Make Your Next Presentation a Masterpiece

I studied art at college but my dreams of being a working artist in adult life were soon bypassed when the need to actually make a living was realized.  I dabbled a bit over the next few years and even convinced my then-wife to let me convert the spare room into an artist studio but that too got binned when the kids came along.  Damn them.  Why couldn’t I have stayed single and gone mad like the Grand Masters? 

I no longer practise art as such although wandering around The Met and MoMA this weekend made me realize how much of my art training I use in my corporate work.

It’s easy to see how working on a project or pitch can mirror the process of creating a piece of art.  First comes the desire or concept, then research and sketch, on to the construct and mould, then finally tweak and present.  The similarity of the structure is apparent yet we don’t allow ourselves the flexibility and creativity in the boardroom which the freedom of the artist studio fosters.

The initial stage of a business project or pitch is allowed to be a little crazy.  We brainstorm and farm ideas and kid ourselves we are being radical knowing full well we will rein ourselves back into our corporate limitations during the next part of the process.  In the art world we allow ourselves to go down different avenues for longer, we may realize during the construction of the subject that the background isn’t quite the right color so we bring out our palette and make the necessary changes.  We are more open and relaxed.  Even though we have tighter time limitations in the world of business, it helps to remain flexible for further down the process line.  Even though you have invested time in an idea and the deadline is looming, if something isn’t working, don’t press on in spite of it.  Don’t be afraid to look back and see what alterations can be made to accommodate your new brilliant idea.

When you stand in a gallery and look at a painting you see the bigger picture.  You observe it as a whole.  Take a look at The Storm by Munch.  It has a fantastic atmosphere.  There is a lot of movement in the painting which draws you in and almost sweeps you up into the storm itself.  It’s a remarkable artistic achievement.  Nobody is stood in MoMA thinking the windows of the house are not uniform (apart from me).  People accept it as part of the composition, it’s simply the style of the piece and the end result is a resounding success.

Whilst I was at college, I supported myself painting theatre backdrops, I would sweat and toil over each branch of each tree.  My mentor told me to stand back.  When the audience are seated, they see the forest.  Nobody’s trip to the theatre was ever ruined because they felt the top branch of the third tree to the left was a bit skewiff.   Don’t sweat over the minutiae.  People will listen to your ideas and presentation as a whole, they won’t scrutinize every word.  Your passion will be apparent and your choice of tie will have no bearing on the outcome (unless it's a ‘comedy’ one - biggest misnomer ever - there is no such thing as a comedy tie).   

COMEDY TIES - Just say NO

Don’t be afraid to show your workings.  Some presentations are so clinical they are devoid of personality and spark.  Look at any Van Gogh up close and the work is only heightened by each obvious sweep of his paintbrush.  It adds something tangible. 

Artists such as Chuck Close aren’t afraid to show the process.  Step up close to his outstanding portrait Lucas I and you can see the pencil lines he used to initially plot his canvas.  Most people wouldn’t even see this, they just see the whole of his majestic portrait. Those who do get close enough to see the graphite are there because they have been drawn in, not because they are scrutinizing for flaws.  The proof of his workings only add to the overall piece.  Have the confidence to show your individuality.

Plan your next presentation or pitch with a more artistic approach.  Throw off the shackles of corporate convention.  The business world can be a very staid place.  Splash some color upon it.  It’s the difference between a piece of work and a masterpiece. 

Controversial Magazine Covers Are Good For Circulation.

Today, in WH Smith, as my eyes scanned the magazine stand, I paused on the latest cover of Vogue and mentally thought I needed to buy it.  WHAT???!!!  I’ve never bought a copy of Vogue in my life... 

This month’s issue has a cover shot of fat-chick-du-jour Lena Dunham by acclaimed photographer Annie Leibovitz.  Dunham has risen to prominence in the last 18 months via the success of her HBO series ‘Girls’.  The show has been heralded by many a feminist for its unabashed depictions of the ‘normal’ female form.  Dunham often gets her odd-shaped titties and ass out causing plenty of white middle-class feminists to trumpet the arrival of a new saviour as if she was single-handedly responsible for halting female genital mutilation in the third world.  So, naturally, they are all aghast that she has agreed to be a Vogue cover model and even more incensed she had been airbrushed.

