The Incomparable

197: Fail Fast


  the incomparable number 197 jun 2014 [TS]

  welcome back to the incomparable podcast [TS]

  on your host Jason Snelling we're here [TS]

  to talk about a book but this is a [TS]

  little bit different from our normal [TS]

  book club this is a work of nonfiction [TS]

  but it's by somebody who is a major [TS]

  player in a major creative endeavor and [TS]

  one that we podcast about before then we [TS]

  love a lot which is pixar we're going to [TS]

  talk about creativity pink book by EDD [TS]

  cat mall with Amy Wallace at catalent [TS]

  the president of pixar for many years [TS]

  and now runs the pics both pixar and [TS]

  disney animation with john lasseter and [TS]

  he wrote this book that is partially a [TS]

  memoir of his time at Pixar and [TS]

  partially a management book about how he [TS]

  has managed the creative culture at [TS]

  Pixar which i think is an interesting [TS]

  conversation to have to and lots of [TS]

  things to talk about i have a panel full [TS]

  of people who are raring to go to talk [TS]

  about this subject I field i love it as [TS]

  a host when that happens because i feel [TS]

  like i can just sort of lean back and [TS]

  I'll go get a glass of water at one [TS]

  point you won't even know I'm gone [TS]

  because anyway my panel is our plan [TS]

  fleischmann welcome back plan [TS]

  nice to see you finally it's it's such a [TS]

  pleasure to have broken the surface of [TS]

  the water tension and come through like [TS]

  Nemo I i found myself [TS]

  ok that's a reference Lisa Schmeisser [TS]

  also here hello [TS]

  thank you it's nice to be here John [TS]

  siracusa is here so excited to be on a [TS]

  book club episode even if it is [TS]

  nonfiction and even if it's not 800-page [TS]

  book about wizards by my by my reckoning [TS]

  it has been approximately 16 months [TS]

  since you were on a book club episode so [TS]

  welcome and David lower who is on every [TS]

  episode that Dan Morgan isn't on and [TS]

  maybe that he is also here [TS]

  hello I all I will say is I'm glad this [TS]

  isn't about the hugo nominees [TS]

  yeah we noticed that was not going to [TS]

  happen [TS]

  well now David this record continuously [TS]

  24 hours a day I believe radio Radio [TS]

  Free David it's where you know and [TS]

  there's so many different facets of this [TS]

  i'm not sure where you want to get [TS]

  started i really enjoyed it on one level [TS]

  I have to say just as being story of [TS]

  pixar and this interesting story of bed [TS]

  cat mall who started out in computer [TS]

  science and but always had creative [TS]

  yearnings as well and ended up sort of [TS]

  by mistake or just through happenstance [TS]

  at a at Lucasfilm when they were [TS]

  starting their computer graphics [TS]

  division and then the story of them [TS]

  being bought by steve jobs and the [TS]

  desire to make a make a motion picture [TS]

  in computer animation and then the [TS]

  trucks or tribulations of the problems [TS]

  they had with various various films the [TS]

  disney buyout and the death of Steve [TS]

  Jobs are all covered in here so he's got [TS]

  that aspect of the story as well as the [TS]

  the sort of management learnings over [TS]

  the course of all this time and you know [TS]

  which I found very interesting but I was [TS]

  fascinated by the story of pixar III the [TS]

  thing that really hit me was that at a [TS]

  time when they could have very easily [TS]

  have just said we're going to make [TS]

  hardware or we're going to make software [TS]

  or you know we're going to do computer [TS]

  graphics for other people's movies they [TS]

  had this one idea which i think came [TS]

  from john lasseter but at cad model was [TS]

  right there with him which is we're [TS]

  going to make a motion picture and and [TS]

  that the world would be very different [TS]

  if they hadn't had that because you get [TS]

  the sense from the book that would have [TS]

  been very easy it was not a fait [TS]

  accompli that they were going to be a [TS]

  movie studio that they became a movie [TS]

  studio not accidentally but it was not [TS]

  looking at pics are in the in the [TS]

  eighties and early nineties you wouldn't [TS]

  have made that guess I think i would say [TS]

  they had needed somebody who is going to [TS]

  pour hundreds of millions of dollars [TS]

  down a whole hoping eventually that was [TS]

  going to become a foundation that's what [TS]

  Steve Jobs did I mean after you know [TS]

  Lucas's years with it and they thought [TS]

  they were a hardware business that was [TS]

  going to maybe do something on the side [TS]

  if they hadn't poured hundreds of [TS]

  millions of dollars in research for [TS]

  you know this really not exactly but [TS]

  nine but certainly supportive ongoing [TS]

  you know leader with big pockets [TS]

  it wouldn't have happened and you know [TS]

  i'll try this isn't letting but I'm i [TS]

  knew a bunch of computer graphics people [TS]

  in the in the eighties and nineties [TS]

  people were involved in siggraph and one [TS]

  was the chair a six and you know I old [TS]

  housemate was a was a computer graphics [TS]

  guy so I met a lot of these kind of [TS]

  people like Ed and it is there's a [TS]

  personality types of readiness and I'm [TS]

  like oh I i remember the kind of person [TS]

  that gets into this field the patients [TS]

  you need because you leave you go insane [TS]

  and you leave the glaring part is we had [TS]

  when i worked at the kodak center for [TS]

  creative imaging we had a pixar box they [TS]

  bought one the cube and it SAT there and [TS]

  none of us knew how to do anything with [TS]

  it and occasionally I would try to plug [TS]

  in component video monitors to and get [TS]

  to do anything at all we had no idea [TS]

  what to do with it [TS]

  I had type of street and i still i think [TS]

  i may even have the disks somewhere type [TS]

  of street for the mac which was 3d [TS]

  rendered type app for the mac from like [TS]

  1993 or something like that when they [TS]

  were a software company which based on [TS]

  the book they realized that they were [TS]

  gonna really be a hardware company said [TS]

  they had try something else [TS]

  the things that this company did when [TS]

  it's time in the wilderness in [TS]

  retrospect it's it's kind of obvious [TS]

  what the problem was because like in the [TS]

  beginning they were Lucas thing and [TS]

  Lucas had something that he wanted them [TS]

  to do just revolutionized you know film [TS]

  editing and filmmaking which they did to [TS]

  the best of their ability and it turns [TS]

  out that they were ahead of their time [TS]

  and whatever and Lucas Lucas stitch them [TS]

  and then they went to steve jobs and [TS]

  what Steve Jobs know how to do he knows [TS]

  how to make computers and software in [TS]

  various combinations and they try to do [TS]

  that for a while I don't the only time [TS]

  that they found success is when I said [TS]

  alright what do you guys want to do and [TS]

  it turned out of the people who remained [TS]

  or the people who were there and the [TS]

  people who are important [TS]

  they said actually we you know Kat most [TS]

  wanted to make always wanted to make [TS]

  films right and when you let them do [TS]

  that i mean i'm not it's not saying that [TS]

  was guaranteed success but previously [TS]

  they had all been in the mindset of like [TS]

  underneath some other master do it Lucas [TS]

  once do with Steve Jobs knows how to do [TS]

  and get acquired by like GM nerve [TS]

  someone who makes dishwashers or [TS]

  whatever then it's like what you guys [TS]

  want to do and that's how they started [TS]

  off on their actual Road so in hindsight [TS]

  it's so easy to see all those periods [TS]

  and of course they weren't going to [TS]

  succeed because you know the people the [TS]

  people who were there and the people in [TS]

  charge didn't have the heart of those [TS]

  things what i want what i wonder is if [TS]

  anybody's going to look at this and say [TS]

  wow it took them nearly 20 years to get [TS]

  to the point where they became a movie [TS]

  studio [TS]

  sometimes it's worth throwing money at [TS]

  something because you build a foundation [TS]

  you build a type working team you build [TS]

  a foundation of knowledge you build a [TS]

  management style that works and you've [TS]

  got raw material all you need is is a [TS]

  crystallizing sense of purpose because [TS]

  the question I have is if a company like [TS]

  Pixar could happen today with the sort [TS]

  of insane pressure the overheated [TS]

  pressure that happened that that seems [TS]

  to be a matter of course for teka teka [TS]

  Jason industries where you're supposed [TS]

  to hit the ground running within 18 to [TS]

  24 months and then and then grow from [TS]

  there and then and quickly pixar [TS]

  happened today [TS]

  well coming out of Lucas like it did it [TS]

  was almost like you're talking about a [TS]

  research division of a company and not a [TS]

  start-up right the this was we collected [TS]

  a bunch of brilliant people who know [TS]

  about computer graphics into George [TS]

  Lucas's credit when Star Wars movies are [TS]

  being made with models he's thinking [TS]

  ahead and saying you know computer [TS]

  graphics is going to be a thing we gotta [TS]

  we gotta get something you know in there [TS]

  and we're gonna try this and steve jobs [TS]

  you know sort of had the same thing [TS]

  which is I think there's something here [TS]

  and these people are really smart but [TS]

  i'm not quite sure what it is yet and it [TS]

  was much more like funding in R&D lab [TS]

  where they're like well we're going to [TS]

  try some hardware we're gonna make some [TS]

  software if you take those products out [TS]

  and say it guys just stop making [TS]

  products just think about stuff but this [TS]

  is the products we sort of part of their [TS]

  exploration and they end up in a place [TS]

  where where something catches but you're [TS]

  right Lisa you know this is not the kind [TS]

  of thing that you just say we're gonna [TS]

  do a start-up and make a thing unless [TS]

  you're unless you're like Elon Musk and [TS]

  you've got a billion dollars kicking [TS]

  around you really you know this is more [TS]

  like rd where you got somebody to fund [TS]

  bankroll something and just say but get [TS]

  some smart people let them kick around [TS]

  for a few years and make a bunch of [TS]

  mistakes and they will eventually get [TS]

  somewhere really interesting because you [TS]

  know without at any point this could [TS]

  all apart and that's where they didn't [TS]

  wake up to that for a while is that they [TS]

  weren't to read when they became a [TS]

  self-standing company they didn't quite [TS]

  realize that they weren't an R&D company [TS]

  for a long time they were sort of trying [TS]

  to figure out where the revenue was I [TS]

  didn't really get it they tried [TS]

  different things they rejected a bunch [TS]

  of stuff but they still sort of acted [TS]

  like they were part of some other firm [TS]

  like we will be well we'll provide the [TS]

  rendering stuff for these other [TS]

  companies even though they weren't [TS]

  really companies who wanted it and what [TS]

  they were creating didn't really work [TS]

  for that purpose what was funny reading [TS]

  the first part of the book for me was [TS]

  the other day I found this out of [TS]

  nowhere a Japanese proverb on the inside [TS]

  of an honest tea bottle cap that said [TS]

  vision without action is a daydream but [TS]

  action without vision is a nightmare and [TS]

  at the end the whole time reading the [TS]

  first part of the book and I'm thinking [TS]

  he's going to say that oh my god that's [TS]

  exactly what he's talking about [TS]

  well there's that one of the book one of [TS]

  the first quotes I pola I i highlighted [TS]

  when I read this [TS]

  we're capitals talking about some of the [TS]

  really bad non advice he received from [TS]

  his friends and contemporary he singles [TS]

  at one focus [TS]

  I'm going to quote here focus focus [TS]

  focus this was a particular favorite [TS]

  piece of not advise when people hear it [TS]

  they not their heads in agreement as it [TS]

  a great truth has been presented not [TS]

  realizing that they've been diverted [TS]

  from addressing the far harder problem [TS]

  deciding what it is they should be [TS]

  focusing on there's nothing in this [TS]

  advice that gives you any idea how to [TS]

  figure out where the focus should be or [TS]

  how to apply your energy to it and I [TS]

  thought that was just a really elegant [TS]

  distillation of it was it i thought was [TS]

  a very elegant elegant critique of what [TS]

  then is talking about which is a you [TS]

  know action without purpose or or action [TS]

  without inspiration for or intent behind [TS]

  it [TS]

  I'm not damn oh I'm sorry dash I'm so [TS]

  sorry but if I'm so are so dumb what was [TS]

  it was really neat reading about the [TS]

  drawing lessons and how we can't see [TS]

  that we can't draw the chair because we [TS]

  see the chair but we're more accurate [TS]

  when we draw the negative space in and [TS]

  around the chair and and that to me is [TS]

  everything about focus because that that [TS]

  makes you look at the things you don't [TS]

  already know [TS]

  which is much more much more worthwhile [TS]

  when you're trying to be creative and [TS]

  you don't know where an idea is going to [TS]

  come from and I mean that happens to me [TS]

  all the time where I'll start something [TS]

  and throw out the first two or three [TS]

  story ideas because the third one was [TS]

  really really good and I had no idea [TS]

  this character is gonna do that so sorry [TS]

  I mean maybe the whole book just well [TS]

  well that seems to be the one he talks [TS]

  about the mental models and the [TS]

  metaphors that people use yeah katal had [TS]

  the real issue of people referring [TS]

  excavation archaeology because he said [TS]

  look it's not like the movie was there [TS]

  and we grew up toward it [TS]

  you know that I don't think he's a guy [TS]

  who's really into the allegory of the [TS]

  cave like he doesn't strike me as the [TS]

