Tom Sachs does have a reputation for being a dictator, but that attitude has led to fascinating work that can't be put together without the close collaboration of a big team (e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm3M9v3vS0I). Remember, it's typical for famous artists to work with assistants who are not credited (e.g. Damien Hirst's spot painters https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/9010657/Dam...). Sach's team is front and center in a lot of his work.
I confess I have his ten bullets on my wall because I think it helps me be a good contributor to my team. I think you can boil it down even further to Brancusi's 3 bullets: "create like a god, command like a king, work like a slave".
I like this. I love the aesthetic of a clean “organized” workspace, but damned if mine aren’t often the opposite. Your observation of what-follows-what is actually profound in light of what I guess (and you suggest) an “obviously organized” space is.
What exactly does it mean to "maintain a Work Hard, Play Hard policy"? Besides being required verbiage on every company's 'Culture' and 'Career' webpages, of course. In the Seattle web startup community, it seems to mean Drink Hard, but I don't think that's what he means here.
Is it just an empty phrase that means nothing, so the speaker and listener can both nod and think they agree perfectly, when in fact they have no common conception of this idea at all?
On the one hand, I agree with commentors that this is way too long and way too over the top... but I think that is definitely the point.
If you don't want to be in my studio, and follow my rules, I don't want you to be in my studio. The length and tone of the video ensures that non-compliers will self select out of the applicant pool.
However, not having the content available in written form is really not acceptable.
TOM SACHS is a sculptor, probably best known for his elaborate recreations of various Modern icons, all of them masterpieces of engineering and design of one kind or another. In an early show he made Knoll office furniture out of phone books and duct tape; later, he recreated Le Corbusier's 1952 Unité d'Habitation using only foamcore and a glue gun. Other projects have included his versions of various Cold War masterpieces, like the Apollo 11 Lunar Excursion Module, and the bridge of the battleship USS Enterprise. And because no engineering project is more complex and pervasive than the corporate ecosystem, he's done versions of those, too, including a McDonald's he built using plywood, glue, assorted kitchen appliances. He's also done Hello Kitty and her friends in materials ranging from foamcore to bronze.
A lot has been made of the conceptual underpinnings of these sculptures: how Sachs' sampling capitalist culture, remixing, dubbing and spitting it back out again, so that the results are transformed and transforming. Equally, if not more important, is his total embrace of "showing his work." All the steps that led up to the end result are always on display. On a practical level, this means that all seams, joints, screws or for that matter anything holding stuff together, like foamcore and plywood, are left exposed. Nothing is erased, sanded away, or rendered invisible. On a more philosophical level, this means that nothing Sachs makes is ever finished. Like any good engineering project, everything can always be stripped down, stripped out, redesigned and improved.
I found out about Tom Sachs because of Casey Neistat, as Casey worked for him when he first came to NYC. He was the biggest mentor to Casey, and if you ever watch Casey's Youtube video, you can see Tom's influence on everything, such as his studio setup and his "analog" video style. Ultimately, Tom Sach has had a great influence on Youtube, even though it was indirect. I believe Casey's brother, Van, still works for Tom.
I'm surprised at the backlash I see here. Doesn't your eye start twitching if someone used the wrong number of spaces in a source file? This is coding style for the physical world. This is far less oppressive than any "SCRUM" I've had to deal with (or whatever the latest trendy name for XP is).
It's easy to see shop rules as overly controlling, until you've had to work in a shop for a few weeks or months and seen things get completely out of control. It's no different than working on a software project. Non-programmers (and beginners) will try writing a 30-line program, without knowing any of the best-practice conventions that experienced programmers know about. Then they post their mess on StackOverflow to get help. What's the first comment? Always: "We can't read this. Fix your indentation! Fix your capitalization! Remove those unused variables!" In other words, knoll that source code.
I absolutely hate self-important studio people who have idiotic ideas on space management and tool usage, especially if the space is not theirs.
And that soldering job was weak.
The aesthetics of the video are cool, though, and the ideas are okay, though presented in an extremely patronising way.