Online feminist rag, Jezebel scored an own goal when they offered $10,000 for the un-airbrushed photos of Dunham.  Publishing them on their own site, they helpfully provided the reader with arrows pointing out Dunham’s physical flaws.  So much for the sisterhood.  A backlash ensued fuelling publicity for the issue which must have seen hard-faced fashion matriarch Anna Wintour rubbing her hands with glee.  The very feminists who had lobbied the fashion industry for years to display more realistic female forms finally had a fat girl on the cover of Vogue and they responded by deteriorating into Mean Girls mode.  The fashionistas are responsible for another eating disorder as fourth-wave feminism began to ingest itself.

Dunham does an important job on her TV show.  Her bold presence has empowered countless chubby chicks against the norm of Baywatch Babes and Sticks In The City.  When she accepted Vogue’s invitation, she showed her true colours.  She is first and foremost a celebrity, rather like Madonna’s humanitarian efforts, her heart is in the right place but money and exposure come first.  The cover of Vogue is way more delicious than any feminist statement.  

The contrived decision to use Dunham as their cover star created a media frenzy which saw this month’s Vogue shot shared extensively.  The free advertising was so effective it resulted in me thinking I wanted a copy.  That’s quite the marketing achievement.

Controversial magazine covers are not new.  People still reference the naked and pregnant Demi Moore Vanity Fair shot and that hit the newsstands more than twenty years ago.  More recently, Rolling Stone’s decision to put Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev on the front cover showed an appalling lack of taste and was greeted with much opposition.  Protestors called for a boycott and some vendors pulled the magazine from its shelves.  The furore resulted in Rolling Stone doubling their sales compared to the same period the previous year.

It’s not just the celebrity publications who go for the shock factor.  Bloomberg Businessweek raised eyebrows with the cheeky phallic graphic below.  They confirmed that "Over the past two years, our more buzzy covers have had a lift on newsstand of up to about 70% above the yearly average.”  Alec Casey, head of circulation at Bloomberg Businessweek  

Also following a controversial cover, subscriptions can increase by 10%.  Retailer backlash is nothing to be scared of either.  When Time magazine published the cover below of a mother breastfeeding her 5-year-old son, many backward Yankee retailers refused to stock it inadvertently increasing sales at other outlets and ultimately driving up web traffic.

Bold and controversial statements are good for publishing.  As circulation figures continue to decline, it would appear creating a fuss is good for business.  Also using the print form to drive business to the online publication is an ingenious marketing tool.  

The fact Vogue managed to get most of their unpaid publicity this month from one of their biggest opposers is evil genius.  As the moral majority continue to get their sensible mom-sized knickers in a twist and inadvertently boost circulation, expect to see many more questionable covers in the future.

Is Napping At Work Ever OK?

Still finding the adjustment to work after the holidays a bore?  Struggling through another afternoon with a bunch of unanswered correspondence and tiresome administration?  Morning caffeine buzz wearing off?  Why not have a nap?

The positives of a power nap have been discussed for a long time but the majority of people still feel bad for taking an afternoon snooze.  Sleeping on the job has always been frowned upon so it's essential to change how we regard it.  Don’t think of it as sleep, think of it as a reboot.  When your laptop becomes sluggish, closing down any open programs and giving it the chance to restart results in better performance.  Going somewhere quiet and closing your eyes for 15 minutes can have a similar effect on your brain.  In fact, studies have shown that a 10-20 minute power nap actually increases productivity. 

I often work from home so catching forty winks is easy.  A private house affords me the luxury of privacy and peace.  If you work in a busy office it's difficult to have a discreet nap.  Where can you go?  The stationery cupboard?  The toilet?  

There are ways how you can have a swift shut-eye without drawing too much attention to yourself.