  Platonic I felt bake cause he's like [TS]

  it's not like this ideal movies out [TS]

  there and we grew up toward it's an [TS]

  iterative process we're not uncover [TS]

  anything we're not really archaeologists [TS]

  of of ideas and that's something he [TS]

  returns to over and over again as is you [TS]

  really have no idea what's the problem [TS]

  that you're facing are you have no idea [TS]

  what you don't know you have to train [TS]

  yourself to look at every situation [TS]

  without bringing context to you have to [TS]

  you have to find new ways to approach it [TS]

  and I thought that was just a really [TS]

  really smart insight to keep hammering [TS]

  on over and over again was the idea that [TS]

  if you want to be creative start by [TS]

  stripping away the context in and just [TS]

  and just try to see what you're not [TS]

  trying to try to see things from a [TS]

  different perspective as a collection of [TS]

  shapes around this shoot that's upside [TS]

  down [TS]

  I thought underlying a lot of this book [TS]

  to is something that's understated and [TS]

  now i have to admit I've never read [TS]

  Clayton Christensen's book innovators [TS]

  dilemma i feel like i have because i've [TS]

  read so many articles and excerpts that [TS]

  involve it but but you know the so it's [TS]

  ridiculous you actually need to sit down [TS]

  and read the thing but i have read [TS]

  interviews with them and lengthy things [TS]

  and watched and talk about it and [TS]

  whatever so I feel like I'm converse in [TS]

  the theory of and the innovators dilemma [TS]

  is the idea [TS]

  yeah one part of it is that these [TS]

  entrenched industries like Disney in [TS]

  this case this day what it became a [TS]

  figure out one thing that works they own [TS]

  a whole space and you know gets applied [TS]

  to mean [TS]

  in the computers and steel manufacturer [TS]

  whatever they plucky upstart scum who do [TS]

  what seems to be cruelly crappy work [TS]

  originally but what they're so cheap and [TS]

  they're so good at the worst thing for [TS]

  the lowest profit Louis margin thing [TS]

  that an industry or company does that [TS]

  they eat that part up and they're like [TS]

  oh they can have that terrible part we [TS]

  don't like that anyway don't make much [TS]

  money off it but they grow from that [TS]

  base and they absorb and take over the [TS]

  whole industry or or displays the [TS]

  company and I feel like you know the [TS]

  pixar story actually has a lot of that [TS]

  in it not just from what pixar did to [TS]

  animation which is exactly that is they [TS]

  started doing something that everyone [TS]

  thought was laughable and then became [TS]

  dominant because they develop the [TS]

  technology to make it work but the other [TS]

  part is that he constantly re-evaluates [TS]

  a whether or not what they're doing [TS]

  makes any sense so we he tries to fight [TS]

  complacency because he worries [TS]

  they're going to be that company at the [TS]

  top that doesn't realize they're about [TS]

  to be eaten from them from all their [TS]

  competition from the bottom be destroyed [TS]

  and coming back and forth going over [TS]

  that again and again and again seems to [TS]

  be one of the lessons of the book you [TS]

  mentioned a little bit this dichotomy [TS]

  almost between the technical and the [TS]

  creative and that was something that [TS]

  struck me about it is you've got this [TS]

  incredibly talented group of computer [TS]

  scientists here and yet I kind of feel [TS]

  like the thing that they were most [TS]

  innovative about was this having a [TS]

  structure that gets good storytelling [TS]

  not at the storytelling innovation of [TS]

  having their brain trust and and being [TS]

  really functional when end and [TS]

  disciplined when it came to building [TS]

  stories and going through scenes was the [TS]

  is the thing that makes pixar the the [TS]

  the studio that creates these amazing [TS]

  stories that are classics not the [TS]

  technology mean they couldn't have been [TS]

  the first computer animated film without [TS]

  the technology that they had this [TS]

  amazing technology but if that story [TS]

  hadn't been good and if the success of [TS]

  stories hadn't been good [TS]

  it would have been all for nothing and [TS]

  and so that's a fascinating mixture that [TS]

  this isn't just a story about them [TS]

  building amazing technology and [TS]

  believing in their technology it's also [TS]

  a story about you know they're these [TS]

  very technical people [TS]

  finding creative people who are good [TS]

  matches and putting them together and [TS]

  having this process for storytelling [TS]

  that was just as functional as the [TS]

  obviously amazing technology that they [TS]

  had I thought it was really fascinating [TS]

  how up evolved over the course of the [TS]

  movie where if you read about all the [TS]

  different plots they had going at one [TS]

  point and you know basically the only [TS]

  thing that stayed the whole time was [TS]

  Carl but I even forget that i'm sorry [TS]

  it's it's it's there is a lot of the [TS]

  book are absorbed and took notes on this [TS]

  is not one of them but I on finding you [TS]

  went through several iterations to where [TS]

  the original was supposed to be parallel [TS]

  story of nemo and his tank and his dad [TS]

  in the wild and they figured out the [TS]

  story structure was confusing scrapped [TS]

  it and started over [TS]

  um they talk about toy story 2 how they [TS]

  had 2 and i thought was really helpful [TS]

  for him to hammer over and over again [TS]

  that look we were not afraid to make [TS]

  mistakes it's an iterative process no [TS]

  one is ever punished for failing it's [TS]

  better to fail and learn from it and to [TS]

  assess it and do something well then to [TS]

  be afraid to try anything and then turn [TS]

  to mediocrity especially cuz he [TS]

  contrasts the the disney process at the [TS]

  end and after disney bought Pixar and he [TS]

  he got broken hinge on last year got [TS]

  brought into to run the disney animation [TS]

  studio and they were working on the [TS]

  movie about the dog and it wasn't [TS]

  working and people were afraid to speak [TS]

  up and say anything because if you if [TS]

  you had done that your corporate culture [TS]

  it was sticking your neck out and it was [TS]

  taking it was considered taking a risk [TS]

  and it was better just to put your head [TS]

  down keep working and Abby risk-averse [TS]

  things like now you've really gotta [TS]

  embrace risk and you gotta embrace [TS]

  failure because if if you don't if you [TS]

  don't try things you're never going to [TS]

  learn from them and find the best way to [TS]

  do anything and we do live in a pretty [TS]

  risk-averse called I don't know about [TS]

  you guys I've worked in some fairly [TS]

  risk-averse places and it's it's always [TS]

  interesting it's always interesting to [TS]

  me to read and hear examples that that [TS]

  can that prove exactly the opposite i [TS]

  loved Andrew Stanton's understands line [TS]

  which is fail fast you should fail and [TS]

  just go and just go for it and do it and [TS]

  find quickly whether you're going to [TS]

  fail and I don't you know don't [TS]

  soft-pedal it fail and fail fast [TS]

  it took a while to get to that though [TS]

  that's where the themes of the book is [TS]

  they think they're like well we should [TS]

  give a lot of time for this we did this [TS]

  for this movie that worked out well and [TS]

  then he says the thing I mean he's so [TS]

  ridiculously honest in this without [TS]

  being shaming nobody has shamed in this [TS]

  book I mean he doesn't he's like we had [TS]

  a fire that director we had to replace [TS]

  that director and so-and-so and [TS]

  so-and-so came on we had a well-known [TS]

  regarded children's book author come in [TS]

  and we couldn't work with that means [TS]

  that over and over the people where [TS]

  there's a problem he does not point the [TS]

  finger and say we had selling something [TS]

  like literally the name of that person [TS]

  but the fact that he's so blunt about [TS]

  that like every time I keep back up [TS]

  being surprised because he doesn't even [TS]

  fall into place and see in the book in [TS]

  that he just seems to call it's like we [TS]

  thought we had this figured out we [TS]

  figured we run in these like that I [TS]

  asked and like oh my god we need to have [TS]

  an entire likely in the book spoilers [TS]

  they do that whole company notes day [TS]

  where they essentially i mean they spend [TS]

  weeks preparing for it [TS]

  they shot the company down for a day [TS]

  which I'm sure cost millions of dollars [TS]

  in terms of you know the projects they [TS]

  have going and but they were formed the [TS]

  company they took something that was [TS]

  working and said it's not working well [TS]

  enough and I'm sure this will come out [TS]

  for many of our conversations here but i [TS]

  thought like Ed Catmull is he's like [TS]

  that seems to be and if this portrayal [TS]

  of himself in the book is anything he's [TS]

  like the most conscientious but relax [TS]

  guy he's the guy you go to when you are [TS]

  totally freaking out and he doesn't just [TS]

  excuse it he makes he figures that I was [TS]

  like a guru practically doesn't pay [TS]

  himself that way and a perfect foil to [TS]

  this eve Steve Jobs hot mentality the [TS]

  colon code called add Catmull is cold [TS]

  but emotional and sensitive Steve Jobs [TS]

  was high and they seem like such a [TS]

  perfect complement but also a camel does [TS]

  exactly what jobs does what we can read [TS]

  jobs doesn't he's just telling us here [TS]

  were so much about what steve jobs that [TS]

  we had to infer read you know leaks and [TS]

  things like that capitalist says hey we [TS]

  did this crazy thing because we need to [TS]

  reinvent everything we're doing suddenly [TS]

  yeah and I don't you gotta throw John [TS]

  Lasseter in there too who's a you know [TS]

  the other piece of this the this this [TS]

  this creative force and it's a [TS]

  fascinating matchup jobs and cattle and [TS]

  Lassiter and you know you've got a [TS]

  you've got to think that a lot of a [TS]

  success Pixar has had is being fortune [TS]

  enough to have those people in in [TS]

  positions of authority in that company [TS]

  is as leaders well forget his capital [TS]

  seem to isolate John Lasseter doesn't [TS]

  seem to come up in the end not power [TS]

  struggles when stuff really is being [TS]

  pulled apart like taffy cattle talks [TS]

  about his conversation directly with [TS]

  jobs so lastly I think brought such I [TS]

  mean the creative stuff like it's odd [TS]

  that capital talk so much about [TS]

  fostering the creative process without [TS]

  being someone who himself is you know [TS]

  artists Albany is at a level but not in [TS]

  this way [TS]

  time for a brief break for one of our [TS]

  sponsors it's and this is [TS]

  going to be a sponsor read with a [TS]

  special appearance by John siracusa in [TS]

  it in an anecdote so stay tuned for that [TS] is a place to help you learn [TS]

  and keep up-to-date with software pickup [TS]

  brand new skills explore new hobbies [TS]

  with easy-to-follow video tutorials that [TS]

  is the killer feature at Leonard [TS] you are learning about lots of [TS]

  tech topics from the beginner level to [TS]

  the super advanced level but you're [TS]

  doing it with professionally produced [TS]

  high quality video tutorials from the [TS]

  experts using the latest online tools [TS]

  learning skills to increase your [TS]

  productivity editing your own video [TS]

  footage building websites programming [TS]

  all of these things are available in the [TS]

  huge more than 2,400 courses available [TS]

  at works directly [TS]

  with software companies to provide [TS]

  timely training on the latest versions [TS]

  of their products often the day that [TS]

  those versions come out so you get a new [TS]

  version of your favorite professional [TS]

  app and you're wondering how do i take [TS]

  advantage of the new features guess what [TS] probably has training for that [TS]

  app on the day that you get the software [TS]

  and like I said you can be a beginner or [TS]

  a super advanced user there are courses [TS]

  for all of the different experience [TS]

  levels and there's one low monthly price [TS]

  twenty-five dollars a month gives you [TS]

  unlimited access you can watch as many [TS]

  videos in the library as you want as [TS]

  many times as you want there's no nickel [TS]

  and diming there's one subscription [TS]

  price twenty-five dollars a month and [TS]

  you get everything and when I say [TS]

  everything I mean everything microsoft [TS]

  office adobe creative cloud Final Cut [TS]

  Pro Logic Pro and more mac windows ipad [TS]

  for business google docs and [TS]

  google sheets keynote six there are so [TS]

  many and here's my John syracuse the [TS]

  story the incomparable dot-com is a [TS]

  website that i built the front end of [TS]

  myself and I'm not much of a web [TS]

  designer and I certainly haven't [TS]

  designed a lot of websites since the [TS]

  20th century probably and I was talking [TS]

  to John syracuse this weekend and he [TS]

  said it shows it's like well it's true [TS]

  it does and he's not one to mince words [TS]

  but however I will say this i was proud [TS]

  of myself i made it responsive it [TS]

  actually does some things differently if [TS]

  you're an iPad or an iPhone or if you [TS]

  have a small browser windows my first [TS]

  time ever doing that and it turns out [TS] has responsive design courses [TS]

  so you can learn from the experts about [TS]

  how to do something like make your [TS]

  website responsive to smaller devices [TS]

  and behave differently on mobile than it [TS]

  does on the desktop and that's what I [TS]

  did so that was pretty cool and John [TS]

  siracusa being what professional was not [TS]

  impressed but like I said every skill [TS]

  level including mine can be serviced at [TS] so improve your skills learn [TS]

  new software keep up with new technology [TS]

  all the courses are incredibly [TS]

  high-quality this is not somebody in [TS]

  their basement on youtube making a [TS]

  hostage video [TS]

  these are super high quality in a [TS]

  professional studio with experts [TS]

  explaining things in bite-sized pieces [TS]

  the navigation is really easy [TS]

  it's really amazing you should see it [TS]

  for yourself and I've got good news [TS]

  there we have a sweet deal for you [TS] is going to provide you with a [TS]

  special offer to access the whole [TS]

  library free all of it not just the [TS]

  intros not just some of the courses all [TS]

  the courses free for seven days [TS]

  here's what you need to do visit [TS] ly ND slash incomparable [TS]

  to start your seven day free trial [TS]

  that's ly ND slash incomparable [TS]

  and thank you so much to the good people [TS]

  at for teaching me some things [TS]

  about responsive design despite John [TS]

