Fascination vs. The Flat-Chested Schoolmarm
by Sally Hogshead on December 13, 2009
The word “fascination” gets tossed around so often in conversation that it’s lost its former gravitas. We say that something is “fascinating” when we actually mean “interesting” or “attention-getting,” using the same hyperbole as we might when describing a tennis match as “awesome” or a movie as “incredible.” In these latter examples, we don’t actually mean that the tennis game inspired awe or that the movie was difficult to believe.
(Hmm. So what’s the difference between attention and fascination?)
Paying attention is disciplined act. It’s rational. Voluntary. Logical. Controlled.
Fascination, on the other hand, is instinctive and irrational. Uncivilized and urgent. It’s an all-consuming force of attraction, far more captivating than its paler cousin, attention.
Most forms of formal education are based on paying attention. Cultural movements are based on fascination. When compared to fascination, attention seems prudish: a buck-toothed, flat-chested schoolmarm whacking a ruler on her desk for control.
If you only want a moment of someone’s focus (enough time to inquire if the flight is on time, or to give an update on tonight’s softball game), then you might get by with only asking for attention.
However. If you’re interested in changing opinions, or actions, or beliefs, then stop trying to get people to pay attention. Stop teaching, stop presenting, stop explaining. Start fascinating.
The word “fascination” gets tossed around so often in conversation that it’s lost its former gravitas. We say that something is “fascinating” when we actually mean “interesting” or “attention-getting,” using the same hyperbole as we might when describing a tennis match as “awesome” or a movie as “incredible.” In these latter examples, we don’t actually mean that the tennis game inspired awe or that the movie was difficult to believe.
So what’s the difference between fascination and attention? Will the real fascination please stand up?
Paying attention is disciplined act. It’s rational. Voluntary. Logical.
Fascination, on the other hand, is instinctive and irrational, uncivilized and urgent. It’s an all-consuming influence, far more captivating than its paler cousin, attention. It’s an irresistible form of attraction, one that affects us intellectually, emotionally, and physically. By comparison, attention seems prudish: a buck-toothed, flat-chested schoolmarm whacking a ruler on her desk for control.
Most forms of formal education are based on paying attention. Cultural movements are based on fascination.
If you only want a moment of someone’s focus (enough time to inquire if the flight is on time, or to give an update on tonight’s softball game), then you might get by with only asking for attention.
But maybe you need a message that’s more persuasive. Maybe you’re interested in changing opinions. Or beliefs. Or long-term actions. If so, stop trying to get attention. Start fascinating.
Tagged as:
Radical Careering
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }
Thanks Sally. Seems like this is kind of like people’s over-focus on brand awareness … just because I know a company’s name or have heard of their product doesn’t mean that I care. Really looking forward to your book!