TEDx refers to a talk that was given at a TEDx event, or about organizing events.

Mark Lovett

What grief and soy sauce taught me about life after loss – Charlene Lam at TEDxLisboa

/in , , , , , /by

I’m constantly reminded of the simple fact that each of us lives a unique life — as no two life journeys are identical — and yet our experiences share common threads and themes. So it is with loss, as it’s a constant throughout life. We lose loved ones, or move on from one job to the next. During a natural disaster we may lose physical objects, possibly our entire home.

When loss happens, grief soon follows, and quite often we’re not sure how to react. Dealing with grief is not something we learn in school. At best, we learn from watching how others handle it. In her talk at TEDxLisboa, Charlene Lam shares her experience dealing with grief after her mother died unexpectedly from a stroke.

Charlene also brings the wisdom she’s gained over the years as the founder of The Grief Gallery , and author of Curating Grief. You might say Charlene is no stranger to grief.

Loss is a fundamental part of being human. Grief is universal. We will all experience it.

Charlene begins her talk with a simple, relatable image: a bottle of soy sauce in her mother’s kitchen. Growing up, this soy sauce evoked pleasant memories of home cooking and family dim sum. But after her mother passed, that everyday object took on a new, heavier meaning.

It symbolized the arduous task of clearing out her mother’s home, of letting go of personal possessions imbued with heartfelt memory and connection. This opening anecdote perfectly illustrates how tangible items become vessels of immense emotional weight after loss.

Grief taught me how to hold lightly. I invite you to hold lightly and to live fully in full color.

Her initial reaction was to “hold on tight” to every single item her mother owned, fearing that letting go of these objects meant letting go of her mother’s memory. This is contrasted with her husband’s suggestion to “just throw it away,” which represents detachment.

These extremes bring in a sense of tension into Charlene’s narrative, and at the same time, serves as a reminder that society often presents us with such binary messages. That it’s all or nothing. At this point, I’m sure many in the audience are reflecting on their own experiences with loss and grief. Reviewing how they may have reacted.

At this point Charlene proposes a different approach: “holding lightly.” Holding lightly, she explains, is about appreciating the beauty and joy of life while also acknowledging the reality of impermanence.

What I find brilliant in how Charlene tells this story is how the narrative weaves in her personal experience with grief, explores the topic more deeply in order to shift the focus away from her and engage the audience. In this way, she’s able to illustrate the fact that grief is a natural part of life that everyone must deal with at some point. What’s unique is also universal.

In the end, we’re invited to examine our own perspective on the matter, and to consider a new way to approach the issue, by holding lightly, and living life fully.

Transcript

When I say soy sauce, what do you think of?

Maybe you think of eating dumplings, soy sauce with sushi. When I think of soy sauce, I think of my mother.

In particular, I think of the bottle of soy sauce in my mother’s kitchen. And how that bottle of soy sauce took on a whole new meaning after she died.

Before my mother died suddenly in 2013, soy sauce reminded me of good food, home cooking, eating dim sum with my family in New York City.

After she died, soy sauce represented my connection to my mother, and it represented the terrible task that I had of trying to clear out her house and trying to let go of the thousands of objects in her home.

Have you experienced something similar? Can you think of a simple object that takes on a whole new meaning for you? Maybe it seems insignificant to other people. And maybe you’ve experienced the exact phenomenon that I did, where an object suddenly becomes precious after a loved one dies.

For you, it might be your grandmother’s ring, your father’s watch, or a family photo. These are the things that are precious to us. These are the things that we hold close to our hearts. These are the things that we would save in a fire. And it hurts when we lose them.

Loss is a fundamental part of being human. Grief is universal. We will all experience it. For some of us, loss will come in the form of a natural disaster: fire, flood, earthquake. Or an unnatural disaster: war breaks out in our country.

[Or a personal disaster. My mother dies of a stroke. Your marriage ends. You lose the job you love. You get a medical diagnosis that changes your life.

In Portuguese, we have this beautiful word, Saudade. I am still learning the depth of the meaning of this untranslatable word. But my understanding is that Saudade means longing for, missing something that we’ve lost, or that we may lose. We know that loss will come.

I talk about and I exhibit soy sauce a lot in my creative work. It represents my connection to my mother, but it also represents this key challenge that we have as humans. Intellectually, we know that we will die. We know that everything we love will someday die. How do we still live full, joyful, beautiful lives, knowing this will happen?

How do we love and feel attached to people, places, pets, and things, knowing that someday we may need to say goodbye?

There are several ways to approach this. When my mother died, I wanted to keep everything. I wanted to hold on to all her clothes, all the furniture, even the ugly furniture.

I wanted to hold on tight because it felt like I needed them to survive. Not everyone understands this. My husband, he said, “It’s just stuff. Just throw it away.”

Yes, I considered divorce. He did not understand that throwing away my mother’s belongings felt like throwing her memory away. It felt like throwing her away.

That’s the thing about grief. We can all have a wide variety of reactions to loss. I’m thinking of a father who threw away all of his wife’s clothing after she died immediately because it was too painful for him to see her dresses, her shoes, her jewelry. His daughters did not understand.