  Syracuse and not being impressed and for [TS]

  supporting me uncomfortable going back [TS]

  to story the thing that struck me this [TS]

  this is the one actual quote that i [TS]

  highlighted wanted to mention [TS]

  even before jobs comes into the picture [TS]

  when they're doing their very first [TS]

  short thing just to try it out and show [TS]

  their new techniques and they didn't get [TS]

  it done in time for the the premier any [TS]

  and he says we could complete a rough [TS]

  version of it in time but portions will [TS]

  be unfinished as his wireframe images [TS]

  mock-ups made from polygons of the [TS]

  finished characters instead of fully [TS]

  colored images the night of our premier [TS]

  we watched mortified as these segments [TS]

  appeared on the screen but something [TS]

  surprising happened despite our worries [TS]

  the majority of the people said they [TS]

  hadn't even noticed that the movie had [TS]

  switched from full color to black and [TS]

  white wire frames they were so caught up [TS]

  in the emotion of the story that they [TS]

  hadn't noticed its flaws and here's the [TS]

  money quote this is my first encounter [TS]

  with the phenomenon i would notice again [TS]

  and again throughout my career for all [TS]

  the care you put into artistry visual [TS]

  polish frequently doesn't matter if [TS]

  you're getting the story right and i run [TS]

  across that in theatres all the time to [TS]

  some of the most beautiful acting some [TS]

  of the most beautiful writing I've ever [TS]

  seen has been on a stage with the table [TS]

  and two chairs and two actors speaking [TS]

  words that no projections no fancy set [TS]

  design the lighting tricks you know and [TS]

  yet you go you know I go to theater all [TS]

  the time and see the gorgeous gorgeous [TS]

  set designs and lighting and projections [TS]

  smallest all in the service of a story [TS]

  that really needs work and you know and [TS]

  and i just love that and I i want to [TS]

  take this book and shove it in the hands [TS]

  of every person working in a theater [TS]

  company building in this country because [TS]

  they could use it seriously troubles a [TS]

  lot of them will say oh this doesn't [TS]

  apply to meet we're not doing it with [TS]

  you're not technology whether it's the [TS]

  pureblood they be like no no you gotta [TS]

  drop that you go kart and read this and [TS]

  accepted i'm so glad you mentioned ego [TS]

  because that's one thing that comes [TS]

  through in this book I made a note about [TS]

  the the lack of eagle one of the things [TS]

  I've noticed about really intelligent [TS]

  people that I've run across again and [TS]

  again is they have an all-day they have [TS]

  a wonderful lack of ego they're really [TS]

  open to new ideas regardless of the [TS]

  source they don't find a lot of [TS]

  hierarchy to it and and to them it's [TS]

  more important that ideas that ideas are [TS]

  tried tested deploy effectively [TS]

  make the world a better and more [TS]

  interesting place and this this [TS]

  capitalism at say it says it explicitly [TS]

  but this ethos permeates the whole book [TS]

  i think this idea that pixar you can [TS]

  take profit you should take you should [TS]

  take enormous pride and craftsmanship [TS]

  and your work but ultimately one of the [TS]

  reasons it succeeds is because they [TS]

  don't as a culture they don't indulge [TS]

  Divas they don't indulge a cult of [TS]

  personality they don't indulge ego at [TS]

  all and you have to learn to be the kind [TS]

  of smart where you don't have a lot of [TS]

  ego bound up with being the smartest [TS]

  person in the room you have to be the [TS]

  kind of smart where you keep your eyes [TS]

  open and your receptive to new ideas and [TS]

  you are always always always open to the [TS]

  possibility that you can learn something [TS]

  from anyone in any way and they talk [TS]

  about this with everybody has you know [TS]

  pictures problems everyone's problems [TS]

  you don't have to wait for permission to [TS]

  grant responsibility [TS]

  you don't have to wait for permission to [TS]

  speak hierarchy doesn't matter [TS]

  ATP emphasizes will you show the company [TS]

  has hierarchy in some fashion but they [TS]

  they want good ideas and good solutions [TS]

  to come from everywhere and in order to [TS]

  empower people that way you you kind of [TS]

  have to aggressively de-emphasize ego as [TS]

  a function of intellect a lot of people [TS]

  don't respond to criticism well they and [TS]

  they take it as a personal affront and [TS]

  and creating a culture where everybody [TS]

  is on the same team and they're just [TS]

  trying to make the thing better and that [TS]

  the idea the idea that you have is a [TS]

  starting point and if it if there's a [TS]

  better idea that comes out of it then [TS]

  you didn't lose because your idea wasn't [TS]

  good enough you're just part of this [TS]

  process and that is you know I took a [TS]

  Creative Writing course in college and [TS]

  you know I we all have to critique other [TS]

  people's work that was the assignment [TS]

  that's how you got graded and it's you [TS]

  know you try to be gentle [TS]

  you know but some people you are [TS]

  destroying this thing that they they [TS]

  think it's a personal insult and and I [TS]

  was amazed by the fact that it picks are [TS]

  they really got to the point where [TS]

  everybody felt like they could say [TS]

  something everybody can make you know [TS]

  make these comments about what they want [TS]

  and what what the what the story should [TS]

  be and you know andrew stanton could [TS]

  have had the idea that was sitting there [TS]

  that got torn apart and his response [TS]

  would be you know great i'm glad week it [TS]

  got something [TS]

  around a bit and then that's good enough [TS]

  in the after we're talking about Steve [TS]

  Jobs they talk about one of steve's [TS]

  greatest strength was pitching pitching [TS]

  ideas where and he says explicitly [TS]

  pitching isn't as a way of testing [TS]

  material taking this measure and [TS]

  strengthening it by observing how place [TS]

  an audience but if the idea doesn't fly [TS]

  good people who go to pitching are [TS]

  extremely adept dropping it moving on [TS]

  and it's a rare skill and it also steve [TS]

  jobs ego doesn't attach the suggestions [TS]

  he makes even as he throws his full [TS]

  weight of belief beyond them he was just [TS]

  there's a certain lack of ego and in [TS]

  making in making suggestions and in [TS]

  being open to criticism and an iterative [TS]

  processes there so i have an insight [TS]

  from my one of my few forays into [TS]

  corporate culture is I mean I work the [TS] in the early days and and [TS]

  jeff bezos is a complete genius he's [TS]

  also a great manager he had but without [TS]

  going to detail it was interesting to [TS]

  read this and have watched how Amazon [TS]

  grew and it's missteps and the kind of [TS]

  culture it appears to have created both [TS]

  from external reports of people I work [TS]

  there at different times including [TS]

  recently and the reason you can have [TS]

  open criticism a place like Pixar is [TS]

  because you're not going to be fired and [TS]

  we talked about the little earlier like [TS]

  people worried about job you know the [TS]

  the disney culture people worry about [TS]

  saying the wrong thing and whatever in [TS]

  when i was an Amazon one of the reasons [TS]

  i left after six months as I was put in [TS]

  charge a few months into a huge project [TS]

  I did my part right i could not get any [TS]

  of the company had a hundred people when [TS]

  i joined and about 400 when I left and I [TS]

  could not get any of the already siloed [TS]

  closed-off other divisions do what I was [TS]

  being directed to do by the CEO of the [TS]

  company they would not do it and I [TS]

  realized because i couldn't succeed in [TS]

  that environment there is no future for [TS]

  me there and that was one of the things [TS]

  that contribute to me leaving I wasn't [TS]

  exactly forced out but there was no more [TS]

  roll and I feel like the environment [TS]

  pixar if this is any accurate [TS]

  description which it seems to be based [TS]

  again on like external signs you know [TS]

  that the film's they released the kind [TS]

  of stories they tell and then the people [TS]

  come out of it they they you're not [TS]

  fired for being part of helping make [TS]

  things better when you say things are [TS]

  wrong or when you try to break down like [TS]

  there's a number of discussions about [TS]

  the production side the creative side or [TS]

  or on this person you know they sent [TS]

  somebody often three days they figure [TS]

  out how to do this thing that should [TS]

  have taken you know six months they're [TS]

  able to rework that thing at disney the [TS]

  the model for one of the characters in a [TS]

  walk-on 1402 it's it's you were not pet [TS]

  he apparently figured a way to not make [TS]

  people worry they would lose their job [TS]

  it was more sensible for you to speak up [TS]

  then to remain quiet was a safer thing [TS]

  to speak up and that is in this [TS]

  extremely crazy thing I wanted to talk [TS]

  about there's a line in this book that [TS]

  up that I what was one of my highlights [TS]

  on the candle which was about leaders of [TS]

  companies focus so focused on the [TS]

  competition they were never they never [TS]

  developed in deep introspection about [TS]

  other destructive forces that work in [TS]

  this introspection i think is another [TS]

  big part of the pixar story that there [TS]

  that there always concerned about you [TS]

  know what's going on that the problems [TS]

  they can't see the mistakes that are [TS]

  happening that that success [TS]

  there's a line John Madden the former [TS]

  football coach and sports announcer like [TS]

  to say that winning is a great deodorant [TS]

  and you know as long as you're winning [TS]

  the problems that you've got in your [TS]

  locker room or wherever don't matter [TS]

  because you're winning but as soon as [TS]

  you stop winning then you realize [TS]

  everything stinks and this is this is [TS]

  really what had cattle is getting out [TS]

  here is we can't wait for us to have a [TS]

  failure to discover that we have lots of [TS]

  major problems with what we're doing we [TS]

  need to we need to be rooting that stuff [TS]

  out now and that reminded me of was it [TS]

  was it a episode or two of hypercritical [TS]

  John where you talked about a lot of the [TS]

  same points this uh you know had Pixar's [TS]

  take on you know you you've got to be [TS]

  constantly rooting out these these [TS]

  things and and that you can't wait for [TS]

  failure to do it well the episode first [TS]

  motion picture i think was about i [TS]

  forget what you were going through a [TS]

  bunch of big companies and saying what [TS]

  we thought was wrong with them and pixar [TS]

  was the 1i think I saved to the end [TS]

  because it's like who's going to say [TS]

  something bad about pixar this is maybe [TS]

  2011 or something [TS]

  what could possibly be wrong with Pixar [TS]

  everyone loves pixar to make great [TS]

  movies you know obviously this is before [TS]

  this book [TS]

  and before I knew pretty much anything [TS]

  about the inner workings and the one [TS]

  thing I decided that seemed like it was [TS]

  wrong with Pixar is this string of [TS]

  successes without any failures up to [TS]

  that point pointed to a situation where [TS]

  they weren't taking enough risks right [TS]

  and so it's like all right what it you [TS]

  know if every single movie is success [TS]

  are any of these movies as biggest [TS]

  success they could be if you're willing [TS]

  to take more risks and the tweet reply I [TS]

  got from michael johnson who is [TS]

  mentioned in this book and works at [TS]

  Pixar cleaning [TS]

  yeah good friend of the show Michael [TS]

  Johnson who is mentioned in the book in [TS]

  response to to that episode of [TS]

  hypocritical was a tweet that I should [TS]

  look it up but i believe the entire [TS]

  content of the tweet is we don't release [TS]

  our failures which was a reasonable [TS]

  answer and if you look in the book you [TS]

  can see that right now they talk about [TS]

  entire movies that they spent millions [TS]

  of dollars on that said you know what [TS]

  the blue yeah yeah yeah that movie is [TS]

  not coming out or all the movies with a [TS]

  change Directors and and stuff like that [TS]

  with it yet where the movie is [TS]

  essentially not the same movie they were [TS]

  working on because they change directors [TS]

  they barely mentioned brave and that was [TS]

  when I would have one moment invention [TS]

  cars to either look like this before i [TS]

  had seen car so I didn't know you know [TS]

  but like and I think a lot of the things [TS]

  in the book if we go back and listen to [TS]

  the hypercritical episode you can see a [TS]

  lot of things in the book that directly [TS]

  speak to those particular points and a [TS]

  lot of people ask me all right so given [TS]

  that you've read this book do you feel [TS]

  like it answers your question or your [TS]

  you're concerned about what's wrong with [TS]

