This is email I had from Corey Hague, one of the founders of BuyerHunt.com. This is important to the philosophical issues I’ve tried to raise, and Corey agreed to let me talk about this in the weblog:
Well Greg, I am out of ideas, slowly becoming “zestless” and looking for some inspiration. A couple of months ago a friend and I created a website, www.buyerhunt.com. As agents ourselves, we designed the site with (progressive) agents in mind. Despite our best efforts, to date, most of the agent-derived response we get is negative and is often personal and unrelated in nature. And these agents aren’t giving the site a shot. They visit the homepage, make a quick decision and write scathing responses (usually in regards to the fact that we give joe schmoe buyer and seller access). All this after we got the “stamp of approval” from Inman News, who named us one of the best new web ideas for 2007. It just doesn’t seem right. I am a big fan of your blog, and am awe-struck by the manner in which you are able to hold your own in the face of often ludicrous and nonsensical banter.
Though I pride myself on being a young (25), determined, forward-thinking individual with plenty of family-infused and “real time” real estate experience, I am for the first time finding it difficult to brush off the aforementioned criticisms and personal attacks. I guess my question is simply this… How do you do it? You lay your heart, soul and ideas on the line and so often have them thrown right back in your face. And yet everyday, I wake up and see that you have written again, unscathed and unabashed. I want to continue to be a progressive, trailblazing agent… but am starting to see a side of the business that I would rather not be privy to.
Without intending to be flippant, I don’t notice things like that. In any sort of reaction to anything — positive or negative — all I am listening for is the resonance of reason.
There’s this first: The reaction, whatever it is, doesn’t have anything to do with me, primarily. Every action is taken first by the self upon the self, so when someone manifests a secondary consequence of that internal activity, it is primarily about the person acting, not about me or anything that is being acted upon or reacted to.
There was a story in the local news today about a man who had punched his television in order to refrain from punching his wife. The action was a form of self-expression — as are all actions — his way of taking the moral high ground by not being a wife-beater. But, of course, if he could refrain from lashing out at his wife, he could also effect the same self-control with respect to his television. So what was his point? To coerce and intimidate his wife by a measured but nevertheless entirely pretended loss of self-control. The action had nothing to do with his wife, primarily, but with his own weighted attempt to dominate his wife by fear without looking like a bad guy in his own eyes.
Does that makes sense? We are each of us a self, an ego, and every purposive action we take, overt or purely introspective, is taken first by the ego upon the ego — as the expression of the essence of the ego. Everything that each one of is doing, all the time, is primarily an affirmative expression of the idea “This is who I am.” “This is how I behave.” “This is what I always do.” “This is what I never do.”
We compare our lives against other human beings — friends, family, other people we have heard or read about, living or dead, even fictional characters — but the primary relationship of the uniquely human life is the interaction between the self of the corporeal mind and body and the imagined self within every individual human mind. Purposive action, primarily, is the ego’s expression of itself — the mind and body’s physical representation of the abstract idea.
This is a point to be internalized — mastered. When your correspondents seem to be lashing out at you, they are very probably lashing out at themselves instead, as a pantomime of lashing out at a universe they view as being inhospitable to their egos. They are very definitely trying to hurt you, but if you reflect upon what is really going on, you will not be hurt. The real issue has nothing to do with you. Like that smashed up TV, you just happened to be there, that’s all.
However: Just because their behavior is bad, it doesn’t mean they have nothing to teach you. I listen for the resonance of reason. If I were to dismiss every complaint because it is expressed in objectionable behavior — or even just argued fallaciously — I would miss out on a lot of excellent opportunities to discover errors in my own thinking. Even as you ignore the form of a reaction — and I mean either criticism or praise — you should attend to the substance, if only to determine whether or not there is any substance.
Do you see? Every response you get to your product is in some sense market research. If someone writes to you praising your efforts to the skies — but for all the wrong reasons — you should not feel good about this. You have failed, with that person anyway, to convey the value you are attempting to bring to the marketplace. By contrast, just because one of your correspondents is a complete jackass in the way he expresses his abhorrence of your product, that doesn’t mean he’s incorrect. His behavior might be unreasonable and yet his complaint might be profoundly important.
For me, it’s all about the message — if any. I don’t care about the envelope it comes packaged in at all.
What is really important, I think, is that every bit of this applies to you, just as much as to anyone else. There is nothing morally wrong with being in honest error. But I think it is a horrible injustice to diminish yourself — your self — in reaction to other people’s bad behavior. Such a diminution might actually be their goal, but it is impossible for them to effect. Only you can do it, and only by your own free choice.