[These are all natural reactions. I wanted to keep everything, and someone else might say, “If it hurts so much to lose, if loss is going to come, I don’t want to hold on to anything.” That’s an option too, for all of us. We could give away our belongings, we could move to a distant land, we can say goodbye to our family and friends, and we can all live like monks.

It’s an option. It feels a little black or white. Hold on to everything or hold on to nothing.

When we’re grieving, it can feel like we only have those two options because of a major misunderstanding about grief. When we’re grieving, we get messages like, “You need to move on. You need to let go. You need to live your own life.” The implication is that if you hold on, you are staying stuck in the past. Black or white.

Move on, let go, or stay stuck.

What if it doesn’t have to be black or white? What if I want to hold on to a connection with my mother without having to hold on to a half-empty bottle of soy sauce forever? And I want to live my own beautiful life. What if we want to have full, joyous lives, knowing that loss will come? My suggestion is to hold lightly.

What do I mean by hold lightly? Earlier I mentioned how I wanted to hold on to everything that my mother owned. Hold on tight as if my life depended on it. Using your hand, can you show me what it might look like to hold tight? What does it look like to hold on tight to something?

Yes, as if you need it to survive. Yes. Some of you are making a fist, right? Some of you have a claw kind of shape. There is tension in your hand, there’s effort and energy in your arm. There might even be tension in your face. Now, what might it look like to hold lightly?

Yes. Some of you used both hands, forming like a cup or a bowl. Your hand is open. Some of you used one hand, palm up, fingers relaxed. This is how we hold lightly. We hold lightly and we can have things. We can hold them close to our hearts, knowing. Knowing that that bird might fly away.

Knowing that beauty will fade, knowing that life will change. Now, why is it important to hold lightly? I believe that when we hold lightly, we give ourselves the opportunity to live life in full color.

Not just black or white, but to live experiencing the full range of colors, all the shades, all the hues. To live with all the textures, all the flavors, tasting the bitter and the sweet. Maybe Saudade, like soy sauce, makes life more delicious.

Maybe grief can make life more beautiful. I find that when I hold lightly, I experience the world and I move through life in a different way. I look into my husband’s eyes and I fall in love with all the little details, trying to memorize them, knowing that someday I may lose him.

When you step out into the world today, no matter where you are, see if the idea of holding lightly helps you to experience the world differently. Maybe we admire a sunset, knowing that those colors will fade. Maybe we enjoy the smell of freshly baked Pastel de Nata, knowing that that fragrance will disappear.

Maybe we hear a song or experience music differently, delighting in that moment. Maybe we even experience soy sauce differently. Maybe now soy sauce tastes like the love of a mother, or soy sauce tastes like a love of life and living.

Grief taught me how to hold lightly. I invite you to hold lightly and to live fully in full color.

Thank you.

Back to you…

As Charlene notes, loss is inevitable, as is the grief we experience afterwards. How have you dealt with grief in your life? Did you embrace the all-or-nothing approach? The idea of holding lightly is one way that we can savor what we’ve lost, to remember the past while fully living in the present.

Even if your story involves a completely different topic, examine how Charlene structured her narrative in a way that engaged the audience, made the subject relatable, and presented her lessons learned as an option for dealing with the issue. It’s a universal structure that’s worth considering.

◆

Learn more about the coaching process or
contact me to discuss your storytelling goals!

◆

Subscribe to the newsletter for the latest updates!

Copyright Storytelling with Impact® – All rights reserved

Mark Lovett

Why some of us don’t have one true calling – Emilie Wapnick at TEDxBend 2015

/in , , , /by

What do you want to be when you grow up?

This seemingly innocent question, posed to us from childhood — typically by the age of five — often evolves into a source of nagging anxiety for many adults. For those of you who have ever felt as though your diverse set of interests make you act scattered, indecisive, or even “wrong,” then Emilie Wapnick’s TEDxBend Talk offers a refreshing and empowering perspective.

Her personal journey, which may be similar to yours, was a cycle of diving deep into a new passion, excelling, and then, inevitably, getting bored and moving on. This pattern led to feelings of inadequacy and a fear of never finding her “thing.”

But what if having many interests isn’t a flaw, but a superpower? Wapnick uses the term “multipotentialite” for someone who has many interests and creative pursuits. It isn’t about being afraid of commitment; it’s about being wired for breadth, not just depth, and seeking variety, instead of consistency.

Let’s take a look at how Emilie structure her talk for impact:

  1. The Hook (Relatable Problem): Emilie identifies a shared experience — the “what do you want to be” question and the anxiety it often causes. A great personal story often begins by establishing common ground, making the audience feel seen and understood. In this case, it’s by asking a question. Alternatively, this effect can be achieved by making a direct statement.

  2. The Journey (Personal Narrative): She then delves into her own struggle, detailing the cyclical nature of her interests. Her vulnerability and honesty builds connection with the audience. For your story, it could mean sharing your own patterns, or questions that arose from your unique experiences.

  3. The Turning Point (Reframing the Narrative): Mentioning “multipotentialite” becomes an “aha!” moment, changing a perceived weakness into a strength. In your personal narrative, this is where you pivot from problem to potential. What new insight or understanding transformed your perspective based on the diversity of your experiences?