  Pixar's and in many respects of course [TS]

  illuminating and learning how things [TS]

  happen or whatever but I in one [TS]

  particular respect I think it it still [TS]

  leaves the question unanswered and I [TS]

  don't think this is necessarily weakness [TS]

  of pixar but it's just the kind of [TS]

  company decided to create is one in [TS]

  which they have a system for making good [TS]

  movies and like the brain trust is a [TS]

  great example part of that system is at [TS]

  various points in the development of a [TS]

  movie we are going to have input from [TS]

  all these other great smart creative [TS]

  people to help you fix what's wrong with [TS]

  your movie and we're gonna you know and [TS]

  we're going to kill it if it looks like [TS]

  it's not going anywhere or we're gonna [TS]

  change the director if it looks like we [TS]

  need to do that [TS]

  right all these things are options on [TS]

  the table all this is structured to not [TS]

  allow a failure out into the market [TS]

  essentially and that you would say is a [TS]

  strength of it but i think the the [TS]

  larger point i was getting at him in the [TS]

  you know let me try to find something is [TS]

  wrong with Pixar those comparing it to [TS]

  miyazaki when you have one person who's [TS]

  in charge who seems to have very limited [TS]

  input from anyone else or sort of like [TS]

  he does what he wants to do and there's [TS]

  no brain trust is going to convince them [TS]

  to this works it doesn't work that [TS]

  person is going to put about a bunch of [TS]

  weird movies with weak parts sometimes [TS]

  total stinker movies but you also may [TS]

  get eventually something that is [TS]

  transcended that could never have been [TS]

  produced by system that was subject to [TS]

  that sort of collaborative process i'm [TS]

  not saying one of those things is better [TS]

  than the other but it's clear that Pixar [TS]

  is the kind of company that is it [TS]

  they've created a system a sort of [TS]

  self-healing system whereby they can [TS]

  make great movies and I i still wonder [TS]

  if does that system preclude making a [TS]

  transcendent movie alongside a bunch of [TS]

  turds like or that we always that are [TS]

  uneven or whatever because like you know [TS]

  i guess like the auteur theory versus [TS]

  you know within that the system they [TS]

  made for making movies yes the director [TS]

  has ultimate control and that your brain [TS]

  trust doesn't have authority to tell [TS]

  them what to do but it's still a process [TS]

  its is an engineering approach to [TS]

  creative work which i think is an [TS]

  amazing innovation a breakthrough in [TS]

  itself and who can argue with the [TS]

  results but it definitely is a different [TS]

  beast then we have one genius who threw [TS]

  his lifetime is going to make a bunch of [TS]

  movies some of them are going to be [TS]

  great some of the middle weird someone's [TS]

  going to be awful and one or two of them [TS]

  are going to be the shining gems are you [TS]

  ever going to get the shining James with [TS]

  this process of pixar maybe they're just [TS]

  different kind of gems Ruby's instead of [TS]

  sapphires it comes back to the money [TS]

  issue though to that you have to the [TS]

  fact that they can put so much money and [TS]

  walk away from most organizations cannot [TS]

  say we put 10 or 15 million dollars into [TS]

  development to this or whatever it is [TS]

  more doctor releases almost movie [TS]

  studios can now what you know they [TS]

  release them they do different things [TS]

  it's 120 business models out there is [TS]

  the movie because all they need a few [TS]

  really good hits every year and they can [TS]

  finance a boatload of failure but they [TS]

  release all the failures and tricks are [TS]

  doesn't release them even as the amazing [TS]

  part of a spike movies that you know [TS]

  that there are lots of things and [TS]

  behind-the-scenes and then i'm reminded [TS]

  of something I was actually thinking [TS]

  about while I was reading this a world [TS]

  war z where the story is they took the [TS]

  last day they had finished the movie and [TS]

  they took the last 30 minutes of it and [TS]

  said it's not working and they went out [TS]

  and reshot the last 30 minutes with a [TS]

  completely different script and it was a [TS]

  hit been so it was like it [TS]

  so I've seen that before but you're [TS]

  right you movie studios that can afford [TS]

  to spend millions of dollars reshoots [TS]

  are the example here a lot of times you [TS]

  just gonna get whipped into decent shape [TS]

  and get out the door and betterment of [TS]

  communication with even with a big movie [TS]

  studios one of the ongoing problems [TS]

  Hollywood has had is middle market or [TS]

  experimental films are actually getting [TS]

  squeezed down because right most studios [TS]

  are now so profoundly risk averse and so [TS]

  intent on the bottom line they're only [TS]

  going to do what they consider to be [TS]

  tentpole blockbusters your franchises [TS]

  your sequels youryour licensable [TS]

  characters [TS]

  that's why we have movies based on old [TS]

  TV shows right is because those are at [TS]

  least they've got some free market but [TS]

  another thing like for example a movie [TS]

  like terms of endearment couldn't get me [TS]

  today [TS]

  XR isn't risk-averse though because they [TS]

  have like that that whole process of [TS]

  like we together as a company are going [TS]

  to work to make sure this directors [TS]

  movie succeeds we're going to take all [TS]

  our collective experience and influence [TS]

  try to like to to collaborate on this [TS]

  morning yes that's the director's movie [TS]

  but we're going to make sure that we [TS]

  don't put it out anything bad [TS]

  and those those sort of pressures and [TS]

  input supplied like this the scene isn't [TS]

  working and maybe this character could [TS]

  be better whatever all that stuff makes [TS]

  the movie better [TS]

  the only thing I question about this [TS]

  process is it do you end up with a [TS]

  different type of movie a series of [TS]

  really great movies and maybe a couple [TS]

  of good ones but no bad ones versus a [TS]

  process where an individual doesn't have [TS]

  the benefit of that input and is going [TS]

  to have scenes in the movie The don't [TS]

  work they could have easily been fixed [TS]

  by your brain just meeting is going to [TS]

  have some movies that in in their [TS]

  entirety don't work but that is also [TS]

  occasionally going to be able to follow [TS]

  his muse in a direction that would have [TS]

  received feed good intelligent feedback [TS]

  from other people that nevertheless [TS]

  would have been shaving the edges [TS]

  off the movie like and I keep picking [TS]

  miyazaki because there are definitely [TS]

  weird pointy edges and birds on those [TS]

  movies and in some respects like that [TS]

  the the the imperfections or the parts [TS]

  that don't work or the things like if [TS]

  you take any document we turn to the [TS]

  brain does that tell you 50 things that [TS]

  are wrong with it and yet somehow the [TS]

  whole some tile feels different to me [TS]

  than even my favorite pixar movies do [TS]

  and i'm not saying that's a bad part of [TS]

  the pixar process i'm saying that's [TS]

  that's what they've made and it is [TS]

  pretty amazing considering that that's [TS]

  what made you think about the movie [TS]

  studios who have like the broken version [TS]

  of that machine was just like well we [TS]

  take we take what was good and what time [TS]

  to make a crappier and sometimes we find [TS]

  stuff that we know is gonna be crap or [TS]

  whatever Pixar's way above that level [TS]

  but that was their example when they [TS]

  took over dissonant disney and said oh [TS]

  my god you know what we do here can this [TS]

  process save this company and they felt [TS]

  like when I actually it with wreck-it [TS]

  Ralph and frozen i mean it it did you [TS]

  write this as my husband point out the [TS]

  last two disney animated movies to come [TS]

  out which were record Robin frozen have [TS]

  have been in his estimated information [TS]

  better than the last two pixar movies [TS]

  that have come [TS]

  even so he feels like the balance he [TS]

  feels like the balance of storytelling [TS]

  in talent has shifted from one to the [TS]

  other brave is also just a movie right [TS]

  brain is not pixar know that was pretty [TS]

  it's the only Pixar movie I really don't [TS]

  like I haven't seen cars to yet so I i [TS]

  have seen cars 2 and it wasn't a [TS]

  terrible movie but it definitely like it [TS]

  is definitely i wanted to say something [TS]

  about that Miyazaki idea because John I [TS]

  I totally get where you're coming from [TS]

  and I i think i agree with you that it's [TS]

  less likely that you're going to get [TS]

  I mean even when you know we've been [TS]

  Brad Brad Bird and understand these [TS]

  people they step into that room and [TS]

  they're still going to be part of the [TS]

  process and they may lead it may bring [TS]

  their idea to the table but it's it is [TS]

  part of the story process and you wonder [TS]

  if something very strange and [TS]

  idiosyncratic will not happen because [TS]

  the the the process won't allow it [TS]

  that said Pixar has done some strange i [TS]

  mean up has a lot of really weird things [TS]

  about it and the first half hour of [TS]

  Wally is a brilliant and weird uh and [TS]

  dialogue lists set of images right so [TS]

  it's not as if it's so I'm torn because [TS]

  I think you're right but I feel like [TS]

  there's more given the process then [TS]

  maybe you might expect [TS]

  here's the thing that would when you go [TS]

  into the room or you when you have this [TS]

  collaborative process and these ppl [TS]

  office offer these suggestions there [TS]

  right there right that this thing isn't [TS]

  working in the subtle way that this [TS]

  thing could be better in this way and [TS]

  and maybe you should you need to figure [TS]

  out what the problem is here because [TS]

  this isn't there but that's why that's [TS]

  why the machine works because all those [TS]

  people are right right [TS]

  I and it's not like they're making your [TS]

  movie worse but they are changing it if [TS]

  it's completely smooth like if you it's [TS]

  not completely smooth that they're [TS]

  they're making your movie better than it [TS]

  was but they are closing the door on [TS]

  some aspects of the way the movie could [TS]

  have been if it had if everything had [TS]

  gone well and if we got like was that [TS]

  they're basically increasing your [TS]

  batting average you're gonna do much [TS]

  better they're going to make your movie [TS]

  better and that's the danger of having [TS]

  the input from all the smart people as [TS]

  they are actually write about what but [TS]

  it may be at that point if those people [TS]

  weren't there what would you have done [TS]

  would you have made a crappy movie [TS]

  that's very likely are made a movie [TS]

  that's worse [TS]

  there's also the possibility depending [TS]

  on who you are again the auteur theory [TS]

  that like one person singular vision [TS]

  with minimal input from everyone else is [TS]

  there because they're megalomaniac [TS]

  because they're insane because there's [TS]

  no one in the company who has anywhere [TS]

  close to their talent like all sorts of [TS]

  unhealthy things that nevertheless [TS]

  produced like over Miyazaki's lifetime [TS]

  his collaborators work with people or [TS]

  whatever but like no it's his singular [TS]

  vision for the or someone else's vision [TS]

  that he guides through to you know it's [TS]

  like it's he could have benefited from [TS]

  all these this kind of input and they [TS]

  all would've been right and and he would [TS]

  have known their right and he would have [TS]

  listened to them but his movies would [TS]

  have been different i have one kind of [TS]

  great counter example of that which is [TS]

  sky captain in the world of tomorrow [TS]

  that was an otter vision nobody told him [TS]

  is beautiful [TS]

  you also have to be a genius that is the [TS]

  difference between a good orator and [TS]

  someone who just wants control what [TS]

  that's my question is to the barriers [TS]

  get lowered is like everything capital [TS]

  is discussing is within the constraints [TS]

  of films where they need who knows how [TS]

  many teraflops of computation power and [TS]

  the most sophisticated people working in [TS]

  the field and constantly developing the [TS]

  cutting edge of software again that echo [TS]

  of steve jobs were jobs.can in through [TS]

  jony ive's is [TS]

  John I've is pushing at the limits of [TS]

  what can be built in computer technology [TS]

  and buying new kinds of lasers are [TS]

  buying every kind of laser that makes a [TS]

  special dot for the macbooks or special [TS]

  transparent let you know [TS]

  aluminum thing the same token like [TS]

  Pixar's at the absolute cutting edge of [TS]

  computer graphics science and that is [TS]

  part of how they continue to be able to [TS]

  advance the story telling [TS]

  so can you be able to tell stories and [TS]

  simpler ways without requiring [TS]

  cutting-edge computer animation can one [TS]

  person do it i think the answer is is [TS]

  probably our small team the answer is [TS]

  yes but i think in the structure of a [TS]

  film of this scale of this type which [TS]

  read some reaches a mass audience they [TS]

  may have perfected that process by not [TS]

  ever believing they perfected it but I i [TS]

  actually completely agree with you John [TS]

  is that you're gonna miss out because [TS]

  you're making films even if they're [TS]

  great on average are great and never [TS]

  have stinkers you're never going to have [TS]

  the imperfections that lead to the that [TS]

  revision that's just totally out of [TS]

  control because nobody even without [TS]

  being risk-averse are not going to do it [TS]

  in that environment [TS]

  well and you know for instance it's it's [TS]

  I I think we're all geeky enough that we [TS]

  know who directed what pixar film long [TS]

  before we read this book but for most [TS]

  people they're gonna see that and go oh [TS]

  that's a Pixar film where they might [TS]

  look and say oh that's a Hitchcock film [TS]

  that's a Tarantino film that so that's a [TS]

  wes anderson film picture is the altar [TS]

  and you know that's why it's really [TS]

  interesting that Edgar Wright left and [TS]

  man which is that's going to be a Marvel [TS]

  film it and it was never going to be in [TS]

  it you're right film yeah he was trying [TS]

  to make it negative right film you get [TS]

  that sense right and horrible is another [TS]

  story committee was your clothes [TS]

  oh god oh but we're all bummed out about [TS]

  it maybe a much better [TS]

  Marvel product at the end of it but it's [TS]

  not going to have that stamp and that [TS]

  weirdness and now my question to you and [TS]

  this is complete the real from the book [TS]

  but not a derail for the uncomfortable [TS]

  um is if we're talking about marvel as [TS]

  an imprint and so on and so forth how do [TS]

  you explain the joss whedon influence as [TS]

  it as it meshes into them to the marble [TS]

  franchise because when you watch The [TS]

  Adventures that's definitely good [TS]

  got that's definitely more of a just [TS]

  weak property in a lot of ways you know [TS]

  but he's a very natural fit I mean buffy [TS]

  the vampire slayer is right on that [TS]

  temple yeah it's in my defense it's [TS]

  basically the same since it's so it's [TS]

  just a matter of saying we translate we [TS]

  would given Buffy Russian backstory and [TS]

  yeah I i think it's and Vander is now [TS]

  useless Archer and no no [TS]

  so here's the thing marvel to has a has [TS]

  a brain trust you know a collection of [TS]

  producers and writers that they bring in [TS]

  and break down their stories with the [TS]

  end you know I think the comics do too [TS]

  but the individual comic writers often [TS]

  have more latitude for something like [TS]

  these movies they have something very [TS]

  similar and and in this case I think [TS]

  what they wanted to find somebody who [TS]

  was a kindred spirit who could you know [TS]

  put this story together and and be that [TS]

  be the writer and director but also work [TS]

  within their framework and so I think [TS]

  John spring and joss whedon to do the [TS]

  Avengers is maybe not that different [TS]

  from from bringing in now I'm going to [TS]

  blank on his name Brad Bird bringing in [TS]

  brad bird to do the incredibles rite aid [TS]

  he was a known quantity had done the [TS]

  iron giant it was a huge hit at the box [TS]

  office but everybody loved it and he had [TS]

  the idea for the incredibles and studios [TS]

  wanted this is something i didn't know [TS]

  studios wanted him to bring that idea to [TS]

  them and he ended up bringing it to [TS]