Do you drive to work?  A cranky old colleague of mine at the Dimbleby Paper Group used to retire to his car to ‘listen to The Archers’ every day.  He used to do this with the driver’s seat in full recline, we could see him from the second-floor window.  He always used to come back in much brighter which was actually better for the office as a whole.  Don’t be afraid to disappear to your car every now and then.  Smokers in your company amass around 30 minutes of extra break time a day as they step outside for their nicotine fix.  Just think they're stealing company time to ruin their bodies, you’re repairing yours.

If you don’t have a car or live nearby, you have to be more resourceful.  Does your office have a meeting room?  Start disappearing there for 20 minutes a day to do some ‘research’.  Build up a routine so people expect this to happen.  You now have the perfect opportunity for a reboot.  20 minutes is ideal for an effective nap and it’s a short enough duration that people won’t wonder where you have gone and come looking for you.

If you don’t have a spare room, you could try the toilet or the store cupboard but if these options are too small or unsanitary then you could try a stealth snooze at your desk.

Die-hard nappers have this down to a fine art.  If you work in a cubicle it’s easier to get away with, open plan offices are harder but not impossible.  The first thing you need to do is position yourself so you have your back to everyone.  Then you have to create the illusion of working. Holding a book will look like you are quietly reading.  As people glance around the office they will not suspect you are sleeping.  Some advanced snoozers silently sit with a pen poised upon a sheet of paper, others place a hand on their mouse having set their screens to automatic scroll.  Sneaky. 

Sleeping in an upright seated position will come with practice.  Remember, you are only catching some light sleep, you’re not bedding down for the night.  Always remember to set your alarm on your phone.  Missing deadlines and meetings will rumble your absent state.

Try not to be jealous but some companies are ahead of the game.  Weary workers in Japan are already taking five in designated nap areas in their offices.  Google also have sleep pods.

Expect your company to follow suit in about twenty years.  If you can stay awake that long.

Sweet dreams.

A Conference Call in Real Life

I love this!  Full marks to all involved...

A conference call playing out in a boardroom.  Clever stuff.

Watch Your Ps and Qs

I judge people harshly who casually abuse the English language.  Within a language containing over one million words there is always room for error - I'm not infallible myself and am always open to correction - but you can tell the difference between a genuine typo and a blatant disregard for syntax and punctuation.

On The Guardian website today it says many top schools receive applications for teaching posts which include spelling mistakes and grammar anomalies.  The article even points out that some schools have difficulty filling senior teaching positions due to poorly-presented CVs.  

Why have people become less particular about their standard of written communication?  Has the speed of online contact and text speak affected our ability to string a sentence together?  As we become more multicultural, are our languages fusing together and losing their identities?  Do we place too much importance on perfectly presented prose?

Mark Twain said   “Anyone who can only think of one way to spell a word obviously lacks imagination.”

I say   “Anyone who can only think of one way to spell a word obviously had a good education.”

I don't like the dumbing-down of the English language.  Although not the most widely-spoken, it is the language which rules the world.  Our rich history of revered writers is in danger of becoming extinct thanks to a generation of Hip Hop slangmeisters and Essex retards.

Even the most successful literary series (and I use the term loosely) of the last couple of years had 50 shades of 'must try harder' about it.  Still at least it got the chavs reading.

I wonder if I care too much.  Am I old-fashioned in my expectation of fully-formed sentences?  After all, language does evolve.

It's also been proven that everybody can read the following:

"Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe."

So, what's the point?  Why go to all that trouble of educating yourself and double-checking your work if most people can read it with a few mistakes anyway?  

I'll tell you why.  It's because it's simply not acceptable in the world of business to send an email like it's come from the barrow boy down Portobello Road.  People like me will automatically judge you. I can hardly stand it if someone abbreviates words in a tweet, let alone in a covering letter.  It tells me you have a poor level of communication.  Even if English is not your first language, if you want a job where English is the primary method of communication, you'd better make sure you are literate.  If somebody has to interpret what you've just told them, you have failed.  People want to do business with people they understand.  Communication should be clear and concise, if you can't manage that then you need a job stacking the shelves in B&Q where you won't be bastardising the Queen's lingo, innit tho?