  4. The Superpowers (Illustrating Your Unique Strengths): Emilie outlines 3 important “superpowers” of multipotentialites, using people who embody them as examples:

    • Idea Synthesis: The ability to combine seemingly disparate fields to create something new. For your story, think about how your varied interests intersect. How has your experience in one area uniquely informed your approach in another? This synthesis creates original perspectives that captivate.

    • Rapid Learning: The knack for grasping new subjects. This translates to your storytelling ability to quickly learn new skills or adapt to different narrative styles. It means you’re rarely starting from scratch because your past learnings are always transferable.

    • Adaptability: The capacity to morph into whatever is needed in a given situation. Your story isn’t static; it evolves and adapts. This superpower allows you to navigate challenges in your life and in your storytelling, ensuring your narrative remains relevant and dynamic.

  5. The Call to Action (Empowering Conclusion): Emilie concludes her talk with a suggestion to embrace your inner wiring. Your multitude of passions isn’t a deficit; it’s precisely what the world needs.

Transcript

Raise your hand if you’ve ever been asked the question, “What do you want to be when you grow up?”

Now, if you had to guess, how old would you say you were when you were first asked this question? You can just hold up fingers.

Okay.

Now, raise your hand if the question, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” has ever caused you any anxiety.

Any anxiety at all?

I’m someone who’s never been able to answer the question, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” See, the problem wasn’t that I didn’t have any interests, it’s that I had too many. In high school, I liked English, and math, and art, and I built websites, and I played guitar in a punk band called Frustrated Telephone Operator. Maybe, maybe you’ve heard of us.

This continued after high school, and at a certain point, I began to notice this pattern in myself, where I would become interested in an area, and I would dive in and become all consumed, and I’d get to be pretty good at whatever it was. And then I would hit this point where I’d start to get bored.

And usually I would try and persist anyway, because I’d already devoted so much time and energy and sometimes money into this field. But eventually, this sense of boredom, this feeling of like, “Like, yeah, I got this. This isn’t challenging anymore.” It would get to be too much, and I would have to let it go.

But then I would become interested in something else, something totally unrelated, and I would dive into that and become all consumed, and I’d feel like, “Yes, I’ve found my thing!” And then I would hit this point again where I’d start to get bored. And eventually, I would let it go. But then I would discover something new and totally different, and I would dive into that.

This pattern caused me a lot of anxiety for two reasons. The first was that I wasn’t sure how I was going to turn any of this into a career. I thought that I would eventually have to pick one thing, deny all of my other passions, and just resign myself to being bored.

The other reason it caused me so much anxiety was a little bit more personal. I worried that there was something wrong with this, and something wrong with me for being unable to stick with anything. I worried that I was afraid of commitment, or that I was scattered, or that I was self-sabotaging, afraid of my own success.

If you can relate to my story and to these feelings, I’d like you to ask yourself a question that I wish I’d asked myself back then. Ask yourself where you learned to assign the meaning of wrong or abnormal to doing many things.

I’ll tell you where you learned it. You learned it from the culture.

We are first asked the question, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” when we’re about five years old. And the truth is that no one really cares what you say when you’re that age.

It’s considered an innocuous question, posed to little kids to elicit cute replies like, “I want to be an astronaut,” or “I want to be a ballerina,” or “I want to be a pirate.” Insert Halloween costume here.

But this question gets asked of us again and again as we get older, in various forms. For instance, high school students might get asked what major they’re going to pick in college. And at some point, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” goes from being the cute exercise it once was to the thing that keeps us up at night. Why?

See, while this question inspires kids to dream about what they could be, it does not inspire them to dream about all that they could be. In fact, it does just the opposite. Because when someone asks you what you want to be, you can’t reply with 20 different things. Though well-meaning adults will likely chuckle and be like, “Oh, how cute!” But, “You can’t be a violin maker and a psychologist, you have to choose.” This is Dr. Bob Child.

And he’s a luthier and a psychotherapist.

And this is Amy Ung, a magazine editor turned illustrator, entrepreneur, teacher, and creative director. But most kids don’t hear about people like this. All they hear is that they’re going to have to choose.

But it’s more than that. The notion of the narrowly focused life is highly romanticized in our culture. It’s this idea of destiny, or the one true calling, the idea that we each have one great thing we are meant to do during our time on this Earth, and you need to figure out what that thing is and devote your life to it.

But what if you’re someone who isn’t wired this way? What if there are a lot of different subjects that you’re curious about and many different things you want to do? Well, there is no room for someone like you in this framework. And so you might feel alone, you might feel like you don’t have a purpose, you might feel like there’s something wrong with you.

There’s nothing wrong with you. What you are is a multipotentialite.

A multipotentialite is someone with many interests and creative pursuits. It’s a mouthful to say. It might help if you break it up into three parts: multi, potential, and ite. You can also use one of the other terms that connote the same idea, such as the polymath, the Renaissance person.

Actually, during the Renaissance period, it was considered the ideal to be well-versed in multiple disciplines. Barbara Sher refers to us as scanners. Use whichever term you like or invent your own. I have to say I find it sort of fitting that as a community, we cannot agree on a single identity.