  Pixar and so he brought his idea and he [TS]

  was a known quantity but when he came he [TS]

  came into the the committee and into the [TS]

  group and into the process and and [TS]

  that's how I sort of feel like the joss [TS]

  whedon thing is it's kinda like that [TS]

  you're bringing a known quantity into a [TS]

  system somebody who you think is going [TS]

  to be a kindred spirit and sometimes [TS]

  that doesn't work out right like with [TS]

  ant-man and did you know that they fell [TS]

  apart and when we see with these pixar [TS]

  movies that like brave you know was one [TS]

  of those examples where they fired the [TS]

  director and she left and they brought [TS]

  in another director to to make the end [TS]

  of the movie different and get it to be [TS]

  what they wanted it to be a lot less [TS]

  like it I love brave and I own the [TS]

  blu-ray so we can guide you or Dan or [TS]

  whatever your name is [TS]

  yeah I'll be there now ok I'll go ahead [TS]

  i think i think dan would point out [TS]

  that Josh was already part of the Marvel [TS]

  family because he'd been writing x-men [TS]

  comics for several years at that point [TS]

  he was not just a known quantity [TS]

  tomorrow but he had actively worked with [TS]

  Marvel you have a duck comics are nice [TS]

  and that's not why I'm faster with the [TS]

  penalty Marvel and pixar now because if [TS]

  you look at the different directors to [TS]

  have different styles and one of the [TS]

  things that Marvel i think is done [TS]

  possibly a little bit better than DC is [TS]

  it gives riders their own voice in their [TS]

  own head [TS]

  yes head of steam as it were I think [TS]

  Marvel does a great job of saying this [TS]

  you know what Brian Michael Bendis is [TS]

  your book like you can always tell when [TS]

  you're reading brian michael bendis you [TS]

  can always tell when you're reading [TS]

  Oh God Runaways a distraction or oh yeah [TS]

  Brian coupon yeah Brian came on that [TS]

  fraction you know anything like that [TS]

  MDC feels a little bit more committee as [TS]

  it was I mean Gail Simone was the [TS]

  glorious exception to that but you know [TS]

  it does feel a little bit more by [TS]

  committee [TS]

  whereas marble gives gives riders a [TS]

  little bit more space to be writers and [TS]

  I feel like Pixar kind of that with the [TS]

  directors about well i would say you [TS]

  know I talk about Brad Bird bringing [TS]

  incredibles in from the outside I sort [TS]

  of feel like the incredibles is more uh [TS]

  just you know it's it's different from [TS]

  Pixar and just by a few degrees it feels [TS]

  a little different its stand it stands [TS]

  apart a little bit I idea and I think [TS]

  brave i think brave stands apart a [TS]

  little bit to it always it doesn't like [TS]

  it i'm a break as well but regardless of [TS]

  whether you like it or not [TS]

  don't you feel like it stands apart a [TS]

  little bit in the same way the [TS]

  incredibles do like I don't even at a [TS]

  distance from maybe from things like [TS]

  Wally which seems so exotic but really [TS]

  feel like fits into the picture mode but [TS]

  then you've got incredible but seems one [TS]

  half step removed and brave to me also [TS]

  seems a little bit different i agree i [TS]

  think brave is a very it's a different [TS]

  kind of storytelling in tone and [TS]

  attitude and and and and all the rest it [TS]

  was it was also i don't wanna get back [TS]

  to the technology too much but i think [TS]

  it does circle around that is I think [TS]

  that's where like brave for me i [TS]

  remember seeing when I when I think [TS]

  Apple put out a trailer of it or [TS]

  something was up shit came up on the [TS]

  apple itunes section and they were [TS]

  really you know that hair her hair was [TS]

  unbelievable and they said they led with [TS]

  the hair and we all knew the story but [TS]

  the story the hair is part of the story [TS]

  that here is actually an element it's [TS]

  used in the storytelling so you can't [TS]

  even that [TS]

  that level you're like they bound up [TS]

  this incredible new capability to make [TS]

  hair and bear fur and everything else [TS]

  with the story they told you know [TS]

  there's some there's actually a lot of [TS]

  parallels between brave and frozen and [TS]

  I've seen frozen approximately 65 times [TS]

  because i have a [TS]

  three-and-a-half-year-old daughter also [TS]

  also the frozen which which by the way [TS]

  if you have even a single track and [TS]

  Ralph and toy story 2 is that I'm not a [TS]

  single actually want some frozen where [TS]

  they have put where they force the [TS]

  software the ice and the texture there [TS]

  is just stunning [TS]

  oh my haha like you watch the what you [TS]

  watch the light filtering through the [TS]

  ice down into the water and then the [TS]

  salt salt plunges through and I thought [TS]

  oh my god I've never seen that that that [TS]

  that then that quality before that that [TS]

  play of light and liquid they've managed [TS]

  to capture that but now my problems the [TS]

  breaker from the storytelling thing but [TS]

  i agree that the incredibles is kind of [TS]

  it i I've always thought in a class by [TS]

  itself [TS]

  yeah um that said ratatouille is my [TS]

  second favorite Pixar movie and I get [TS]

  the feeling i'm in a distinct minority [TS]

  on the apple and you know i love [TS]

  ratatouille yeah it's my husband's [TS]

  favorite movie for actually since and I [TS]

  think I didn't mention is really smart [TS]

  that cattle mentions in the book he says [TS]

  who would make a movie where wet rats [TS]

  are making food and not me not me [TS]

  that is my favorite see when the rats go [TS]

  in the dishwasher they dry out the steam [TS]

  room [TS]

  no but you know that's a case where they [TS]

  fired the director and brought inbred [TS]

  bird may change the they change the [TS]

  movie of course the movie will get back [TS]

  to Pixar in a minute but I want to tell [TS]

  you about one of our sponsors for this [TS]

  episode it's the good people at [TS] you've heard me talk about [TS]

  them before I fix it is the world's free [TS]

  online repair manual for everything and [TS]

  that's only a slight understatement [TS]

  I tell you every time i'm looking for a [TS]

  way to take apart or put back together [TS]

  some piece of technology i almost [TS]

  invariably end up at [TS]

  excellent step-by-step repair guides [TS]

  they've got all the steps and [TS]

  photographs to show you what the heck [TS]

  you're looking at foolproof instructions [TS]

  to fix all of your stuff got a broken [TS]

  screen or broken game console or you [TS]

  know you you name it they've got [TS]

  pictures of it lots of Max iphones ipads [TS]

  I fix it's got you covered they have [TS]

  thousands of repair guides for [TS]

  electronics smartphones tablets game [TS]

  consoles they can hook you up with the [TS]

  parts you'll need to fix it and [TS]

  everything they sell is tested and [TS]

  guaranteed and best of all iFixit [TS]

  designs and manufactures the most [TS]

  trusted repair tools for electronics [TS]

  including their awesome [TS]

  protec toolkit here's what's in the [TS]

  protec toolkit 70 different tools to [TS]

  assist you with any mod malfunction or [TS]

  misfortune that comes your way so if you [TS]

  need a set of tools you keep getting [TS]

  frustrated that you don't have that [TS]

  little bit with the pentalobe screw head [TS]

  so that you can unscrew an iphone or mac [TS]

  laptops crew because apples got this [TS]

  devilishly weird screw on it it's in the [TS]

  toolkit see so you get the toolkit and [TS]

  then you've got all of the stuff you [TS]

  need to take the i'm betting a lot of [TS]

  uncomfortable listeners are the person [TS]

  on their block or in their family that [TS]

  everybody comes to with all their [TS]

  computer and technology questions help i [TS]

  need to fix this thing you got the [TS]

  toolkit you've got the tools to do what [TS]

  you need to do to get those people back [TS]

  in shape its gold standard for [TS]

  electronics work garage hackers the CIA [TS]

  and FBI sure and these unique tools are [TS]

  used by repair technicians everywhere so [TS]

  you're using the tools that the pros use [TS]

  it's got a 54 bit driver kit Philip it's [TS]

  those nasty pentalobe it's torx bits [TS]

  torque security bits the try wing bit [TS]

  the triangle bit [TS]

  you're never going to look at something [TS]

  to go with GI can't open that I don't [TS]

  know what that is and then it's got all [TS]

  those other tools to get into cramped [TS]

  spaces and computers like spongers is [TS]

  the nylon metal plastic all the [TS]

  different ways that you can get in the [TS]

  cracks and pop these things open in [TS]

  order to repair them so 70 pieces 1 year [TS]

  warranty and best of all there are [TS]

  thousands of free i fix of guides you [TS]

  can use with the tools to get those [TS]

  things back in working order [TS]

  you definitely need to check these guys [TS]

  out both for the toolkit and for their [TS]

  repair guides here's what you do go to [TS] / incomparable for all the [TS]

  free repair guides you'll ever need and [TS]

  when you find that perfect partner tool [TS]

  use the coupon code geeky at checkout [TS]

  and you'll get ten dollars off your [TS]

  order of fifty dollars or more thats i [TS]

  fix it [TS]

  dot-com / uncomfortable and thank you so [TS]

  much do i fix it for sponsoring the [TS]

  incomparable well I want to talk about [TS]

  it ties into some of this I think is a [TS]

  the fact that they try so much why [TS]

  there's experimentation is baked into [TS]

  their culture because they come from [TS]

  that research background and I think [TS]

  there's a direct correlation there's a [TS]

  reason I mean this book is actually a [TS]

  beautifully told story even though it [TS]

  gets dry at points i think he diverges [TS]

  into things that are sort of business [TS]

  your technology is you know very early [TS]

  on he talks about how he drew all these [TS]

  you know polygons on his hand so you [TS]

  create a hand you know the first [TS]

  animated hand computer-animated hand and [TS]

  it's an extraordinary bit of that he [TS]

  wanted to you know hands are the ones [TS]

  telling things of the body and in [TS]

  paintings in Renaissance times even [TS]

  today you pay more to have the hands of [TS]

  the painting when your pic commission a [TS]

  portrait because there's so much more [TS]

  complicated and people can see the [TS]

  detail and it was like in Toy Story the [TS]

  faces the human faces look so terrible [TS]

  compared to the animation of the objects [TS]

  because you see that detailed response [TS]

  with a different way [TS]

  well but I think that spirit of [TS]

  experimentation of like the fact that [TS]

  they try this stuff outcomes through the [TS]

  whole book and that they it's it's baked [TS]

  in and the bid i wanted to talk about [TS]

  relationships i think is the risks and [TS]

  things they try with the short films [TS]

  beforehand which they did almost as I [TS]

  mean he talks about the book that it [TS]

  wasn't like an intent we're always gonna [TS]

  do it but that it became away they [TS]

  thought it would have a purpose and [TS]

  enter not have the purpose and they [TS]

  thought they could do something else [TS]

  with that and they finally said it's [TS]

  just a way to make a short really good [TS]

  film that is part of the charm of what [TS]

  we do and we're just going to do it [TS]

  because people like them even though we [TS]

  have to spend a few million dollars on [TS]

  them and I think that was kind of a [TS]

  lovely thing that that's part of what [TS]

  they're doing at the profit is they are [TS]

  literally throwing it away maybe brings [TS]

  more people and because as part of the [TS]

  package of charm and maybe increases the [TS]

  prophets overall but that they feel that [TS]

  it's an important part of what they've [TS]

  become [TS]

  they do this for the audience and and [TS]

  maybe it's only for the audience that [TS]

  they spend that money that's part of [TS]

  what their us the kickback from coming [TS]

  to see pixar film yeah always been [TS]

  present at the shorts were away from to [TS]

  work out technical troubles where you [TS]

  could like they have that one shorts [TS]

  that she dancing around until he gets [TS]

  here yeah I thought he says [TS]

  man its fate that another special unit [TS]

  when he said we thought they would be [TS]

  and then they didn't he's like well then [TS]

  we thought it'd be a good way to train [TS]

  directors but turns out of 5 minute [TS]

  movie is really not a good way to test [TS]

  out someone if they get a fully foot [TS]

  I mean I feel like that's part of the [TS]

  discarding is that they that they said [TS]

  you know what we wanted to be all these [TS]

  things and it wasn't any of those things [TS]

  so it's just a thing we did an [TS]

  unfortunate expired it is awesome and I [TS]

  also think that part of my question is [TS]

  how much of this book I don't doubt that [TS]

  he's coming from a place of deep [TS]

  emotional and intellectual integrity a [TS]

  lot of time but i also have to wonder [TS]

  how much of them is this is also he's [TS]

  crafting the this is also a work of [TS]

  image crafting for Pixar because let's [TS]

  face it this is a CEO of any other [TS]

  company that is not in the business as [TS]

  exciting and glamorous and sexy as pixar [TS]

  yeah if it were CEO of somebody who was [TS]

  say handling point-to-point shipping and [TS]

  logistics would we be as excited about [TS]

  his insights with creativity was like we [TS]

  found this really great way for [TS]

  computers to talk to each other and then [TS]

  we found a way to give our drivers [TS]

  ownership of the process you know so [TS]

  there's part of me that thinks this book [TS]

  is also a very good exercise and [TS]

  publicity and so part of me was reading [TS]

  this also with a thought [TS]

  how much of this is is is officially [TS]

  crafted message and how much of this is [TS]

  is is him being well cancer you know I [TS]

  that I can't help but wonder if there's [TS]

  a certain degree of discretion that goes [TS]

  in the Records books as well to make [TS]

  sure that the company doesn't take a [TS]

  reputational hit or people who had ideas [TS]

  that didn't pan out don't take [TS]

  rotational hits would be horrible this [TS]

  was all a really well-crafted lie and [TS]

  it's actually a horrible [TS]

  teraflex to work the roads in fear you [TS]

  have to ask yourself how many different [TS]

  modems are there and and how what what [TS]

  is that what is that what is the [TS]

  motivation for everything that goes into [TS]

  it and I don't doubt that most of the [TS]

  motivation is a hundred percent the [TS]

  genuine desire to share information [TS]

  because it makes the world a better [TS]

  place like you can tell this will bring [TS]

  on [TS]

  yeah you can tell this guy walks the [TS]

  walk in terms of you know more [TS]

  information is better iterative [TS]

  processes are great here's how to be [TS]

  mindful of yours had observed like you [TS]

  can tell the stuff he genuinely believes [TS]

  and when he slips into social policy [TS]

  which I found fascinating by the way you [TS]

  can also tell that he believes very [TS]

  strongly those convictions to but i also [TS]

  wonder how much of this is the fact that [TS]

  he is a don't position of leadership at [TS]

  a big company and part of being a [TS]

  position of leadership at a big company [TS]

  is saying [TS]

