What writers prize is simpler, quieter and more enduring than clamorous Fame: it is recognition. Fame, by and large, is an accountant’s category, tallied in Amazonian sales. Recognition, hushed and inherent in the silence of the page, is a reader’s category: its stealth is its wealth.

– Cynthia Ozick, Writers, Visible and Invisible.

Something that used to irk me to no end when I wrote/dramaturged the two Kent Ridge Hall productions I was involved in - there was never any effort to be professional about the publicity, and include the names of the producers, directors and playwrights.

What’s worse is that the playwrights were always relegated to the rear positions when it came to curtain calls and programme credits, when we actually had one of the most central roles in the productions; the production would never have taken off if we hadn’t started writing in the first place.

I used to think that it might seem like arrogance on my part if I clamoured for more mention, or mention in greater detail, so I always kept silent about this issue, although I always felt very strongly about this.

But reading Ozick’s article has made me realise that I’m not alone in this desire for recognition as a writer, especially when we writers are one of the most ‘invisible’ people in the business of wordsmithing.

Being someone who is easily distracted by Topics That Are Very Important And Of High Research Value, I decided to do some Google-ing, and found two very interesting articles. One kinda explains how this works, while the other is on a tangential but related topic.

At the end of the day, though, the only answer I have runs along the same lines as my hypothesis, that is to say: I don’t have a clue. I’m neither a mathematician nor a computer scientist, so I can’t write fancy programs that reverse engineer the process and decipher the algorithm that the Facebook developers use.

But the best guess I have is that the people who appear on said list are actually the people who last visited my profile. Because sometimes, I see certain names popping up again and again, but not others. Why?

Hmmm. On hindsight, that’s not the best correlation one can and/or should make. Anyway, what’s your take on this?

This is a stunning moment in economic history: At one time we worked hard so that someday we (or our children) wouldn’t have to. Today, the more we earn, the more we work, since the opportunity cost of not working is all the greater (and since the higher we go, the more relatively deprived we feel).

In other words, when we get a raise, instead of using that hard-won money to buy “the good life,” we feel even more pressure to work since the shadow costs of not working are all the greater.

– Dalton Conley, Rich Man’s Burden.

Compare with:

Christine Chong posed a good question - “Why must life be a competition?”. The problem with competitions is that they have rules, and the rules were made by someone else, not you.

It’s okay to compete for a while, and it might even be fun. But you should pick and choose your races. You should also bear in mind that it’s all just mind games and you always have the right to refuse to play.

– Mr Wang Says So, Life As A Competition.

That’s our Chris Chong BTW!