A recent vblog by Penn Jillette got me thinking about my approach as a solo filmmaker. For a few years now, it's been normal for me to multitask projects almost to an absurd degree, at times having as many as half a dozen films in different stages of production. I'm a bit of a nutter in that regard, come to think about it.
Now I don't at all agree with Penn's assertion that multitasking inevitably means doing everything half-assed. Certainly that can be the outcome, but it isn't necessarily so. However, what I've been noticing is that as outside pressures have encroached on the amount of time I have to spend on films, the juggler approach is losing its edge in terms of results and productivity. And after Penn jarred some thinking, I've now started to wonder if perhaps the best thing I can do to right myself - did I mention I'm feeling hopelessly overwhelmed? - is to put these projects in order, and attack them with undivided attention one at a time.
One result of that shift will be an increase in the time between releases of substance, and probably a decrease in the quantity of "quickies." But given the reduced time pool, shouldn't those be changes I should expect and/or demand of myself anyway??
In any event, the one at a time approach is something I've decided to try on for size. Heaven knows that outside the context of my filmmaking there's plenty of multitasking that I cannot just opt out of, but within this little sacred area of my life I can.
Comments
Oh Phil, I don't think castration is the answer. Oh wait, that's Eunuchtasking...
(I'll be leaving now).
Makes sense, let yourself do one thing at a time in an area of your life you can control, take out the time pressure and see where it takes you.
I think this is a worthy experiment. Not that multitasking is bad, I have had some of my best moments while multitasking. :) I just think mixing things up is good and trying a new approach to your day to day life is always going to be a good thing, or at least a good learning experience.
It is also fun to completely immerse yourself in something for a while. In the end you have this memory of the era when you were working on mostly that one thing and it becomes a strong memory instead of a jumbled memory of all the million things you were also working on at the time. We already look back at our Shelf Life chapter one era with fond nostalgia even though it is still pretty new just because we focused so hard on it...although it was also a relief to finish heh.
I am not a big fan of an all or nothing approach but shifting from side to side to find that sweet spot between single obsession and overwhelming multitasking is a healthy goal.
Outside pressures...I can relate! Right about now unitasking would be a step up from zerotasking.
I couldn't work on more than two films at a time or so. . . I think that there is *a little* truth in that female assertion that men are bad at multitasking. I know for me, my attention subconsciously deviates towards the project I'm more interested in and then the other ones seem to fall by the wayside completely. Maybe good in that it separates the wheat from the chaff a bit, but I know I personally work best when I can focus all of my attention on one thing.
There's something very satisfying and motivating about working on one job, and getting it finished and on display - whether it's making a film or mowing the lawn :)
I've once read that the common assertion that women are good at multi-tasking is just not true, because the human brain is not made for it, regardless of it being a male or a female brain. All the word "multi-tasking" is doing is stressing us out, because it seems to be expected we're able to do it, and if everyone else seems to be able to do it, why not I? - maybe it was invented by the big bosses of the big corporations, to get their employees to work even harder (for less money...:p)?
Be that as it may, I've always admired your ability to release so many highest-quality films in such short amounts of time, Phil, but once you start feeling overwhelmed by something you're doing for enjoyment, I think you're right about trying a new approach.
We're be here waiting eagerly for your new releases, even if it will take you a little longer to make your films. :)
unitasking++
"One result of that shift will be an increase in the time between releases of substance, and probably a decrease in the quantity of “quickies.”"
Having *less time* does that. Unitasking should not.
...unless you have external dependencies ("can't work on project A today because am waiting for input from Mr X, do something on project B instead".) Sometimes projects are completely independent ("I can save time/cost if I travel to the studio to do sound recording for project A and project B on the same day") but tendency is to overestimate how much you can save that way.
In fact, doing projects one at a time means you get the one you care about released *earlier* and the one you care about less *no later* than you would have done with parallel production. Suppose I have three projects each of which takes a month of my available time to do. If I work on them in parallel, I release all three after about three months. If I do them one at a time, I release first one after a month, second after two months, third after three months. Examples where different projects take different amounts of time are more complicated but the basic truth still holds.
And this is even before we get into the saving you get from not having to juggle, and the clarity you gain by only thinking about one thing.
There is an argument that you will miss some of the creative triggering or shared learning that can occur when work on one project inspires or teaches something about the other. I can't speak with experience about how the creative part works in your particular domain (I don't make films, I develop software) but will say that when it comes to learning, completely finishing one project before starting on the next can be better, because the learning is in the context of a complete project, and completing projects is what you're ultimately trying to do. You will also start fewer projects that learning and growing lead you to realize were a bad idea in the first place.
(Apologies for evangelistically exporting strong opinions from a different context. I don't buy every software/film practice analogy I've heard, but the project management ones seem to hold up.)