  I am the public face for this company [TS]

  how do i want this company to be [TS]

  perceived by the rest of the world only [TS]

  the cynical but i think part of it is [TS]

  there is an external validation of what [TS]

  he says in that he didn't have too many [TS]

  the failures when you read business [TS]

  books that are totally motivational in [TS]

  our Rob corporate biography things that [TS]

  are ghostwritten or if the written [TS]

  partly by the CEO or or something like [TS]

  that they the failures are always [TS]

  brushed off and the successes are [TS]

  emphasized strength-to-strength things [TS]

  we have this little setback but then [TS]

  that came and the fact that he focuses [TS]

  again and again and again this [TS]

  ok so we have the answer was this and I [TS]

  was totally wrong like that is what [TS]

  makes maybe that's a even more double [TS]

  creative technique to get us to believe [TS]

  him or maybe we take him nobody [TS]

  seriously wants you to believe glad I [TS]

  wouldn't but I don't know you could say [TS]

  the fact that he's so candid about what [TS]

  seems to be the failures even though [TS]

  he's representing this series of [TS]

  successes now they come out of it in the [TS]

  process is so wonderful [TS]

  process is so wonderful [TS]

  even as they break it apart that is [TS]

  actually part of the propaganda part is [TS]

  that he is he brings up the failure so [TS]

  your mother for ya [TS]

  the failures also burns the image in [TS]

  some sense to you by saying look we took [TS]

  these photos we made it better and that [TS]

  is actually a really nifty managerial [TS]

  sleight-of-hand this because how many [TS]

  other companies do you know that turn [TS]

  their failures into a point of pride or [TS]

  selling point with you know our product [TS]

  is good because we have been risky and [TS]

  spend and bold enough to fail several [TS]

  times and to learn from that like is [TS]

  that something that you can see all the [TS]

  time and other companies are deep or do [TS]

  you see as one says a lot of companies [TS]

  that tell their ability to go from [TS]

  strength to strength to strength to [TS]

  strength [TS]

  hey I didn't get that message from this [TS]

  book like I i read it as a sort of an [TS]

  anti-business book because you're right [TS]

  that other business books and you know [TS]

  it's a lie here was a failure and here [TS]

  is our eventual victory but if taken as [TS]

  a whole I i see it as a much more honest [TS]

  assessment because it's like we tried [TS]

  this and it failed and he came with his [TS]

  better thing and then you think all [TS]

  right well that's the story [TS]

  no actually that failed to and then we [TS]

  tried this and like and is a series of [TS]

  those and by the end of a series of [TS]

  those you realize that whatever they end [TS]

  on whether its success or failure [TS]

  it's merely just another point in the [TS]

  sine wave of success and failure and [TS]

  that this is not the final success [TS]

  because this will inevitably turn out to [TS]

  be the wrong thing as well later and if [TS]

  you feel like if the book had continued [TS]

  for another 10 years that everything [TS]

  you've seen as accessible eventually [TS]

  become a failure and success and failure [TS]

  and success and I think it does a good [TS]

  job of laying that out and it's not [TS]

  trying to construct a narrative or an [TS]

  arc in which the failures are are are [TS]

  held up held aloft to see how great we [TS]

  are first we have to set back but then [TS]

  we succeeded but to establish a pattern [TS]

  and the pattern is that you're not going [TS]

  to get it right you're going to think [TS]

  you have a right and you're going to be [TS]

  wrong and he let me demonstrate this [TS]

  until you understand that there is this [TS]

  no happy ending to this book there's no [TS]

  and that's how we made pics are great [TS]

  company that it is today [TS]

  that's never going to happen in the book [TS]

  and it's very difficult to get through [TS]

  because as you start reading the book [TS]

  you're like oh this is the story of [TS]

  pixar was struggling and then it [TS]

  succeeded and there is a little bit of [TS]

  that but the I think the undercurrent is [TS]

  don't get fooled by that everything that [TS]

  we thought we had right we eventually [TS]

  had wrong and that's going to be true of [TS]

  everything that we think we have right [TS]

  right now as well and I think that is [TS]

  the overall message of the book which is [TS]

  not a message of hope and [TS]

  definitely i say it's like the antique [TS]

  business book it is not an uplifting [TS]

  story a story of triumph you know that's [TS]

  mixed in there but like the message that [TS]

  i take home from it and because he tries [TS]

  so hard he reiterates over and over [TS]

  again to try to convince people to not [TS]

  to not fall into that trap to not think [TS]

  they haven't figured out and do not [TS]

  think that he has it figured out and he [TS]

  has to convince himself that he doesn't [TS]

  have it figured out and that's what i [TS]

  think is so is so it refreshing about [TS]

  this book as compared to every other [TS]

  business book I've read a lot of them [TS]

  what it's like in in a typical business [TS]

  book you'd hear story about how toy [TS]

  story 2 collapsed and they redid the [TS]

  whole thing in under eight months and [TS]

  you know and we're never gonna do that [TS]

  again and then the implied message after [TS]

  it would be but we totally could do it [TS]

  again [TS]

  where's the implied message i got from [TS]

  this was there is no way in hell we're [TS]

  ever gonna do that again and we're gonna [TS]

  do all these things to make sure that [TS]

  never happens again [TS]

  here's how we did that and we're gonna [TS]

  ever into something else that is equally [TS]

  disastrous that we haven't even figured [TS]

  out yet and actually if you keep reading [TS]

  the book you'll see we have a similar [TS]

  even worse disaster which we can't even [TS]

  really see a movie at all and we spend [TS]

  millions of dollars on it so it doesn't [TS]

  even matter that we didn't do that [TS]

  mistake again because another mistake is [TS]

  waiting and the whole idea is to build a [TS]

  system that understands this is going to [TS]

  happen what I really straight there was [TS]

  the story about how they someone entered [TS]

  the wrong command at all and they [TS]

  deliberately deleted so much of the [TS]

  movie and the only reason it was saved [TS]

  as because you had a woman who had just [TS]

  had a baby so she had she's like I I've [TS]

  been back at the movie on the slide home [TS]

  so I can work on and I think I might [TS]

  have a copy and print I thought I I [TS]

  guess don't land i thought let here for [TS]

  flexible workplaces like that no you [TS]

  have to let you know when they actually [TS]

  had like an IT group like figure out a [TS]

  way to sync the all the data files to [TS]

  her system but Jesus but here's the [TS]

  thing i want to ask you since we're all [TS]

  parents on this podcast how low in your [TS]

  feet that your heart sink the baby in [TS]

  the car and I was like I read that and i [TS]

  I just I almost fell over I mean I've [TS]

  heard i think is it the the Washington [TS]

  Post writer gene Weingarten disney story [TS]

  horrible if you want something with now [TS]

  that you know its don't read that story [TS]

  if you haven't already [TS]

  not really because it will haunt you for [TS]

  the rest your life it's just terrible [TS]

  but the baby the baby because they are [TS]

  working in and McCartney and that's [TS]

  where it's not a business book raise [TS]

  cattle says we almost killed a baby [TS]

  because we may [TS]

  our people work so our child because too [TS]

  many people work so hard that the [TS]

  engineer was supposed to drop he's been [TS]

  sleepless working for weeks on end [TS]

  supposed to drop this kid off a [TS]

  childcare leaves in the car for three [TS]

  hours in the hot parking lot is fine you [TS]

  know in the locality was finally with [TS]

  rehydrated like okay we don't know all [TS]

  the details the screen is all i need to [TS]

  know but I mean I i love you know this [TS]

  is what what i thought was striking [TS]

  about that he bounces from that [TS]

  immediately into and this is why [TS]

  work-life balance is important and this [TS]

  is why we have to give leave two working [TS]

  parents and he actually returns to that [TS]

  a couple times the book he makes the [TS]

  point of thing we're very proud of the [TS]

  couples have got together as a result of [TS]

  pics are proud of the kids we don't have [TS]

  a daycare center that is affiliated with [TS]

  Pixar and what I found interesting [TS]

  because i did a search for this [TS]

  yesterday at a curiosity because there [TS]

  are plenty of you know explainer type [TS]

  pieces the six lessons you need to learn [TS]

  from the book and so on and so forth and [TS]

  I thought how could nobody has picked up [TS]

  on the fact that this guy who works in a [TS]

  really time intensive industry because [TS]

  he talks about how it takes 22,000 [TS]

  people weeks to make a movie but but [TS]

  this but this guy is still saying hey we [TS]

  need really seen work-life balance and [TS]

  we need paid parental leave for [TS]

  everybody because it makes for better [TS]

  workforce and I thought it was really [TS]

  striking that almost everybody is [TS]

  ignored that passage in the book when [TS]

  this is actually been a big national [TS]

  conversation this year about you know [TS]

  how the u.s. is one of three countries [TS]

  noble that any work whatsoever and [TS]

  there's plenty of studies that talk [TS]

  about how it's affecting the american [TS]

  workforce american life and cattle just [TS]

  kind of sneaks it on there and they're [TS]

  saying look we almost had a crisis [TS]

  happens forces to reassess this is what [TS]

  I believe he did that company goes [TS]

  through the same exact failures everyone [TS]

  else like that the part besides the baby [TS]

  part which is striking itself as a [TS]

  single as a single you know presumably [TS]

  rare like this doesn't happen no you [TS]

  know 1,000,000 type thing but also [TS]

  terrible at is the statistic that i've [TS]

  i've had the passage highlighted by [TS]

  don't have it now but like some huge [TS]

  percentage of their worst for workforce [TS]

  was suffering from repetitive strange [TS]

  one third day in what did end of the [TS]

  giant crush and so essentially looked at [TS]

  one perspective it's the elites in this [TS]

  organization which do nothing except [TS]

  push paper all day person virtual paper [TS]

  and decide destroyed the health and [TS]

  lives of a huge number of other people [TS]

  as as a way to to achieve the goals of [TS]

  the company and that is the typical cap [TS]

  evil capitalist like I don't care about [TS]

  the workers we have [TS]

  old we're gonna get it done where the [TS]

  elite say we celebrated and their [TS]

  reaction to it is what differentiates [TS]

  them that that happens the company's all [TS]

  the time workers are exploited managers [TS]

  need to get something done they lean on [TS]

  the people below them they direct [TS]

  people's lives you know their personal [TS]

  lives their health everything about them [TS]

  the difference is their reaction to that [TS]

  wasn't now I guess the system worked and [TS]

  you look at million points out this [TS]

  company's I think he's probably talking [TS]

  about EA he didn't name any names like [TS]

  this there's those companies that say [TS]

  that they just have like you know [TS]

  fifteen percent turnover because they [TS]

  say well you get great work if you hire [TS]

  these energetic people at school and [TS]

  then grind them into dust and then they [TS]

  burn out you just get another new crop [TS]

  of people and and from their perspective [TS]

  like that's a winning strategy but what [TS]

  cattle says is that that seems that [TS]

  actually on paper and in reality that is [TS]

  an effective strategy but he says it's [TS]

  immoral and he so he has a moral [TS]

  objection to what is an effective [TS]

  strategy you know if you just you just [TS]

  like Machiavellian or like you know I'm [TS]

  a power broker I'm Jack well trying to [TS]

  get things done on your business book [TS]

  open every says yes that is effective [TS]

  and we actually did that but we said no [TS]

  to it not because it didn't get the job [TS]

  done but hey look we made a great move [TS]

  got it because it's immoral and it's [TS]

  like such a simple thing you said he [TS]

  just came out and set in case you're [TS]

  missing this people we're not gonna do [TS]

  this to our workers because it's immoral [TS]

  the games industry and this is outside [TS]

  of my room because I'm not a serious [TS]

  gamer as you know but the games industry [TS]

  I mean you know Pixar's written in the [TS]

  Disney division are are related most of [TS]

  the film industry but they work sort of [TS]

  fundamentally differently in the rest of [TS]

  the film industry is not making [TS]

  animation with their closer to is the [TS]

  games industry where they're doing stuff [TS]

  that is telling a story and doing [TS]

  animation and it's it's a different [TS]

  software and software driven and they're [TS]

  always pushing on the edge blah blah and [TS]

  you and I've never heard it all these [TS]

