The boy who did just enough

I discussed with my brother last night, in the course of one of our too rare phonecalls, the fact that nobody really admits the realities of working life particularly to youngsters, and thus the idea of 'neutra-vational' kids' books was born. I'm pretty sure that a significant number of people have based their lives on a carefully balanced ability to do just enough to get by - no extra hours and extra stress, but not happy to do nothing either. The concept of doing just enough seems one which is either ignored by those super motivated individuals who like to spend their time telling everyone how to be just like them, or dismissed as the mindset of the lazy. Presumably highly motivated people have an unfair advantage in 'selling' their way of life, because by their very nature they are keen to earn more money, organise others and use their time effectively, and what could combine these three passions more efficiently than a career in motivational speaking? Conversely, those who do just enough to get by probably never consider that they have made a 'lifestyle choice' thinking of it instead as a way to get all the crap stuff done without it cutting into your free time too much. There is definitely a scale of perceived 'worthiness' for pass times - watching films seems to be considered a far worthier use of time than watching TV for example. People will say they are really into films, and are perceived as art enthusiasts, whereas very few people would say that they are really into TV, and those that do are considered lesser somehow as though the length of a programme (which for me is the only difference) makes the difference between art and trash. Reading has a more subtle scale as it's so much more solitary, so you can read 'worthy' books, but then you have to tell people about them, whereas reading a 'trashy' book is unlikely to make the conversational grade unless someone else is reading it too. Then there's the matter of careers. There are plenty of careers which terrify me - anything medical, teaching, air traffic control and the like where tuning out for half an hour to collect your thoughts simply isn't an option. You can't make a class of 6 year olds do something quiet requiring no input from you just because you haven't really got a handle on the day and can't work out how to get yourself going. You can't nip off from your monitor to get some Lucozade to keep your eyes open if that 1 minute break could cause untold numbers of planes to crash into the very tower which contains that fridge. And you can't get half way through heart surgery, realise you haven't paid your car tax and nip off to sort it out online for 5 minutes before carrying on. I don't think I could live like this, and that is one of the reasons these careers aren't ones that you just 'fall into' like my job. You can't start off as an administrator for a hospital and then by a series of lucky breaks end up elbow deep in someone's chest cavity just because it turned out you knew where everything was kept and wouldn't need as much training as someone new. However, these are jobs that you have to really want to do, and given that I naturally assume that anyone who actively wants to work is either lucky enough to have a job that coincides with their hobby or mental (which is essentially the difference between the Boy Wonder wanting to make a living from playing the guitar, and undertaking private veterinary work on your kitchen table), I find the whole thing a bit confusing. This is probably how I managed to leave university with no more idea of what I wanted to do as a job than I had when I began my A-levels. But who tells you about the jobs that most people do? My current job simply didn't exist when I was at school, so even the most motivational teacher would have been hard-pressed to give me a head start in online marketing. It wouldn't have mattered though - I spent the formative years of my life being told I was not 'reaching my full potential' only to find that this is something actively encouraged in a work environment. My current job allows me to reach my potential within the confines of the potential of others, either from a technical, business or interest level point of view. I think telling children that working harder is better is not only setting them up for a future of work/life balance issues, but misleading them into thinking that most jobs actually appreciate the potential of an employee rather than hoping they will not cause trouble, challenge the status quo or upset those who wish to maintain their position of 'doing just enough'. I am happy to do just enough, but if I weren't, I would be an individual thwarted at every turn by the limits of my colleagues, our budget and the near-obsessive greed of my boss. Fortunately, I am happy to do what I can and avoid anything that will frustrate or annoy me on the grounds that I get paid the same whether I give myself an ulcer or not, and if it comes to it, I would much rather be at home with the Boy Wonder and a pint than worrying myself over something which will make someone else rich. My brother and I were struck with a fervour at the idea that children should be encouraged not to really stretch themselves - the overwhelming odds against their efforts being recognised or providing any level of personal satisfaction mean that a life spent enjoying yourself, working as much as you need to to do so and trying not to worry about things must be just as satisfying as climbing Everest and coming home with a blackened stump where your toes used to be. So, to celebrate this, we came up with the idea of 'The Boy Who Did Just Enough'. If only either of us could be bothered to write it, it could be good...