It’s easy to see our multipotentiality as a limitation, or an affliction that you need to overcome. But what I’ve learned through speaking with people and writing about these ideas on my website is that there are some tremendous strengths to being wired this way. Here are three multipotentialite superpowers.

One: Idea synthesis.

That is combining two or more fields and creating something new at the intersection. That’s where the new ideas come from.

Shaw Wong and Rachel Binks drew from their shared interests in cartography, data visualization, travel, mathematics, and design when they founded Mesh you.

Mesh you is a company that creates custom, geographically inspired jewelry. Shaw and Rachel came up with this unique idea not despite, but because of their eclectic mix of skills and experiences.

Innovation happens at the intersections. That’s where the new ideas come from. And multipotentialites, with all of their backgrounds, are able to access a lot of these points of intersection.

The second multipotentialite superpower is rapid learning.

When multipotentialites become interested in something, we go hard. We absorb everything we can get our hands on. We’re also so used to being beginners because we’ve been beginners so many times in the past.

And this means that we’re less afraid of trying new things and stepping out of our comfort zones. What’s more, many skills are transferable across disciplines, and we bring everything we’ve learned to every new area we pursue, so we’re rarely starting from scratch.

Nora Dunn is a full-time traveler and freelance writer. As a child concert pianist, she honed an incredible ability to develop muscle memory. Now, she’s the fastest typist she knows.

Before becoming a writer, Nora was a financial planner. She had to learn the finer mechanics of sales when she was starting her practice, and this skill now helps her write compelling pitches to editors. It is rarely a waste of time to pursue something you’re drawn to, even if you end up quitting. You might apply that knowledge in a different field entirely in a way that you couldn’t have anticipated.

The third multipotentialite superpower is adaptability.

That is the ability to morph into whatever you need to be in a given situation.

Abe Cahudo is sometimes a video director, sometimes a web designer, sometimes a Kickstarter consultant, sometimes a teacher, and sometimes, apparently, James Bond.

He’s valuable because he does good work. He’s even more valuable because he can take on various roles depending on his clients’ needs. Fast Company magazine identified adaptability as the single most important skill to develop in order to thrive in the 21st century. The economic world is changing so quickly and unpredictably that it is the individuals and organizations that can pivot in order to meet the needs of the market that are really going to thrive.

Idea synthesis, rapid learning, and adaptability. Three skills that multipotentialites are very adept at, and three skills that they might lose if pressured to narrow their focus.

As a society, we have a vested interest in encouraging multipotentialites to be themselves. We have a lot of complex, multi-dimensional problems in the world right now, and we need creative, out-of-the-box thinkers to tackle them.

Now, let’s say that you are, in your heart, a specialist. You came out of the womb knowing you wanted to be a pediatric neurosurgeon. Don’t worry, there’s nothing wrong with you either. In fact, some of the best teams are comprised of a specialist and multipotentialite paired together. The specialist can dive in deep and implement ideas, while the multipotentialite brings their breadth of knowledge to the project. It’s a beautiful partnership.

But we should all be designing lives and careers that are aligned with how we’re wired. And sadly, multipotentialites are largely being encouraged simply to be more like their specialist peers.

So, with that said, if there is one thing you take away from this talk, I hope that it is this: Embrace your inner wiring, whatever that may be. If you’re a specialist at heart, then by all means specialize. That is where you’ll do your best work. But to the multipotentialites in the room, including those of you who may have just realized in the last 12 minutes that you are one,

To you I say: Embrace your many passions. Follow your curiosity down those rabbit holes. Explore your intersections. Embracing our inner wiring leads to a happier, more authentic life. And perhaps more importantly, multipotentialites, the world needs us.

Back to you…

Do you have a similar story to tell? One that’s based upon valuable insights on a subject the audience can relate to? Note that you don’t have to be a scientist, or world renowned expert on the topic, but you do have to explain your idea with clarity, and support it with strong examples that illustrate your idea.

◆

Learn more about the coaching process or
contact me to discuss your storytelling goals!

◆

Subscribe to the newsletter for the latest updates!

Copyright Storytelling with Impact® – All rights reserved

Mark Lovett

Are we heading towards World War III? – Heni Ozi Cukier at TEDxLisboa 2025

/in , , , , , , /by

World War I — The Great War — The War to End All Wars. With a death toll that exceeded 20 million, many believed it was, and others at least hoped it was, but such was not the case. More than 3 times as many perished during World War II. Afterwards, fewer believed or even hoped it would be the last. The atomic bomb changed everything we thought we knew about war.

The Cold War kept the world on its toes until the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, supposedly bringing that era to and end. And for a while there was a resurgence of hope that humanity had finally turned a corner. Mutual Assured Destruction was supposed to keep us crazy humans in check.

But in his talk at TEDxLisboa in March 2025, professor Heni Ozi Cukier asked the audience to consider the question again: Are we heading towards World War III? On the one hand, answering such a question would consume many hours, if not days, so the challenge from a storytelling perspective was how to do that in less than 18 minutes from the stage.