  Triple A game companies every story i [TS]

  hear every time I interview someone is [TS]

  the games industry or read the articles [TS]

  they are grinding machines as you say [TS]

  like Electronic Arts is it lawsuits [TS]

  about it and marriages break up and [TS]

  everything's you know horrible but [TS]

  they're the closest competitor [TS]

  competition it seems that competition [TS]

  whether the closest analog and they [TS]

  produce they put huge amounts of money [TS]

  in and they produce sometimes games that [TS]

  make a bazillion dollars and hundreds of [TS]

  millions of dollars and sometimes they [TS]

  really stuff that's utter crap and fails [TS]

  like a movie studio [TS]

  I mentioned for the engineering approach [TS]

  to creative work and how Pixar is like [TS]

  I'm not the only engineer on this on [TS]

  this podcast i put I I faked being an [TS]

  engineer so yes you are well I'd be like [TS]

  if you are if you are a computer [TS]

  programmer or in computer science or in [TS]

  any of these rooms and probably also if [TS]

  you're a scientist although i can't [TS]

  relate to that you you can relate to and [TS]

  cattle in this book reads like something [TS]

  that you recognize like a lot of the [TS]

  personality traits that come through and [TS]

  camel in this book and the things that [TS]

  I've seen him in our personality traits [TS]

  that i share that are usually a [TS]

  liability in normal life and the [TS]

  refreshing thing about reading this book [TS]

  is I think engineers and programmers and [TS]

  scientists will recognize themselves [TS]

  themselves and their personality traits [TS]

  in a cattle and we'll we'll find it as i [TS]

  did exciting and refreshing to see that [TS]

  those those traits are can be both [TS]

  useful and successful in real life [TS]

  because in most of our lives they have [TS]

  not been if you're useful successful to [TS]

  that degree and part of that is the the [TS]

  engineering approach of saying I'm going [TS]

  to analyze the situation i'm going to [TS]

  figure out what needs to be done and I'm [TS]

  but you know you mentioned the Eagle [TS]

  listen s before that's a scientific type [TS]

  of approach who cares who ideas idea was [TS]

  to test the idea of it doesn't work you [TS]

  move on and early very early [TS]

  conversation with Lisa talk about camels [TS]

  objection to the idea that you're [TS]

  discovering a movie and chipping away [TS]

  and the movie is hiding underneath the [TS]

  bottom and cat mole in typical [TS]

  programmer engineering science fashion [TS]

  saying that's not the case at all [TS]

  actually like it's not their innate [TS]

  you're actually making it whatever but [TS]

  then this is the whole thing about this [TS]

  type of this engineering approach is [TS]

  alright so you can analyze and so that's [TS]

  a stupid analogy it's not actually how [TS]

  things are done [TS]

  ah it's not accurate but and cattle [TS]

  accepts that this analogy helps people [TS]

  to produce good work and then he goes on [TS]

  and one chapter in the book to detail [TS]

  all the other things which are also not [TS]

  accurate the people tell themselves to [TS]

  help them do good work all peoples [TS]

  different analogies I think of it like [TS]

  climbing a mountain or I think of [TS]

  running one tail to the other and all [TS]

  these different things which are not [TS]

  really the process as far as the [TS]

  Capitals concern but part of the process [TS]

  of having an engineer's approach the [TS]

  creative work is to say it doesn't [TS]

  matter that that's not accurate because [TS]

  in the end you're trying to just get [TS]

  good work [TS]

  David help some people get good work you [TS]

  have to put that as a tool in your tool [TS]

  chests and say this is one way you know [TS]

  it did not get hung up on the first to [TS]

  reorder like oh that's actually not not [TS]

  the correct approach and we can test [TS]

  that she really hear all the reasons why [TS]

  that is not actually how we make movies [TS]

  but if thinking that helps you make a [TS]

  good movie that needs to be to my tool [TS]

  chest to say go ahead person who doesn't [TS]

  understand the reality of the world use [TS]

  this model mental model to help you do [TS]

  great work and that's that's the genius [TS]

  of a Catalan of this book is that it is [TS]

  it never gives up on the idea that uh [TS]

  thinking about things [TS]

  testing them in evaluating the results [TS]

  is the path to success in all endeavors [TS]

  and you never stop doing that even if [TS]

  you've determined that you know for [TS]

  example someone's analogy is in apt [TS]

  inaccurate that analogy may still have a [TS]

  use you may just need to test it [TS]

  differently [TS]

  it did really bug me that he kept going [TS]

  back to the there's not a there's not a [TS]

  sculpture in that block of marble [TS]

  well i think that's that's part of the [TS]

  personality traits like it's gotta know [TS]

  him because it's not accurate but like [TS]

  but he is but he was not blinded by that [TS]

  he saw that helps these people it here [TS]

  look at and that's like that's why i [TS]

  love the whole chapter look at all these [TS]

  things these people think that helped [TS]

  them get their work done all but you're [TS]

  ridiculous and foolish from you know we [TS]

  all know Here I see it but but it helps [TS]

  them get their work done and that's why [TS]

  I think these are important tools [TS]

  yes the homeopathic school of filmmaking [TS]

  it's like I don't believe it but it [TS]

  still works well but itself hacking like [TS]

  it these individuals are sort of hacking [TS]

  their own brains in a way that works for [TS]

  them it was the way that doesn't work [TS]

  with that capital and maybe isn't [TS]

  accurate reflection of a reality but [TS]

  that's the whole thing about people [TS]

  management somebody goes into my new [TS]

  challenge will be figuring out how to [TS]

  manage people and make this company and [TS]

  that is an amazing challenges anyone [TS]

  who's a parent knows trying to figure [TS]

  out what the heck is going on in the [TS]

  mind of someone else and heard them to [TS]

  be successful even when they are so [TS]

  unlike you and so unknowable and that is [TS]

  that is like the ultimate challenge [TS]

  after he's you know doll that the [TS]

  scientific stuff and the the engineering [TS]

  stuff which is sort of glossed over yeah [TS]

  I invented texture-mapping whatever big [TS]

  work that was when I was a kid anyway [TS]

  try to manage people on their own [TS]

  yeah that's the thing i love how casual [TS]

  hears about the fact that yeah I only I [TS]

  only revolutionized reading rendering [TS]

  big deal I mean it's almost like he [TS]

  didn't want to talk about is like that's [TS]

  technically it's boring you wouldn't be [TS]

  interested in it over [TS]

  alignment obviously i'm reading like no [TS]

  please write an entire book about that [TS]

  he was for it's probably the right call [TS]

  because most persuasive was like oh yeah [TS]

  retweet / that one second have that [TS]

  pulled out in the book to the fact that [TS]

  the program he went to the kind of fishy [TS]

  of Utah was ridiculous it was who came [TS]

  as Alan Kay it was um who was the border [TS]

  people instrumental today's Warnock John [TS]

  Warnock of adobe John Warnock in what [TS]

  was the other one just a link in a Jim [TS]

  Clark I'm sorry said jim cotton jim [TS]

  cotton jim clark yeah and you're like [TS]

  yeah Jim Clark it out more knock [TS]

  allocate like these are the fat and EDD [TS]

  Connolly's the foundational people of [TS]

  the of like every aspect around graphics [TS]

  2d and 3d graphics representation of the [TS]

  computers like this that without those [TS]

  four people you could argue with them as [TS]

  impotence because they're all sort of [TS]

  business people even though they were [TS]

  scientists computer scientist named [TS]

  Warnock certainly wasn't k was at some [TS]

  level I mean he was practically a [TS]

  certain way but without those four [TS]

  people i think we the same stuff they [TS]

  that happen might have been 10 or 15 [TS]

  years later it feels like what capital [TS]

  would say is that the same stuff what [TS]

  happened in the same time frame it just [TS]

  would have been different people because [TS]

  a large part of success that you [TS]

  attribute to the the magic of the [TS]

  individuals actually attributable to [TS]

  lock in it's a mistake to believe that [TS]

  that he only could have been done by [TS]

  those people I generally believe that [TS]

  with certain individuals they catalyze [TS]

  things in a way that you could see how [TS]

  there was nothing else going on the [TS]

  field the guy they're studying with I [TS]

  mean sutherland ivan sutherland was a [TS]

  genius as well I mean just it was a [TS]

  crazy group of people too crazy group [TS]

  things that came out of it and I believe [TS]

  it would have been replicated but not as [TS]

  quickly so I manager at that point does [TS]

  bring up in the book again being the [TS]

  anti-business book that the typical [TS]

  business book is I have been massively [TS]

  successful therefore everything I've [TS]

  done in my life must have led to success [TS]

  if so facto and now i'm going to [TS]

  describe what I had for breakfast [TS]

  because it is an integral part of my [TS]

  success right and cattle does not [TS]

  believe his the height does not believe [TS]

  his own hype is not believe it like is [TS]

  so aware that just because that's what [TS]

  happened doesn't mean that's the only [TS]

  way this could have happened and maybe [TS]

  entirely unrelated and in fact the whole [TS]

  success I problem things may have been [TS]

  stopping you you know [TS]

  I don't maybe going to die I think he's [TS]

  just going to dissolve into a pure cloud [TS]

  of Eagle list of eagles discovery you [TS]

  know you like some benign cognitive [TS]

  entity that hovers over gonna make a [TS]

  stark alien you know if you can detect [TS]

  if you can detect any of his ego in the [TS]

  book i would say the place i detected is [TS]

  he never did get to the part where he [TS]

  describes the failures of the movies [TS]

  that Pixar has released what aspects of [TS]

  cars were not satisfactory what aspects [TS]

  event you know me and he never goes for [TS]

  that one and it could be that he doesn't [TS]

  see any failures there but I was waiting [TS]

  for the moment where he discusses we [TS]

  release this one it's not as good as [TS]

  some of the other ones releasing here's [TS]

  why and here's what happened [TS]

  well i think that there's a protection [TS]

  throughout you see it he won't name the [TS]

  names of the directors to get fired [TS]

  right i think there's a pretty level of [TS]

  protection where there are things that [TS]

  are not discussed able to be discussed [TS]

  and I suspected that is part of it is [TS]

  for him to come and then be seen [TS]

  criticizing specific things in his [TS]

  company's released movies is not [TS]

  something he's willing to do well if [TS]

  he's responsible he's willing to [TS]

  criticize himself but like the can't the [TS]

  candor that he talks about has to exist [TS]

  within pixar the camera doesn't have [TS]

  doesn't have to exist external to Pixar [TS]

  so it is a balancing act [TS]

  you know what I mean hehe edges up to it [TS]

  the edges up to what he's talking about [TS]

  up when he says you know after they went [TS]

  through several variations they had an [TS]

  explanation as to why Charles months was [TS]

  so you know he was I mean he was a grown [TS]

  man when Karl was a child and yet [TS]

  they're roughly the same age later yeah [TS]

  and yet you know he's still active and [TS]

  any and he says but you know nobody [TS]

  noticed that nobody noticed anyone if [TS]

  they noticed they didn't care i'm and i [TS]

  have to say that's the only thing in the [TS]

  book where he went [TS]

  now I noticed and we came up with an [TS]

  alternate reason why that worked and you [TS]

  know the kids thought hey that's [TS]

  actually better than the movie because [TS]

  it you know and it wouldn't have taken [TS]

  that much to do but they noticed that [TS]

  logic problem and the reason they [TS]

  noticed was because that was the first [TS]

  Pixar movie they had seen where there [TS]

  was a logic problem as I think was a the [TS]

  Lewis Carroll actually say it or is it [TS]

  the computer to him that it's like [TS]

  nonsense has to be rigidly internally [TS]

  consistent or you notice it [TS]

  yeah and there's not nonsense but it's [TS]

  like when you tell a story the [TS]

  University creative it's not [TS]

  originally internally consistent no [TS]

  matter how fantastic it is you will [TS]

  notice the the things that stand out you [TS]

  know Lewis Carroll's granddaughter once [TS]

  sold dilemma used car lot to its engine [TS]

  made this as Tweedledee Tweedledum [TS]

  Tweedledee Tweedledum my dream learning [TS]

  right there dream living dream [TS]

  glittering oh dear God dream Glendinning [TS]

  anything we should we should talk about [TS]

  before before I wrap it up i just wanted [TS]

  this is my last this is the last call he [TS]

  have to work the afterward I cried like [TS]

  a baby reading that chapter was not [TS]

  expecting it i started reading at the oh [TS]

  well that's good he hasn't remembrance [TS]

  of them steve jobs and steve jobs i was [TS]

  ball was it was reading it 1145 at night [TS]

  about to go to bed was gonna put the [TS]

  book down i read the whole last part and [TS]

  was just how to use up being a box of [TS]

  Kleenex I expected it to be one of those [TS]

  things where somebody's somebody says [TS]

  come on you gotta talk about Steve Jobs [TS]

  was like alright I'll dad something off [TS]

  there just to just to give you and [TS]

  instead it's like a man who knew this [TS]

  guy for a long time and is and is [TS]

  infuriated about how terribly and in [TS]

  accurately he is portrayed in the media [TS]

  and he's going to get his shots in he's [TS]

  going to say look this is the guy I knew [TS]

  and these are all the ways that he is [TS]

  he's miss characterized and you don't [TS]

  know the guy that I knew and let me tell [TS]

  you about him and it's a it's a you know [TS]

  it's a real it's fascinating in that way [TS]

  and this guy's got all the credibility [TS]

  in terms of who Steve Jobs was because [TS]

  he worked with him for so long i think i [TS]

  think he established that by the earlier [TS]

  in the book because he talked something [TS]

  like even without the afterward I think [TS]

  the way he established the to me because [TS]

  I've read a lot about Steve Jobs and [TS]