TTFN

How Do You Get Rid Of The House Guest From Hell?

Aaaaarrrggghhhh!!!!

This weekend, my partner’s childhood friend came to stay.  After my hard week at work, I was looking forward to a nice leisurely time with good food and wine.  It’s always nice to meet Julian’s friends, I adore everyone I have met through him so far.  One of the reasons I fell for him was his social circle.  If lots of lovely people gravitate towards someone, it’s a good sign of their character.  Which makes it even harder to believe that this weekend’s guest, Marilyn, is one of the most reprehensible people I have ever met.

It started off innocently enough when she pulled up in her car and came in proffering a bottle of red wine.  She said the drive was hellish and had located the corkscrew before she had even taken her coat off.  I went upstairs to take a shower and left Julian and Marilyn to catch up.  When I came back down 30 minutes later, Marilyn was already slurring.  Julian looked at me and raised his eyebrows but it’s not the first time we’ve had to endure a tipsy friend - we like a drink ourselves.  

We got to the restaurant for our 8pm booking and when the sommelier came over, Julian chose a nice bottle and Marilyn jumped in and ordered a Cosmopolitan.  No problems there, it’s Saturday night, even if she was racing ahead.  Anyway…

We ate our starters and listened to Marilyn - neither of us could get a word in edgeways.  Her mouth chattered away with a sprinkling of expletives which weren’t really befitting our environment but me and Julian exchanged another grin and bore it.  

Our main course came at which point Marilyn started to get ranty about women in the workplace.  I didn’t disagree with anything she was saying but she started to get very argumentative.  Twisting things.  Then she said that it was impossible for me to truly understand feminism from my white male privilege so I dared suggest that feminism wasn’t all about white middle class women.  My mistake, I gave a red rag to a bull with PMT (I’m aware that’s sexist - I’m being ironic) and she ran with it...  

She was demanding to know my knowledge on female genital mutilation - hers didn’t amount to much more.  She started to raise her voice in an accusatory tone drawing glances from our fellow diners.  At this point, even though I didn't feel I was the one who should be apologising, I backed down.  I tried to pull the evening back on course but she accused me of trying to control the conversation.  Her word ratio to mine 500:1.  Poor Julian didn’t know what to do.  His lovely old schoolfriend and his partner just had a barney and the nice meal turned into a very awkward silence.  We were less than halfway through our main - cringe.

We paid the bill (she actually didn’t attempt to pay so I swallowed it up - is that part of my white male privilege?) and we made a silent journey back to ours.  She was clearly too drunk to drive herself home so I decided the best thing I could do, as I seemed to antagonise her so much, was remove myself from the situation.  I left them chatting and had an early night.  Julian came to bed 2 hours later saying she was still up and drinking whiskey.  Come midnight she was making weird noises.  At 1am, she decided to put music on.  At 2am, it sounded like she was on the phone to someone or just shouting.  Julian said he would go out and tell her to go to bed but I told him not to, she was clearly spoiling for a fight.  At 3am, she finally passed out.

Reflecting in the morning, there was no two ways about it.  She had behaved abysmally.  She was beyond offensive, personally attacked me and put Julian in an awkward position.  We had planned for her to stay tonight too but now we both want shot of her.  We don’t want her here, especially as it may involve drinking again.  Anyway, this is where it gets worse…

Julian got a call from work, he had to go in to service a short European flight and would be home by supper.  Good.  This solves our predicament.  Marilyn was still in bed as Julian left.  I wanted to get rid of her quickly so made a fresh pot of coffee and turned on the radio LOUD.  She eventually surfaced with no apology, helped herself to coffee and dumped herself on the sofa.  She then told me to turn the radio off as she wanted to watch the TV.  I said No.  She then started on me saying she found me objectional last night and couldn’t believe I was still this rude this morning.  I snapped, I said she had to leave, she said she wasn’t going anywhere as she wanted to see Julian.  I said that Julian didn’t want to see her and she said ‘Tough’.  We are now at a stand off.  I have asked her again to leave and she says no.  This is a really weird situation.  This is my house and there has been an irredeemable reprobate on the sofa watching TV for the last 3 hours and I am in my office typing this.  What do I do?  Seriously.