Beyond the fact that this is one of the most important questions that any of us can ask, Heni’s talk is an excellent example of how to take a very complex topic and present it in a way that general audiences — composed of people who are not experts in geopolitics — can understand.

In short, technological progress brings incredible benefits, but they also breed insecurity, resentment, and uncertainty. Historically, such anxieties have made societies more unstable and vulnerable to extreme ideologies that fuel militarism and war.

Heni does this in two ways. First, he takes us back in time to examine what was happening when previous world wars erupted. In this way we can frame what’s going on in the world today against how events transpired in the past. But even this method involves too many variables, too much complexity, so he highlights four dimensions for the audience to track from past to present:

  • social
  • economic
  • political
  • military

Within the first minute, the audience is clear on the topic at hand, the three time periods in question, and the four dimensions that will be reviewed at each stage. In a sense, he’s given them signposts to follow as the narrative unfolds, ensuring they won’t get lost along the way.

If we have the aggressors’ alliance growing stronger and the opposing alliance becoming divided and weak, the incentives for the aggressors to strike, they’re really big.

Follow along with the transcript as you listed to Heni’s talk. Notice how each element is presented in order. How each is explained enough to understand, without over-explaining. And the conclusion does not give us an answer to the question initially posed, but summarizes the current state of world affairs in a way that invites us to do our own research, and come to our own conclusion.

Transcript

History has taught us many lessons, and we should pay attention to its signs because we might be heading towards World War III.

One way to understand today’s events is to look for clues from the past. But cherry-picking historical events to forecast the future is a risky exercise that oftentimes only reinforces our biases. So, I want to do something different. Instead of comparing historical examples with what is happening now, I will examine four major dimensions of life: the social, economic, political, and military dimensions. And I will analyze key trends within each one of those dimensions in three critical moments in history: before World War I, before World War II, and today.

So, let’s begin with the social dimension. And there are many factors that shape societies, but I want to focus on how technological innovations have produced social anxieties and destabilized societies throughout history. Before World War I, the Second Industrial Revolution was transforming life with electricity, cars, phones, mass production, and more. While many celebrated these advances, they also disrupted societies.

For instance, machines replaced workers, and new farming techniques uprooted populations from the countryside. This led to insecurity and resentment. At the same time, traditional authorities such as churches and monarchies, they were questioned at that time. And new mass movements, they emerged, such as labor unions and nationalist leagues. People were afraid that progress was shaking the very foundation of societies.

Moving a little bit ahead, in the interwar years before World War II, technology continued to affect life. The word “robot” was even coined in 1921, and it symbolizes fears of possibly machines substituting human jobs. At the same time, or a little bit later, the famous economist John Maynard Keynes warned us in 1930 of a new disease, namely technological unemployment.

During this period, we had communications revolutions that completely changed public discourse. So, these media became powerful tools for propaganda, polarizing politics, and amplifying social fears. Traditionalists at that time, they were worried that modern culture was simply eroding tradition, family, and religion.

Today, we are going through a technological revolution driven by AI, digital media, and social platforms. The internet, smartphones, and social media have transformed the way we work, communicate, and even think. Psychologists, they debate how digital life is affecting children’s development, while concerns over privacy and surveillance and AI-driven job loss continue to grow. Technologies are spreading ideas across the globe, but also they are amplifying frustrations, fears, and divisions faster than ever before.

In short, technological progress brings incredible benefits, but they also breed insecurity, resentment, and uncertainty. Historically, such anxieties have made societies more unstable and vulnerable to extreme ideologies that fuel militarism and war.

Now, let’s talk about the economics. And I want to present two perspectives on the economics. The first one is related to a common idea that economic prosperity prevents wars. And the argument goes like this. It makes no sense for a nation to go to war and destroy its own wealth. So they don’t want to go to war.

Before World War I, in 1914, Britain dominated global trade and finance. Germany was thriving industrially and expanding its exports. Both countries, they knew that there were no financial benefits that justify the enormous economic costs of going to war. However, World War I taught us a very important lesson.

Economics may explain what can be done, but politics decides what will be done. Fear, ambition, miscalculation, all overrode by even the strongest economic success, showing us that simply war and peace are not decided by economic arguments alone. We have to take into consideration political, ideological, and strategic reasons.

Okay. So, what is going on with the second perspective? And the common perspective says the following. People assume that nations, they want to be wealthy and powerful. It’s not that they don’t want that, they do, but they want something else. It’s better for them if they are wealthier or more powerful than their rivals. Right? So what it matters is the relative power. I want to be more powerful, I don’t want to be just powerful, I want to be more powerful than my enemy or my rival.

Let’s look at what happened at World War II. And in that moment, Germany and Japan, they did not see trade as mutually beneficial. Why? They were gaining less than their rivals: Britain, France, and the US, which made them vulnerable. What was their response? Searching for self-sufficiency and eventually war.

So what is going on today? There are two main ideas that we see all over. The US-China economic interdependence will prevent war. Really? I just told you what happened in World War I. Right? So, economics alone do not determine geopolitical outcomes. We have to consider political, strategic, ideological, and many other factors.

