Anecdote fodder.

I was chatting yesterday with a handsome young man who said that he isn't interesting, and he wants to be. I was pretty dubious about that. I know him to be funny, and I know that he has interesting observations about being a runner. So I know that he leaves the house to pursue a hobby, and then reflects on it. Funny, does stuff, and reflects on it is most of being interesting. So I wasn't convinced by his claim. But he says that he runs out of things to say too early in conversation. He wants to make his life more interesting, so that he has more to say.

I thought that should be pretty do-able. He lives in a big city, so he has lots of ways to make his life more interesting. I suggested that he go to stuff around town. Book readings and open mics and gallery openings. It isn’t so much about whether he likes an individual outing. Going to a few open mics in a row will start to give him opinions, and opinions are interesting. If he goes there by public transit, he's likely to see strange things, and strange things that happen on public transit are interesting. He got the idea right away; sure, he said, a calendar for anecdote fodder.

On my bike ride home, I got to thinking about it even more. It struck me that he could get even more out of it if he reflects on the outings on his way home. I wanted to propose two (maybe a third) questions for him to answer after the event.

First: what was your favorite part? I think consciously deciding on a favorite part of the evening is helpful for a few reasons. First, I think it will make him like the evening better in retrospect. Maybe the café was dingy and the open mic was largely embarrassing and the whole thing reminds him of the emptiness of our disconnected urban lives. Fine. But searching through the evening for a favorite part will emphasize that piece in his memory, and he’ll look back on the evening just a little more fondly. Since going to a bunch of those things can be work, he might as well remember the best aspects of it. Second, people enjoy enthusiastic people. It is a good practice to notice the best parts of things and be able to recount them. Calling out the bad parts is not-interesting. It is easy and predictable and brings negativity to the party and sounds like a jaded teenager. To be interesting, note your favorite parts.

Second: what were you surprised by? Defied predictions are interesting, because they illuminate the prediction and if other people have it, they will be surprised too. Then you and your listener can all do the work of re-calibrating your predictions, which is figuring things out, which feels good to people. So, note surprises.

Optional third question: how did the logistics work? This is idiosyncratic, perhaps. It won't be interesting to everyone. But I promise you that there is a portion of the population that hosts parties and plans events, and they are fascinated by logistics. So if there weren't enough chairs but you could have fit more people in by re-shaping the aisles, dorks like me notice. We don't get to talk about it often, but when we find someone else who notices, we can talk for hours, finding it interesting the whole time. How did the logistics work? Was everyone comfortable? What were the fire hazards? How were the lines of sight? What would make the speaker more at ease with the mike? Hopefully the content of the evening will be interesting, and if not, the first two questions can improve it. But if none of that is inspiring, there are always logistics to ponder.

I think that is more than enough homework for this poor guy, who was interesting to start with. But he asked.

Comments

[Adam]

Your strategy point one reminds me of Tyler Cowen's advice about getting the most out of a museum: pretend that it's a gallery and you can buy one (but only one) artwork. Which one would you buy? Why? What about that other one over there-- it's beautiful or interesting or whatever, but is it more to your liking than the current leader? Why?

It's basically designed to focus attention, and like your strategy, it focuses on the good and away from the bad. Sure, the museum may have pieces that don't work for you, but why focus on that? Focus on the ones that do work for you and you'll have more fun and get more out of it.

[andrew]

In some Italian churches there are coin operated machines for lighting selected frescoes. (They help pay for maintenance/preservation, I believe.) On a trip, years ago, I noticed that most people don't light them, but that if you light one yourself people will drift over to see. A few times when I thought a painting I'd already spent a while looking at wasn't getting enough attention, I lit it again and walked away.

[Liz]

I like your suggestions and think this guy would benefit from them, but when it comes to conversations he shouldn't just focus on things that *he* has to say. He should ask his conversational partners open-ended questions that invite them to open up interesting topics.

[PG]

Ha, I predicted the 3rd question, more or less -- your character is such that I was certain one of the questions would be along the lines of "How would you make it better?"

[PG]

Which, incidentally, is an aspect of your character that makes you likeable as well as interesting. I think the complainers, if they are sufficiently witty, can be interesting. They just rarely come off as likeable. I might laugh at what they have to say, but I don't think "I want to spend more time with this person."

[Gubernatrix]

Nice post. I like your 'does stuff, reflects on it' formula. That is often what makes a good blog too.

I found your blog following a link from the Bodytribe website and have read some of the posts under 'weightlifting' as that's what interests me. But I enjoy your other musings too :)

[Megan]

Holy crap, am I linked from Bodytribe? Or did you just happen to see it under my name. I gotta go look.

[Brian]

Very few people are interesting in and of themselves. Some have interesting accomplishments, to be sure, but it's far from a given that their own thoughts on their accomplishments are particularly entertaining or insightful.

Curiosity about the world would be the primary requirement, because it would naturally engender a certain attentiveness to what's going on around you. Follow that with a taste for narrative where you take shards of observation and overheard talk (why does eavesdropping have such a bad rap?), filling in the gaps with some fanciful caulk, and you're on your way.

B

[Gubernatrix]

It was your name I clicked on in the comments section of an old post - can't remember which one.

[Thelonious_Nick]

What Liz said. I think people perceive others as interesting when those people are intelligently curious and ask good questions in conversation. Open-ended, surprising questions tend to create interesting conversation.

Of course, this is more in theory than actual practice, as I'm not all that out-going myself, and tend to fall back on cleverly sarcastic remarks in social situations.