Would you rather have a consistent existence where you could mostly depend on certain things going as expected, not too fabulous, but not too horrible . . . or would you prefer to tolerate huge setbacks in exchange for wild successes?
Would you rather have a consistent existence where you could mostly depend on certain things going as expected, not too fabulous, but not too horrible . . . or would you prefer to tolerate huge setbacks in exchange for wild successes?
I've always taken the risks.
But calculated risks.
My example was that I wanted to work on movies. So I went to film school. Then I went back home, and was working a regular construction type job. Because back home, there was very little in the way of movie business. So I could have stayed in my hometown, worked a regular job, etc. But I decided to move to LA, with no job, and try to make things work out. But at least I already had some movie training and experience from school. If someone just moves out to LA to be in movies, or be a rock star, with no skills, and no plan, then they are pretty likely to fail.
But sometimes you have to go to where the jobs are.
It might be scary to interview for jobs in another city.
But if nothing is panning out for you in your town,
sometimes you have to take a risk and go someplace else.
Even if you have no friends, no family, etc...
depends on what's going on in life....................I've taken some risks and now I'd like things to stay consistent for a number of years so I can enjoy the rewards.
But you can't really stop shit from happeneing.........sometimes
I like to roll the dice. I can't deny the economic crisis makes me flinch a bit though.
OEC
Damn... can't decide!
In my teens and 20's, the latter was by far the preferable. Every awesome success was to be celebrated and recorded in legend... yet every horrible downfall became writing material, also to be recorded in legend. Nowadays, while I still love and welcome the awesome successes, the downfalls they bring in their wake are harder to afford. Honestly, I could use just a short period of temperate contentment in which to catch up on my own life.
I've lived like shit and I've lived comfortably. I don't want to live like shit again so I'd probably pick the latter.
having the huge successes with the huge downfalls seems exciting because there is always something going on in your life. But security gets borring after a while. I guess it would all depend what the setbacks happen to be out of the sucesses and if there actually worth it or not.
Too old and too many responsibilities to take risks.
Besides, I'm at a stage in life when I don't want to be a rock star, famous, or even rich. So long as I have food, a roof over my head, a loving spouse, gas in the truck and the bikes, venison in the freezer and a couple of bottles of something stashed away for the odd nightcap, I'm good.
I took a risk moving to Las Vegas from Boston 7 years ago and it turned out better, not a lot better but at least in Vegas I can afford a house and more on an income that is less than what I was making in Boston and could definitely not afford a house there, could barely afford to live... But now I have more responsibilities (other than my house) and less desire to take a risk, it would have to be a solid opportunity that was a definite improvement. I would take a risk I was confident in, not just any risk with a possibility of wild success.
Funny thing about this is that going for the dependable could land you in the shit just as easily as taking risks... It is kinda like the rock star who makes amazing albums that only sell around 100,000 copies because they are generally inaccessible to most of the public (but beloved by his core audience), then decides to "sell out" by making a mainstream record, only to sell 5,000 copies and lose his house, wife, agent, and pet Doberman doing it. *Shrug*
But even that is a risk that some people are willing to take...
For instance, if you were 14 years old, and could sing, would you take a deal to be the next "Justin Bieber"?
Even if some people would make fun of it, other people would love it, and you'd be set for life financially...
People always hassle people for "selling out", but if you were made the exact same offer,
you might take it... You'd get financial "stability". Or you could stay true to whatever musical
style you think is best, and take the "risk" that you never make any money doing it...
So it seems that between us, we come up with the same idea :P It's ALL a risk, whether you see it or not. Tom Waits song said, "You must risk something that matters." Gotta say I agree. What could matter more than the small amount of time we have on the planet to live out our life stories, especially considering that we only get one chance to do it?
I've always been a risk junky, that thinks my shoes are gonna keep growing.
In this economy riding it out and playing it safe seems the norm. I can't do that. But scary yeah - I'm rolling the dice for my whole family.
Bookmarks