I reckon I have 2 options:

- Pick her up and manhandle her out - which I’m sure would be a criminal offence with the police on her side.

- Call the police on her - which seems like a total waste of their time as no real crime is being committed.

What do I do?  HELP ME!

Madonna: Celebrity or Philanthropist?

Madonna’s human rights initiative Art for Freedom has been established 'to fuel free speech and protest persecution around the world.'  Artists are invited to submit work based on their ideas of freedom and revolution and each month a guest curator comes aboard to help Madonna deliberate over the submissions.

And who has Madonna chosen to curate January's input?  Malala Yousafzai?  Peter Tatchell?  Pragna Patel?  No.  That well-known philanthropist, Katy Perry !!!???

“I am so fortunate to have the freedom to express myself through music,” gushed Perry. “I believe that 2014 can be a year of great social change.”

Quite a statement from the pop princess.  On the surface, she seems one of the more lightweight singers at the top of the charts preferring to sing about Daisy Duke bikinis and fireworks than stray into the pop politico arena like P!nk and Lily Allen.  

Perry has 3 mainstream albums choc full of pop confection with nary a Masses Against The Classes in sight. This blatantly begs the question why Madonna, who has come under fire for using philanthropy to further her celebrity, would choose someone who doesn't have the credentials when it comes to human rights.  Especially when that person has been criticised for deriding minority groups.

Her breakthrough hit I Kissed a Girl was singled out by lesbian groups irked she had reduced girl-on-girl smooching to nothing more than a bit of teenage boy titillation.  Lines like 'It's not what good girls do' understandably caused friction with gay rights groups who were already unhappy with lyrics to a previous song.

Early in her career, Perry wrote and recorded an unremarkable track called Ur So Gay.  The lyrics bemoan an ex-boyfriend for being a bit fey.  He wears designer clothes, drives an eco car, reads Hemingway and is a vegetarian.  For Perry and her blinkered binary view of gender, all of this points to the obvious conclusion that he’s gay.  It’s undeniably homophobic and after initial opposition, Perry was quick to set the record straight.

"The fact of the matter is that we live in a very metrosexual world. You know, a girl might walk into a bar, meet a boy, and discover he's more manicured than she is. And they can't figure it out. Is he wearing foundation and a bit of bronzer? But he's buying me drinks at the same time! I'm not saying you're so gay, you're so lame. I'm saying, you're so gay, but I don't understand it because you don't like boys!" 

Perry is totally unaware her explanation digs her a deeper hole.  Her level of ignorance and stupidity are not befitting a human rights initiative.  I mean, would a pro-gay humanitarian like Madonna support such points of view?

Listen here as Madonna waxes lyrical about a pre-fame Katy Perry and her 'so good' song Ur So Gay.  A glowing endorsement.

Countless articles have been written opposing the song but Perry remains indignant and still plays it live to this day.  Whatever her intention, the use of the word gay as a negative is harmful and each time she plays it onstage, she has thousands of teenagers singing along to the chorus reinforcing the insult.  Perry stresses she doesn't use the word as a derogative term yet at this V Festival performance she introduces the song by encouraging people to leave voicemails to their ex-boyfriends saying 'Ur So Gay'

and in this performance, in front of a high school audience, Perry spots an old classmate who turned down her affections and dedicates the song to him - 'Ur So Gay'.  

Fans argue Perry is a gay ally as she has come out in support of equal marriage but by still performing songs which are abrasive to many gay people, it's hard to believe she is fully committed to the cause.  Are her words of support a contrived part of her pop star profile? Similarly, why would Madonna choose Perry for her campaign opposing persecution when there are a hundred more suitable people?  Because this really is more about celebrity than philanthropy, that's why.