When we think of what is going on after or what happened after the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, at that moment, states realized that it’s too risky to be really dependent on your rival. So, as nations reassess today their economic dependencies, they are all moving towards one thing, or actually two: self-sufficiency and economic nationalism, just like before World War II.

History reminds us that wars are not only caused by economic situations, but we have to take into consideration political factors and relative power.

All right. So, let’s go to the political dimension. Here, I want to talk about polarization. And polarization not only divides societies, but ultimately it might destroy the political order. Polarization comes in many forms: divided media, political battles, legislative deadlocks, contested elections, and its worst form, political violence. And that’s when armed groups emerge because they don’t trust institutions to resolve the disputes of society.

What we have in World War I, before that actually, in the Balkans, there’s a deep polarization, and many nationalist movements clashing against the Austro-Hungarian Empire. And that led to the Serbian group, the secret Serbian group Black Hand, to assassinate the Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914, which wasn’t an isolated event. It was the result of years of political violence in a fractured society that triggered World War I.

Now, what do we have before World War II? The same situation. Germany. The Weimar Republic was struggling with escalating polarization, and violence became common. Assassinations of key political figures, such as the Finance Minister in 1921 and the Foreign Minister in 1922, they demonstrated this. Soon, at that time, all political factions from the right, the center, and the left, they had their own militias. And obviously, this brought instability, and we know the rise of authoritarianism and World War II.

What do we have today? Very interesting and scary in some ways. January 6, 2021, the attack on the US Capitol. Some Trump supporters contested the result of the election. That is a clear example where polarization became violent. More recently, several assassination attempts against President Trump. Polarization and violence in the United States is coming from all sides, but this is not only the US.

Let’s look at Germany. There’s a deep surge or a big surge in political violence in Germany. Over the last five years, more than 10,000 attacks on politicians, while the far-right supporters of AfD have committed a lot of attacks against other politicians. The politicians from AfD themselves, they are frequent targets for this political violence. As you can see, the signs are really big. And when we analyze what history shows us, we realize that once armed groups emerge, compromise becomes impossible and conflict inevitable. If polarization nowadays has reached this level, society or the political order is on the brink of collapse.

Now, let’s go to the final dimension, the military dimension. And here I want to focus on alliances because they are key to understanding how conflicts become worldwide disasters. Wars, or world wars, they don’t start as global wars. They begin as regional wars. And then a regional problem becomes this big problem because of the alliances. Let’s take a look at World War I before that. We had a dispute between Austria and Serbia, and because of the alliance, it escalated to become a European war. And once Britain joined, it became a global war.

The same thing happened in World War II. We had three regional conflicts, separated conflicts, initiated by three different countries. Germany won a hegemony in Europe, Italy sought an empire in the Mediterranean and Africa, and Japan wanted to control China and Asia-Pacific. World War II only became a world war when the United States entered the war after the Pearl Harbor attack.

So, how is this related to today? We already have two regional wars: Russia in Ukraine and Iran with its proxy’s wars in the Middle East. And the third one is taking shape as China aims to take Taiwan. Maybe in that third theater, we’re going to see more countries joining. And then, as in World War II, we’re going to have three regional conflicts that become a global war.

There’s another important aspect of alliances, which is the level of integration, how united they really are. This is interesting. When we look at the Axis powers of the 1930s—Germany, Italy, and Japan—they were not allied. Really, actually, they were on opposite sides. When we look at the crisis in Austria in 1934 and in Ethiopia in 1935, Italy was on one side and Germany was on the other. When we look at who was helping China against Japan until late 1938, that was Germany.

And then, comparing this to today, we have a new axis being formed: China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran today. They are all united, like who sends ammunitions, weapons, and even soldiers to help Russia fight Ukraine? North Korea. Who gives food and energy to North Korea? China. Who buys Iran’s sanctioned oil? China. Who buys Russia’s gas? China. And China supplies Russia with electronic equipment to keep its war.

As you can see, the axis of today, which I call the axis of dictatorships, they are really united, much more than the axis of the thirties. And on the other hand, we look at the opposing alliance, which is what? NATO and the democracies, they are falling apart, and they’re breaking, and they are divided.

History tells us that alliances are very important. If we have the aggressors’ alliance growing stronger and the opposing alliance becoming divided and weak, the incentives for the aggressors to strike, they’re really big. I’m not here talking about any inevitable destiny, but I’m looking for historical patterns that help us connect the dots. And with that, we might not repeat the mistakes of the past.

And to end, I want to remind you of the famous aphorism: “History does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”

Thank you.

Some final thoughts…

You may have come to your own conclusion regarding Professor HOC’s talk, but as I see it, it’s not a prophecy of doom but a call to action. By understanding the historical patterns that have led to past conflicts, we can be more vigilant in how we address the challenges of our time. It is a reminder that peace is not a given, but something that must be actively pursued and protected. For each of us, this means staying informed, engaging in civil discourse, and holding world leaders accountable for their actions on the global stage.

◆

Learn more about the coaching process or
contact me to discuss your storytelling goals!

◆

Subscribe to the newsletter for the latest updates!