A comment on the video put it nicely:
>I think Ave pranked us all. My eyes are twitching I'm so triggered by this;-) A great example of the kind of person you never want to work for. Someone who's utterly concerned with trivialities of HOW things are done instead of the reasons you're actually in business. Someone who can't see past their own way of negotiating the world, imposing their own way of doing things on their staff. I can assure you, being told what to do and how to do it are two different things. HR nonsense aside, I'd last 10 mins working for someone this short sighted. The end result is the goal. How you get there is irrelevant, beyond following some basic safety protocols. And cats should be at home.. litter boxes stink.
I think you're being too dismissive of the value of setting expectations about how work is done. I'll try to make it relatable for software folks...
I've developed software in places where we:
* had coding style guides
* promoted many compiler Warnings to Errors
* worked off of Bug and Feature lists, not just going off coding
* had to document all changes (for the FDA) in a certain way
* were expected to keep Continuous Integration tests running
* were expected to write unit tests as much as possible, and have very high code coverage
* attempted to do Test-Driven Development for most work (because it was the best way to make sure our code was testable [see "Working Effectively With Legacy Code" by Michael C. Feathers for inspiration)
* had a strict process for handling customer feedback, to ensure we triaged it appropriately
* had to lock our workstations when we stepped away (Sarbanes–Oxley)
* had a code review process for submitting changes
* had a design review process for larger changes (especially including adopting new tools)
* used a very restricted set of programming languages for any new work, even for small tools and one-offs
* followed SCRUM (daily stand-ups, story points, etc.)
* used Objectives and Key Results to plan our work
* had a process to discuss changing any of these
* all used one tool to manage our calendar (even for personal time blocks that didn't impact anyone else)
* all used one messaging tool
Every single one of those is an example of being told how to do my work. And they all existed to set expectations about how I was supposed to interact with my teammates. Whose responsibility was it to do things, how do we keep track of the things, how do we make decisions, how do we stay out of each others' way, how do we avoid unnecessary interruptions.
I've heard someone express the phrase, "We don't do that here." What was meant by it is, don't get dragged down into a discussion about whether something is right or wrong. We have a culture. There are rules. We follow them. (And there's the door, if you don't like it.)
Not clear if you know who AvE is, in the referenced video, but I hadn't heard of Tom Sachs until AvE linked this video. I'd like to note though, that AvE's workspace is basically the polar opposite of that promoted by 10 bullets.
I, personally, really liked the video. I, like you, couldn't work at that place. But, I appreciate a lot of the ideas presented in it, some more than others. As with just about every piece of advice you can find: Take the things that work for you, leave those that don't.
One thing that shop rules like this are very effective at is: weeding out the people he doesn't want working for him. He has his way of working and he could either do it all himself, or he could find people who work in a way that's compatible with how he works. I suspect that the kind of people who just want to do their work in their way without having these sorts of rules imposed on them, just wouldn't work for Tom Sachs.
AvE is a youtuber who is fairly specialized in the machine-shop sort of arena, but with wider-than-normal appeal because he is entertaining and just does some generally cool shit. He hit a million subscribers a month or two ago. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChWv6Pn_zP0rI6lgGt3MyfA
There's probably quite a few people who appreciate this approach, and would work together nicely with this guy. Lord knows I've worked with some smart people who acted like the sun rises and sets on their choices and methodology. But there's nothing I hate more than condescension.
It's definitely not that I disagree with every point he made, but an open and honest dialog with your team feels so much better than having ten commandments hanging over your head at all times. Your personality mesh either works or it doesn't.
As true as this may be in much of industry, it doesn’t really apply to the fine art marketplace Sachs is operating in. Through video pieces like this and by leaving intentional imperfection (ave might say “apprentice marks”) in finished sculpture, Sachs makes his studio practice a part of the work. By developing & communicating the unique processes he uses, Sachs imbues his sculptures with origin narratives, adding market value as collectors consider not only the object but the performance that brought it into existence. Being able to talk about all the unneccary hoops they jumped through to make a piece is a definite boon. Finally, since a tremendous portion of the work coming out of the Tom Sachs studio was physically produced entirely by assistants, Sachs-dictated processes help to center Tom himself in the work while reducing the authorial role of assistants. Collectors aren’t interested in the comfort or intentionality of some no-name assistant.
