisions on the details (or to change my mind on everything so it’s no longer anything like the original sketches, whichever!). Trying to stop in the middle of a project to go do something not art-related throws my frame of mind off so much that it’s incredibly difficult to get back into a project later on. I have no problem managing multiple projects (in fact, I prefer that, so I can jump to another one when I start slowing down on one) but as soon as I start trying to focus on my grocery list or meetings, all that momentum hits a brick wall. It’s a creative blueball.

And when your studio is located several blocks away from where you live, getting the desire to just get up and go in for only an hour or two before you have to run off again just… never works.

Sometimes I switch it up by getting up earlier than normal to try and get something done before work/class, but in general? I cherish those uninterrupted chunks of time. I just don’t think I’ve ever been able to put my methods so precisely into words. So thanks, Graham.