Copyright Storytelling with Impact® – All rights reserved

Mark Lovett

The Superpower of Comic Con – Natalie Kaczorowski at TEDxSanDiego 2016

/in , , , , /by

Comic Con is like a multi-day thrill ride, more carnival than convention, packed with eccentric attire, celebrities, and all things pop-culture. For years, onlookers have viewed these masters of the geek universe with a sense of confusion and comic relief.

That’s about to change, as Natalie Kaczorowski, aka Comic Connie, looks behind the mask of Comic Con to explain the hype, the craziness, and the exceptional superpower of Comic Con. Strap in for the thrill-ride of your life, as things are about to get nerdy.

“We are who we choose to be. So choose.”

Back in the day, when I was the organizer of TEDxSanDiego, I would start lining up speakers 6 months ahead of time. The theme for 2016 was The Age of Magic. One aspect of this theme addressed the incredible technology that was being developed and deployed around the world in ways that could change society.

But another way to look at this theme was through the lens of human identity and the human imagination. That got me thinking about Comic-Con, the world-famous conference held annually in San Diego. And as luck would have it, I knew someone who approached the yearly convention with an unbridled passion.

The brilliance in Natalie’s talk comes from her ability to weave her personal story of finding her identity and her tribe to the broader story of how everyone is just playing a role in life, whether they recognize it or not.

Notice how she captures the audience’s attention and has them laughing — first by referring to the superhero outfit she’s wearing on stage, and seconds later, to the outfit she’s wearing in a photo taken at Comic Con.

When I was a kid, I always had a flair for the dramatic. Turns out I had a condition called being an insufferable pain in the ass.

She then takes us from the woman she is on stage that day, to the young girl she was growing up and the central topic of how we all struggle to find our identity. In her case, that journey was through the world of comic book heroes.

Comic-Con is really an invitation to celebrate self-expression.

And when she introduces the topic of cosplay, it’s an opportunity to connect to the audience on the topic of self-expression, and thus, personal identity.

I want to live in a world where we don’t have to have an identity struggle or change or hide our appearance to hide from who we really want to be.

As you follow Natalie’s journey of self-expression, connecting with her tribe, and becoming her most invincible self, reflect upon your own path and the struggles you’ve had to simply be yourself.

If you’re in the process of writing a personal story of your own, note how Natalie blends various story blocks in order to create a narrative tapestry that’s founded in her own experiences, but reaches out the audience with a universal message.

Transcript

I wish I could wear this every day.
No, I meant this.
That’s me, by the way.

Sounds like a funny request, but this photo actually reminds me of this photo. Which is also me. Now, I know the first thing that comes to mind when you see this photo is, obviously, future TEDx speaker. But if you look deeper, you’ll see there’s a similarity between these two photos.

This is me at my most amazing. And this is me at my most invincible. And in both photos, I am my most fearless. I didn’t realize that until I experienced the superpower of Comic-Con for the first time.

Society doesn’t tell us that we can dress in superhero costumes in everyday life. We need to get a real job, get a real degree, start a real family. We are supposed to be normal. We struggle, though, with identity our entire lives. It’s a common theme in superhero stories, too. Peter Parker struggles with the fact that he’s Spider-Man. Clark Kent changes his appearance to hide the fact that he’s Superman. Bruce Wayne doesn’t feel free until he becomes Batman.

When I was a kid, I always had a flair for the dramatic. Turns out I had a condition called being an insufferable pain in the ass. I wasn’t raised by my real parents, so I imagined my journey through life in the context of Superman. I always felt like the world was on the verge of ending, so I felt like a vampire slayer. All that drama actually made things more clear. It was good versus evil, right and wrong, black and white. With great power comes great responsibility.

Somewhere along the line, I quit looking at the world that way. We reach an age where we stop believing that we’re capable of saving the world or in magical lands where anything is possible. Which is why Comic-Con is such an enigma. I get it. Not everyone understands Comic-Con. First of all, you don’t simply just go there! It’s really hard to get tickets! Tickets to Comic-Con aren’t really bought so much as you win the privilege of paying for a ticket.

During open registration, badges sell out in less than an hour in the most stressful, indigestion-inducing process in history. Ask anyone that’s been through this, it’s the joy of being selected for Hogwarts matched with the sheer terror of surviving the Hunger Games.

I get asked all the time, why go through all that trouble? Or more commonly, you pay so much money and get dressed up and sit in some theater to watch a bunch of people talk. It’s gonna come out on YouTube. I mean, you guys get it, right? So annoying. Let it sink in.

Truth is, millions of people try to go to Comic-Con. It has something for everyone. It ranges from well-known comics and mainstream movies and television, to also include video games, anime, science, technology, everything in between. It’s the one place where the line to the men’s room can consist of Reed Richards, Han Solo, Captain Picard, someone cosplaying astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, and the actual Neil deGrasse Tyson.

You might have heard that term cosplay before. It’s a big part of Comic-Con. Cosplay is the art of dressing up. And like any classic art, it revolves around self-expression. Celebrities even dress up to go to Comic-Con for the same reason everyone else does: because you can be whoever you want to be. Even if you just want to dress and blend in with the Stormtroopers.