At the end of the day, today’s collectors aren’t buying for a specific end product— they’re buying for an artist’s name and the STORY of the work. Better story -> bigger valuation -> More effective tax shelter
I totally agree, and, as far as I know, Tom treats his employees quite well. What I’m getting at here is that, in the art world, the most expedient/comfortable/logical way for a worker to do a task doesn’t correlate to a competitive advantage as it might in other industries. For better worse! Artistic struggle is marketable.
Consider Marina Abromovic’s “Rhythm 0” or RAE’s residence in a storefront window. Consenting, controlled discomfort can be a medium in itself.
Maybe I'm getting old, but was youtube always this annoying with ads? I had 2 clips just now, 2.5 minutes together, and none of them were marked as advertisement. I did'nt even realize it was advertisement until the first clip was half way through. And I still don't know what it tried to sell. WTF!??
Bullet 11)
Forget all the compulsive controll freaks that are your bosses said in the video. Think like management- ask yourself, is it efficient, to clean up my workspace after me?
Or could somebody else, somebody cheaper do it.
Outsource all the stupid stuff.
Buellet 12)
Remove that idiotic video from youtube.
Tom Sachs does have a reputation for being a dictator, but that attitude has led to fascinating work that can't be put together without the close collaboration of a big team (e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm3M9v3vS0I). Remember, it's typical for famous artists to work with assistants who are not credited (e.g. Damien Hirst's spot painters https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/art-news/9010657/Dam...). Sach's team is front and center in a lot of his work.
I confess I have his ten bullets on my wall because I think it helps me be a good contributor to my team. I think you can boil it down even further to Brancusi's 3 bullets: "create like a god, command like a king, work like a slave".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Sachs_(artist)
Always be knolling is a great lesson for pretending you're organized.
Even if you don't care about the angles, "put away everything not in use" and "group like objects together" sound like actual organization to me.
What does "organized" mean to you, if not these?
Organization doesn't happen when you put things away, it happens when you go to locate them again.
For some people that's a tautology, but not for everyone.
I like this. I love the aesthetic of a clean “organized” workspace, but damned if mine aren’t often the opposite. Your observation of what-follows-what is actually profound in light of what I guess (and you suggest) an “obviously organized” space is.
I thought I was going to find this unknown but great bullet-hell game here: https://www.crazygames.com/game/10-bullets-html-5
What exactly does it mean to "maintain a Work Hard, Play Hard policy"? Besides being required verbiage on every company's 'Culture' and 'Career' webpages, of course. In the Seattle web startup community, it seems to mean Drink Hard, but I don't think that's what he means here.
Is it just an empty phrase that means nothing, so the speaker and listener can both nod and think they agree perfectly, when in fact they have no common conception of this idea at all?
It is an empty phrase used to excuse overwork.
On the one hand, I agree with commentors that this is way too long and way too over the top... but I think that is definitely the point.
If you don't want to be in my studio, and follow my rules, I don't want you to be in my studio. The length and tone of the video ensures that non-compliers will self select out of the applicant pool.
However, not having the content available in written form is really not acceptable.
Was thinking this video was very Casey Neistat especially the way it is oragnised, and then he shows up.
I think it was directed and voiced by his brother Van Neistat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XpXDzL-h7cI
TOM SACHS is a sculptor, probably best known for his elaborate recreations of various Modern icons, all of them masterpieces of engineering and design of one kind or another. In an early show he made Knoll office furniture out of phone books and duct tape; later, he recreated Le Corbusier's 1952 Unité d'Habitation using only foamcore and a glue gun. Other projects have included his versions of various Cold War masterpieces, like the Apollo 11 Lunar Excursion Module, and the bridge of the battleship USS Enterprise. And because no engineering project is more complex and pervasive than the corporate ecosystem, he's done versions of those, too, including a McDonald's he built using plywood, glue, assorted kitchen appliances. He's also done Hello Kitty and her friends in materials ranging from foamcore to bronze.
A lot has been made of the conceptual underpinnings of these sculptures: how Sachs' sampling capitalist culture, remixing, dubbing and spitting it back out again, so that the results are transformed and transforming. Equally, if not more important, is his total embrace of "showing his work." All the steps that led up to the end result are always on display. On a practical level, this means that all seams, joints, screws or for that matter anything holding stuff together, like foamcore and plywood, are left exposed. Nothing is erased, sanded away, or rendered invisible. On a more philosophical level, this means that nothing Sachs makes is ever finished. Like any good engineering project, everything can always be stripped down, stripped out, redesigned and improved.