The issue is always and only one’s own self. I did nothing to provoke this irrational reaction, but what can I learn from it? I am in a situation that I would have sooner avoided, but, being in it, how can I profit from it — even if my profit is simply not to have taken a total loss? I will be alive for a finite but unknown span of time. In this particular irreplaceable instant of my life, am I growing or shrinking? Am I enriching or impoverishing myself? Am I learning something new or am I affecting to pretend to have made believe that something I already know to be true is untrue? Am I engaged, in this moment, in self-construction or self-destruction? Am I trying with all my will to live as a human being, or am I maneuvering to avoid the awesome responsibility of being alive as a reasoning, recollecting organism? Every choice is life or death. Don’t choose death just because so many other people seem to.
It took a lot of courage for Corey to approach me with this question, and even more for him to permit me to discuss it in public. I’m talking to him, of course, and, incidentally and always, to myself. But I am talking to you, too, alone in the silence of your own mind. And, of course and, I hope, obviously, we’re not just talking about the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune at work.
There are angels among us, impish, wry-smiled Russell Shaws and Jeff Browns, who want nothing but the best for you and for everyone. But there are devils, too, and too many of the influences you confront every day are born in the fires of self-damnation. If you can learn to think of your ego as something you must always love and honor and revere and burnish until it seems to glow of its own light, you can make yourself immune from other people’s ugly behavior.
Technorati Tags: real estate, real estate marketing
Jeff Brown says:
Corey – Let me say this as a repeat of Greg’s killer response to you. (Ayn would be proud Greg.)
The average real estate agent can barely get out of his own way. If IQ scores for agents were expressed as heat, most of the real estate world would be on the chilly side.
I won’t even spend time on the lack of testicular fortitude, of which you are overflowing.
And there’s the problem. You’re smart, and fearless, and they’re slow and afraid of the dark.
They’re unworthy of anything but ensuring you can learn a little bit from each of their embarrassingly inane comments.
By the way, are you nervous that all the Bloodhound Dogs are now watching you? π
March 27, 2007 — 9:36 pm
Galen says:
Well put Greg. Screaming users are a good thing if you know how to take their advice.
March 27, 2007 — 10:31 pm
Greg Swann says:
> (Ayn would be proud Greg.)
This is my work, not hers. Her minions hate it. Perfectly understandable: If you embrace egoism as I defend it, you can’t be a minion.
March 27, 2007 — 11:03 pm
Jeff Brown says:
Thought I had ya. π
March 27, 2007 — 11:16 pm
Greg Swann says:
> Thought I had ya.
It’s a fact that she’s a part of everything I am. When I was 21 years old, I came back to New York from visiting my mother at Christmas. I could travel out of a gym bag in those days. It was early evening, and I didn’t feel like going home. I went to Coliseum Books at 57th and Broadway and picked up a copy of The Fountainhead. A professor had mentioned it derisively, and I figured anything he despised I might like. I took it to Mariella’s Pizza on West 57th and sat down with the book and a couple of slices of pizza. I read perhaps ten pages and stopped. I had to start over. I couldn’t figure out who this woman was and how she knew so much about the inside of my mind — my work, my vision, my passions, my childhood. I was living, working and going to school in New York, but I had never felt at home anywhere. The Fountainhead was the first time in my life that I had felt anything like companionship — for the characters in that book and for its author. I sent her a note the following Thanksgiving, just to say “Thank you.” I’m glad I did, because she died that next Spring. I understand intellectually that a culture rooted in self-loathing has to treat Ayn Rand the way it has, but, still, I hate it. She deserved much better than ever she got, and, in the end it was she who was “casting pearls without getting so much as a pork-chop in return.” We’ll learn to do better, each of us, or the last cackle in Starnesville will be hers.
March 27, 2007 — 11:46 pm
Jeff Brown says:
The way she spoke to you, she was a guide post to the future of the U.S. for me. Atlas Shrugged is a map for our future, and unfortunately we seem to be following it pretty closely.
I”m wondering where all the brains will go to not be found. π
March 28, 2007 — 12:29 am
Cathy says:
Corey,
Greg’s advice is good. Learn, and I would add: persevere. To paraphrase Einstein, if at first, an idea is not [attacked as] absurd, then there is no hope for it.
On a more commercial note, I would suggest that you consider the economic motives of your critics. And in particular, try to shake a grain or two of salt on the attacks from agents who criticize the distribution of information to buyers and sellers. Agents who think that their most significant value-add in the real estate transaction is listing information are not long for this business.