  I've also been angry about books that i [TS]

  felt like i was like because I mean so [TS]

  easy to harp on the bad stuff and the [TS]

  bad stuff is true and capital believes [TS]

  that but like acknowledges that rather [TS]

  but the the bit that was the most [TS]

  convincing is the earlier part where he [TS]

  talks about how Steve Jobs interacted [TS]

  with Pixar and that he stuck with it and [TS]

  kept dumping his money into it for so [TS]

  long so many people say like will you [TS]

  know like I believe in you know these [TS]

  people and passion is important in blah [TS]

  blah but the second a company like that [TS]

  didn't look like they had a good [TS]

  prospects they get out because that's [TS]

  how you get rich you don't get rich by [TS]

  being stupid by making stupid [TS]

  investments and steve jobs seem like was [TS]

  just gonna you know i mean he he was [TS]

  trying to find ways that he was trying [TS]

  to sell them as well but he stuck it out [TS]

  for as long as he did because he [TS]

  recognized the passion and that is [TS]

  something that people usually only talk [TS]

  about like oh I believe in passionate [TS]

  people and I investment companies as [TS]

  passionate whatever but so many in my [TS]

  experience so many of those people who [TS]

  are successful business are successful [TS]

  because they don't do that because they [TS]

  they put you know money first and [TS]

  practical concerns first and I don't [TS]

  care how passionate you are i'm getting [TS]

  out what it looks like i'll be losing [TS]

  some money where Steve Jobs was just [TS]

  going to sit there punkin millions and [TS]

  like it and try to sell but then like [TS]

  being assaulted by Microsoft small after [TS]

  you know what [TS]

  no this would have made my money back [TS]

  with screw you i'm gonna stick with his [TS]

  company and that speaks to his character [TS]

  more than any other description or [TS]

  whatever is that you know he he really [TS]

  put his money where his mouth is he [TS]

  really did things that don't make sense [TS]

  from a business perspective and that is [TS]

  the most revealing of his character far [TS]

  above all his little things in [TS]

  boardrooms of you know being rude to [TS]

  people are firing people in elevators [TS]

  are all out of the stuff it shows what [TS]

  did he do with his life and Pixar is one [TS]

  of the things he did with his life that [TS]

  I don't think almost anyone else would [TS]

  have done I wanted to know the other [TS]

  thing i highlighted in here which is a [TS]

  applicable to portrayals of Steve Jobs [TS]

  of Pixar and of apple and pretty much [TS]

  anything else but i underlined it [TS]

  because it's so perfectly stated which [TS]

  is a journalist tend to look for [TS]

  patterns that can be explained in a [TS]

  relatively small number of words if you [TS]

  haven't done the work of teasing apart [TS]

  what is random and what you have [TS]

  intentionally set in motion you will be [TS]

  overly influenced by the analysis of [TS]

  outside observers which is often over [TS]

  simplified this is partially this is [TS]

  don't believe your own PR and partially [TS]

  this is lots of people who write about [TS]

  companies are trying to find the [TS]

  simplest fewest number of words to [TS]

  explain anything it's like Occam's razor [TS]

  gone horribly wrong is the simplest [TS]

  explanation is is up probably the right [TS]

  one except in these cases it's not so [TS]

  simple I distance with it some people [TS]

  shit pushes back against simple [TS]

  aphorisms and simple explanations all [TS]

  the way along [TS]

  no I mean that's one of his big things [TS]

  is never doubt the role that random [TS]

  chance plays in your life and never [TS]

  underestimate how powerfully complex and [TS]

  unknowable systems around you are either [TS]

  and in like John says that's not exactly [TS]

  a happy ending [TS]

  it's basically surrender surrender to [TS]

  the chaos find a way to surf it and [TS]

  that's a scary message to send I think [TS]

  it's great that he's sending it and it's [TS]

  a message that resonates at me in this [TS]

  time of my life but you know if people [TS]

  are reading this book to I need to [TS]

  become a leader in the messages [TS]

  surrendered to chaos that's wait what [TS]

  was a baby and the anti-business book [TS]

  although anyways I mean first off it it [TS]

  I sounded I mean I kept I i noted lots [TS]

  of things that I took away from this is [TS]

  as inspirational business book kind of [TS]

  material it's just a different kind of [TS]

  book with a different kind of lesson and [TS]

  you know why there but then again I work [TS]

  with I work with creative people I I you [TS]

  know I work with writers and editors and [TS]

  and it might be very different if you [TS]

  were working with bankers or something [TS]

  like that [TS]

  hey I think this is all applicable like [TS]

  he doesn't like that's why I feel better [TS]

  than the titles creativity ink because [TS]

  it seems like well what if I don't work [TS]

  into creative field should I read this [TS]

  like the the elements that he described [TS]

  in this book are in any big company any [TS]

  big company where everybody making [TS]

  hamburgers or door knobs or our jet [TS]

  planes or software or anything like [TS]

  these are just people elements and he's [TS]

  coming out of that particular but people [TS]

  are people everywhere and all these [TS]

  things that he describes about you know [TS]

  that being more candor in the hallway [TS]

  than there are in the thing it in the in [TS]

  the boardroom meetings and you know not [TS]

  stigmatizing failure and like you said [TS]

  not attributing your success two things [TS]

  that seem simple and all like that they [TS]

  happen everywhere and Ed Catmull I think [TS]

  it from the sort of engineering [TS]

  scientific perspective feels like he has [TS]

  a clear image of what's really going on [TS]

  and most people don't want to know what [TS]

  it's like they don't want to see the [TS]

  matrix they want to take whichever the [TS]

  pillows the one that I forget that makes [TS]

  you not understand that you're in a [TS]

  group odd somewhere and he's here within [TS]

  with an unfriendly unwelcome message but [TS]

  like you said about about the randomness [TS]

  in the chaos and that you know like that [TS]

  is not a welcoming message and he has to [TS]

  repeat himself so many times because i [TS]

  feel like it is a message that people [TS]

  will resist they want the pad [TS]

  answer they want they say I recognize [TS]

  that Alan my company and tell me how the [TS]

  person i like I don't like in this [TS]

  situation is wrong and tell me how I'm [TS]

  right and tell me how to fix it and he's [TS]

  not going to do any of those things he's [TS]

  gonna say the situation is bad person [TS]

  you hate it isn't that the villain here [TS]

  you're all the Berlin and there's no [TS]

  easy way to fix it and here's what we [TS]

  tried and here's mine failed and like [TS]

  it's it's it's a a clear-eyed look into [TS]

  into the chaos of life I and I think [TS]

  it's something that if you don't share [TS]

  that mindset people will find [TS]

  unattractive and not not compelling and [TS]

  it to varying degrees you can get [TS]

  inspiration out of it but like it's [TS]

  almost like if you feel inspired by [TS]

  section of this book the the book is not [TS]

  you know the book would grab you by your [TS]

  lapels and shakers and now stop being [TS]

  inspired think you're in the jaws of [TS]

  death and you don't even know it [TS]

  no I have this thing that I learned [TS]

  enough because art history class [TS]

  security with it me for decades is the [TS]

  Egyptian sculpture the Pharaohs and and [TS]

  wives and so forth we would be portrayed [TS]

  as staring directly into the Sun and I [TS]

  thought of that as an important concept [TS]

  that sometimes you have to look at truth [TS]

  in it hurts you may have been damaged [TS]

  you but you have to stare directly into [TS]

  the Sun because if you look away you're [TS]

  not actually seeing the true image we [TS]

  get into the you know the cave that [TS]

  Plato's cave and so forth but what it is [TS]

  that is that a he is he finds himself [TS]

  looking at me and goes like uh huh [TS]

  I looked away for too long I need to [TS]

  look all man that's what was going on [TS]

  there and that's where the truth comes [TS]

  from he does it again and again [TS]

  it'sit's you need to see the chair by [TS]

  looking at the negative space and very [TS]

  nice the space between the notes [TS]

  that's right for our solid background [TS]

  hey that's what i do i I was going to [TS]

  say in the theater social media world a [TS]

  couple months ago someone found the the [TS]

  list of story rules at Pixar and that [TS]

  just you know spread like wildfire [TS]

  facebook and twitter and everyone had [TS]

  the on everyone had like the poster [TS]

  version of the link to the story version [TS]

  of it and you know I read it and I [TS]

  thought well okay yeah i believe all [TS]

  those things that's great and I really [TS]

  hope that you know whether whether on [TS]

  the management side on the creative side [TS]

  if you work in creative industry read [TS]

  this book because it's just as useful as [TS]

  those story [TS]

  rules and it's it's just as many things [TS]

  that you can you can follow or you can [TS]

  ignore or you can adjust and adapt and [TS]

  you know I'm kind of afraid that people [TS]

  aren't going to read it because they're [TS]

  going to think I was a business book or [TS]

  oh it's not a nice list like a buzzfeed [TS]

  article because you know 25-story rules [TS]

  is a lot faster than 300 something pages [TS]

  but I I just almost every every chapter [TS]

  in this was just going [TS]

  yes in my head the artistic aspects of [TS]

  it is another place where is like a [TS]

  fairly frightening echo of my personal [TS]

  experience that I spent my my use doing [TS]

  a you know a lot of you know fine arts [TS]

  type stuff and that cat balls into that [TS]

  as well and he describes having the pics [TS]

  are employees take an art class and the [TS]

  things he described like it's kind of [TS]

  the same thing it seeing the reality [TS]

  situation doing doing the negative space [TS]

  and drawing your shoe upside down and [TS]

  everything all that is an exercise to [TS]

  make people who aren't experienced [TS]

  artists draw it's actually they're not [TS]

  what they think [TS]

  don't draw your minds conception of a [TS]

  shoe draw the actual shoe that's there [TS]

  at which is a great analogy is a great [TS]

  experience because it in business so [TS]

  much people will people withdraw their [TS]

  conception of issue i know what a chair [TS]

  looks like i'm going to throw a chair [TS]

  I know how business runs I'm gonna run a [TS]

  business and they will just not see the [TS]

  actual chair that's their the actual [TS]

  shoes there and the worst part is like [TS]

  after they've done it after you drop the [TS]

  shoe and you ask somebody have you [TS]

  accurately depicted the shoe that was in [TS]

  front of you does that look like that [TS]

  show you look at this issue that's a [TS]

  sure they'll shoot shoot i did it and [TS]

  but like why is your why is this picture [TS]

  not good why is not realistic wise iron [TS]

  always is different in some way but i we [TS]

  can't really tell it's the same thing in [TS]

  business it's like you know I I know how [TS]

  to run a business this is a business [TS]

  there they're running the business they [TS]

  think is their not the business that's [TS]

  actually there so it's it's a great [TS]

  analogy but I fear like so much when I [TS]

  read this book and reiterating the same [TS]

  points over and over i fear that it will [TS]

  bounce off people that if they haven't [TS]

  actually drawn tried to draw shoe they [TS]

  won't understand the point is being made [TS]

  that if they run a business there [TS]

  they're gonna be running the business [TS]

  they think they see not the one that's [TS]

  really there that's the irony of the [TS]

  reality distortion field that he [TS]

  mentions in the afterward to is [TS]

  afterwards a select few know people talk [TS]

  about Steve Jobs having this reality [TS]

  distortion field and he didn't see it [TS]

  the same way you know Steve painting a [TS]

  vision of reality [TS]

  that he could pull into existence in [TS]

  India it's funny that I think he saw [TS]

  himself right we got ed catmull himself [TS]

  and the way viewed steve jobs is that [TS]

  they did that you know they weren't [TS]

  distorting reality they actually because [TS]

  it made this stuff happen doesn't matter [TS]

  what you think they're thinking they did [TS]

  it right right all right we have to go [TS]

  we have run out of time for this episode [TS]

  but i would like to thank my guests for [TS]

  joining me to talk a little bit about a [TS]

  lot of stuff revolving around Pixar and [TS]

  creativity think David Laura thanks for [TS]

  being here [TS]

  hey thanks for getting me to read it [TS]

  anyway yeah yeah absolutely not that I [TS]

  wasn't going to but Glenn fleischmann [TS]

  thank you for being back lit been awhile [TS]

  I i read a book [TS]

  thank you yeah you used to read lots of [TS]

  books what happened [TS]

  Hugo's broken yeah that's possible [TS]

  well mirror Lisa Schmeisser thank you [TS]

  for being here [TS]

  I like how you laugh resided me when you [TS]

  say my name haha well you were here you [TS]

  were also present know you know you were [TS]

  more I realized this one of the only way [TS]

  you could have contributed more as if I [TS]

  just let you host and gone decided and [TS]

  watch some TV [TS]

  John syracuse oh thanks for being here [TS]

  success sides problems dazing you know [TS]

  it's true it's true but first you have [TS]

  to have success anyway that's it for now [TS]

  and thanks for listening to be [TS]

  uncomfortable we'll see you next time [TS]

  space the final frontier [TS]

  these are the voyages of Scott McNulty [TS]

  his one-man mission to watch every [TS]

  episode of Star Trek the original series [TS]

  the next generation deep space nine [TS]

  Voyager enterprise and all the feature [TS]

  films but not the animated series [TS]

  randomly with a guest on our podcast [TS]

  it's called random track [TS]

  first of all some of the actors are [TS]

  better than i was in this isn't my [TS]

  favorite part of this episode is [TS]

  watching the actors just freeze and try [TS]

  to remain as still as possible [TS]

  some i will say that divorce Kelly and [TS]

  Leonard anymore do a pretty good job i [TS]

  think i like how Shatner has some [TS]

  trouble whose eyes keep moving is like I [TS]

  can't stop acting [TS]

  find it on itunes or at the [TS]

  uncomfortable dot-com / random track [TS]