The reward for work is more work.
--Mark van de Walle
I found out about Tom Sachs because of Casey Neistat, as Casey worked for him when he first came to NYC. He was the biggest mentor to Casey, and if you ever watch Casey's Youtube video, you can see Tom's influence on everything, such as his studio setup and his "analog" video style. Ultimately, Tom Sach has had a great influence on Youtube, even though it was indirect. I believe Casey's brother, Van, still works for Tom.
A must-see for those who loved this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFl31p89VCM&list=PL9DA5B1371...
EDIT:
In case you need English translation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCpbBVthD7o&list=PL2FC1B24C6...
Discipline of Do Easy by Gus Van Sant (video adaptation of William Burroughs) is somewhat similar and definitely amazing:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoOUBETTyMI
I'm surprised at the backlash I see here. Doesn't your eye start twitching if someone used the wrong number of spaces in a source file? This is coding style for the physical world. This is far less oppressive than any "SCRUM" I've had to deal with (or whatever the latest trendy name for XP is).
It's easy to see shop rules as overly controlling, until you've had to work in a shop for a few weeks or months and seen things get completely out of control. It's no different than working on a software project. Non-programmers (and beginners) will try writing a 30-line program, without knowing any of the best-practice conventions that experienced programmers know about. Then they post their mess on StackOverflow to get help. What's the first comment? Always: "We can't read this. Fix your indentation! Fix your capitalization! Remove those unused variables!" In other words, knoll that source code.
I feel exausted just watching this, not sure it makes the point it is trying to. Now I just feel like I am watching someones therapy session.
I can't tell if that's put up as parody or not.
Either way, whatever point is intended, it doesn't justify the video length.
Right things explained by a myopic cretin. Wouldn't be surprised to find out that Corbusier was like that.
When it comes to "educational workspace videos" nothing will ever beat Staplerfahrer Klaus.
this is amazing, thank you
What did I just watch...
I absolutely hate self-important studio people who have idiotic ideas on space management and tool usage, especially if the space is not theirs.
And that soldering job was weak.
The aesthetics of the video are cool, though, and the ideas are okay, though presented in an extremely patronising way.
A comment on the video put it nicely:
>I think Ave pranked us all. My eyes are twitching I'm so triggered by this;-) A great example of the kind of person you never want to work for. Someone who's utterly concerned with trivialities of HOW things are done instead of the reasons you're actually in business. Someone who can't see past their own way of negotiating the world, imposing their own way of doing things on their staff. I can assure you, being told what to do and how to do it are two different things. HR nonsense aside, I'd last 10 mins working for someone this short sighted. The end result is the goal. How you get there is irrelevant, beyond following some basic safety protocols. And cats should be at home.. litter boxes stink.
I think you're being too dismissive of the value of setting expectations about how work is done. I'll try to make it relatable for software folks...
I've developed software in places where we:
* had coding style guides
* promoted many compiler Warnings to Errors
* worked off of Bug and Feature lists, not just going off coding
* had to document all changes (for the FDA) in a certain way
* were expected to keep Continuous Integration tests running
* were expected to write unit tests as much as possible, and have very high code coverage
* attempted to do Test-Driven Development for most work (because it was the best way to make sure our code was testable [see "Working Effectively With Legacy Code" by Michael C. Feathers for inspiration)
* had a strict process for handling customer feedback, to ensure we triaged it appropriately
* had to lock our workstations when we stepped away (Sarbanes–Oxley)
* had a code review process for submitting changes
* had a design review process for larger changes (especially including adopting new tools)
* used a very restricted set of programming languages for any new work, even for small tools and one-offs
* followed SCRUM (daily stand-ups, story points, etc.)
* used Objectives and Key Results to plan our work
* had a process to discuss changing any of these
* all used one tool to manage our calendar (even for personal time blocks that didn't impact anyone else)
* all used one messaging tool
Every single one of those is an example of being told how to do my work. And they all existed to set expectations about how I was supposed to interact with my teammates. Whose responsibility was it to do things, how do we keep track of the things, how do we make decisions, how do we stay out of each others' way, how do we avoid unnecessary interruptions.