March 28, 2007 — 5:36 am
Kris Berg says:
Who is John Galt?
Another inspiring post, Greg. I continue to be awestruck by your writing, healthy outlook on life, your introspective clarity, and the time-stamps on your comments. It’s been a decade since I have seen what 12:00 AM looks like.
March 28, 2007 — 6:45 am
Todd Tarson says:
“Agents who think that their most significant value-add in the real estate transaction is listing information are not long for this business.”
Wow, awesome, brilliant. I love it. Now just tell that to my fellow board members at my MLS.
March 28, 2007 — 8:58 am
Corey Hague says:
WOW! Would it be taboo to say that i am in “shock and awe”? Greg, i aspire to one day be able to write with such passion and eloquence. Thanks to all of you, you have served as a great source of inspiration. I find myself filled with new vigor. And Todd, I couldn’t agree more. It is simple economics. If Realtors are unable to sustain a position without exclusive and proprietary use of a listing system, then our profession is outdated and in need of change. I, for one, believe we serve a far greater purpose and look forward to a future of untarnished reputations and valuable service.
March 28, 2007 — 10:43 am
Jessica Swesey says:
“All this after we got the “stamp of approval” from Inman News, who named us one of the best new web ideas for 2007.”
Hmmmm… this is news to me and I direct all editorial content at Inman News.
March 29, 2007 — 10:19 am
Corey Hague says:
That’s what they told us. We were invited to speak at their Connect conference this past January. Did you get a chance to see us?
March 29, 2007 — 2:53 pm
Wanda Grindstaff says:
Fabulous post. Thank you for submitting it to the Success and Abundant Mindset Carnival. Look for it on April 5. Keep up the great work.
April 1, 2007 — 11:31 am
Pat Kitano says:
Well stated Greg… I somehow missed your post within the prolific outpourings of the Bloodhound and caught up with Christine’s Carnival this morning
April 2, 2007 — 10:07 am
Jay Thompson says:
Corey –
I blogged about BuyerHunt back in early October (shortly after you went live) here:
http://www.phoenixrealestateguy.com/buyerhunt-released-matching-sellers-to-buyers/155
Must say your sites grown and improved a lot since then.
April 2, 2007 — 10:09 am
Albuquerque NM Real Estate says:
Great post Greg. I’d like to add to that–in between praise and complaint is likely the truth. It’s never as bad or good as someone tries to make it.
—
Find your dream New Mexico home by visiting Albuquerque Real Estate.
April 2, 2007 — 8:18 pm
Simon says:
I enjoy reading your posts and like that you get your inspiration from Ayn Rand. Reading her helped me feel better about ditching a pointless Masters degree in Critical Theory and it made me appreciate capitalism for what it is. The only system that can work. I sometimes wonder though, what she would make of the world economy today. What would she make of the people who make tons of money by just moving money around and also in a smaller way what would she make of realtors? Do you think Ayn Rand’s definition of the Producers would include realtors? I think the people who are hostile to realtors see them as leaches, taking money out of the system and not really contributing anything (producing anything). I’d love to read an objectivist defense of your profession.
If you have already done this in the past, I apologize. I’ve only been reading your posts for a few months now. When I first came across your writings I thought you were a bona-fide lunatic (no offense, like). I read your ramblin-gamblin Willie story about the good dad, and you seemed so holier-than-thou and judgmental–and possibly even racist, I was astonished; but I’ve since come to see that I was wrong and you are the most entertaining read on all the real estate blogs. (Though you are still holier-than-thou and judgmental)
April 3, 2007 — 12:41 pm
Greg Swann says:
The shortest distance between two points is not a straight line — it’s a middleman. — The Fountainhead
A good Realtor makes even the simplest transaction faster, less burdensome and more profitable. For complicated transactions, a skilled Realtor is the difference between success and failure.
April 3, 2007 — 12:57 pm
Simon says:
Thanks, That clears that up. I googled that quote and found this from a character analysis of Kent Lansing:
“In the struggle that Lansing fights and wins, he demonstrates that independence and integrity are not the exclusive prerogative of the creative artist, but are sometimes possessed by the middleman, as well.”
I have only read Atlas Shrugged and her theoretical works. One of these days I’ll get to The Fountainhead. I watched the movie and it was kind of bad, so I haven’t been able to bring myself to read it yet.
April 4, 2007 — 7:00 am
Jeff Brown says:
Simon – The movie doesn’t deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the book.
April 4, 2007 — 7:57 am