I've heard someone express the phrase, "We don't do that here." What was meant by it is, don't get dragged down into a discussion about whether something is right or wrong. We have a culture. There are rules. We follow them. (And there's the door, if you don't like it.)
To be honest everything on that list sounds good to me as each was decently implemented.
At that level you are much more engineering than throwing stuff over the wall and running away.
I wish the system I inherited was structured that way!.
I got the code.
No comments, no tests, no test environment, no documentation, no history and the code is hilarious.
At that point your job is archaeology not engineering.
Not clear if you know who AvE is, in the referenced video, but I hadn't heard of Tom Sachs until AvE linked this video. I'd like to note though, that AvE's workspace is basically the polar opposite of that promoted by 10 bullets.
I, personally, really liked the video. I, like you, couldn't work at that place. But, I appreciate a lot of the ideas presented in it, some more than others. As with just about every piece of advice you can find: Take the things that work for you, leave those that don't.
One thing that shop rules like this are very effective at is: weeding out the people he doesn't want working for him. He has his way of working and he could either do it all himself, or he could find people who work in a way that's compatible with how he works. I suspect that the kind of people who just want to do their work in their way without having these sorts of rules imposed on them, just wouldn't work for Tom Sachs.
Who is AvE?
AvE is a youtuber who is fairly specialized in the machine-shop sort of arena, but with wider-than-normal appeal because he is entertaining and just does some generally cool shit. He hit a million subscribers a month or two ago. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UChWv6Pn_zP0rI6lgGt3MyfA
Skookum as frig
There's probably quite a few people who appreciate this approach, and would work together nicely with this guy. Lord knows I've worked with some smart people who acted like the sun rises and sets on their choices and methodology. But there's nothing I hate more than condescension.
It's definitely not that I disagree with every point he made, but an open and honest dialog with your team feels so much better than having ten commandments hanging over your head at all times. Your personality mesh either works or it doesn't.
As true as this may be in much of industry, it doesn’t really apply to the fine art marketplace Sachs is operating in. Through video pieces like this and by leaving intentional imperfection (ave might say “apprentice marks”) in finished sculpture, Sachs makes his studio practice a part of the work. By developing & communicating the unique processes he uses, Sachs imbues his sculptures with origin narratives, adding market value as collectors consider not only the object but the performance that brought it into existence. Being able to talk about all the unneccary hoops they jumped through to make a piece is a definite boon. Finally, since a tremendous portion of the work coming out of the Tom Sachs studio was physically produced entirely by assistants, Sachs-dictated processes help to center Tom himself in the work while reducing the authorial role of assistants. Collectors aren’t interested in the comfort or intentionality of some no-name assistant.
At the end of the day, today’s collectors aren’t buying for a specific end product— they’re buying for an artist’s name and the STORY of the work. Better story -> bigger valuation -> More effective tax shelter
> Collectors aren’t interested in the comfort or intentionality of some no-name assistant.
I view that as a problem. And it's not unique to the art world.
All else equal, we should favor buying products and services from employers who treat their employees well.
One could even argue we should be willing to pay a premium for it.
I totally agree, and, as far as I know, Tom treats his employees quite well. What I’m getting at here is that, in the art world, the most expedient/comfortable/logical way for a worker to do a task doesn’t correlate to a competitive advantage as it might in other industries. For better worse! Artistic struggle is marketable.
Consider Marina Abromovic’s “Rhythm 0” or RAE’s residence in a storefront window. Consenting, controlled discomfort can be a medium in itself.
I am resigning my position after 10 years. I like my manager personally but they are 100% in the tell you how camp. This summed it up perfectly.
Maybe I'm getting old, but was youtube always this annoying with ads? I had 2 clips just now, 2.5 minutes together, and none of them were marked as advertisement. I did'nt even realize it was advertisement until the first clip was half way through. And I still don't know what it tried to sell. WTF!??
Bullet 11) Forget all the compulsive controll freaks that are your bosses said in the video. Think like management- ask yourself, is it efficient, to clean up my workspace after me? Or could somebody else, somebody cheaper do it. Outsource all the stupid stuff.
Buellet 12) Remove that idiotic video from youtube.
That was probably the weakest soldering joint I've ever seen. It was very funny to me though, so perhaps they were going for irony?
I once stayed at a hostel in Phoenix run this way . . .