Comic-Con is really an invitation to celebrate self-expression. I’m going to tell you an origin story about how my two identities became one. Natalie grew up in a small town. She didn’t win any high school awards. But if there was a trophy for most contributed screencaps of the Dharma logos on the Lost Wikipedia page, she would have won it. She found a small tribe of people that would put up with her crazy teen antics, even embrace her for it. She thought that familial bond she had was isolated to her hometown until she went to Comic-Con.

Now, here’s a place full of hundreds of thousands of people that not only got it, but celebrated it. It’s a utopia, a hub of energy, full of lights and sounds and culture. Comic-Con is like a parade, Mardi Gras, and Times Square, all at the same time. It’s Nerd Mecca. Of course I’d want to live there. I mean, she, she would want to live there.

So, Natalie moved to San Diego. And every year when Comic-Con came to town, it was like homecoming. But on the last day of Comic-Con, she gets this sinking feeling in her chest. She felt worse after Comic-Con. She didn’t know why. She did all the normal things: got a job, got a degree, gotten married. Something was missing that compelled her to change. So she began to dismantle all of the beautiful things she had, one by one, until she had none of those things.

A friend of ours came up with an idea about how to best utilize her talents. We called it Comic-Con-nie. All that was needed was a camera, her passion for Comic-Con, and to act like a super nerd. Oh, and she had to wear the costume. That changed everything. Wearing that costume, playing that part, it allowed her to unlock her passion for talking to people about the characters and the stories that excited her.

And when she ran out of different costumes to wear, she started wearing nerdy t-shirts, even off-camera. And then something amazing happened. People from diverse backgrounds would recognize those symbols. They’d strike up conversations she never saw coming. Sometimes it’s, “I love your shirt!”

Seeing that symbol gives them this freedom in identifying that we are members of the same tribe. That was my radioactive spider bite. That’s when who I was trying to be and who I was afraid of being finally came together. That’s when I realized, this is who I’m supposed to be. Comic-Con connects individuals with their tribe. But fandom is the connection that the tribe has with characters which represent an ideal that we admire.

It could come in the form of power, like Superman’s abilities. Iron Man’s financial strength. Sherlock Holmes’ superior intellect. Or maybe, maybe we just need courage. Like Katniss Everdeen from The Hunger Games, or Jon Snow from Game of Thrones, who in the face of insurmountable odds still have the courage to fight. And the best part? People are lining up to speak with Charles Xavier.

I understand there’s a lot of pushback with this idea of dressing up in large groups. For some reason, people find it strange to wear Vulcan ears to match your Starfleet uniform. But when you spend over $300 on an authentic jersey and paint your face in your team’s colors, I have news for you. You are a nerd! Nerd! We do this, though, for love of the story. It’s united humans together for thousands of years.

Maybe it’s a group of people sitting in an auditorium or watching online randomly chosen members of society tell their stories. You can nerd out about anything. I’ve stood in line overnight to watch a panel for a TV show called Supernatural. Thank you. In 2016, Supernatural broke a record by entering its 12th season. I’m not still watching to see which of the two main characters is going to get punched in the face by a ghost this week. I stand in line to meet other fans. The show speaks to us because it teaches us that home isn’t necessarily where you came from. Family doesn’t end with blood. We are stronger together than we are apart.

Comic-Con is a ritual that celebrates this transformation. For four days out of the year, you can be whoever you want to be instead of who you’re supposed to be. Define yourself. That’s the superpower of Comic-Con. Comic-Con was the catalyst for my own transformation. Natalie and Comic-Con-nie have merged into me. To become my most amazing, my most invincible. And they’ve led me to this stage so I can become my most fearless.

I want to live in a world where we don’t have to have an identity struggle or change or hide our appearance to hide from who we really want to be. What if being a superhero in everyday life was normal? You dress for the job you want. And dressing the part and playing the part means being the part. Then the real question is, who are you cosplaying as this year?

We are who we choose to be. So choose.

Thank you.

◆

Learn more about the coaching process or
contact me to discuss your storytelling goals!

◆

Subscribe to the newsletter for the latest updates!

Copyright Storytelling with Impact® – All rights reserved

Mark Lovett

Stop Telling Single People to Get Married – Peter McGraw at TEDxBoulder

/in , , , , /by

We would like to think that all the decisions we make are of our own choosing. They are, to some extent, of course, but oftentimes social norms have a way of creeping into the equation. We do something because everyone else is doing it, or our friends and family expect us to. Sometimes it’s related to our culture, or our religion.

Marriage has a way of falling into this trap. In his recent talk from TEDxBoulder, Stop Telling Single People to Get Married, Peter McGraw walks us through the changing social norm of getting hitched, and offers us a new way to look at the concept of significant other.

The solo movement, where being single isn’t just tolerated, it’s celebrated. Not less than, not better, just a different path filled with opportunities to live remarkably.

His talk includes a number of beautifully humorous moments (it’s a lesson unto itself) but beyond the laughter, Peter provides us with a brief history lesson on how the cultural norms of marriage have changed over time. And as with most social paradigms, it’s complex.

The story of the rise of singles is the story of the rise of women.

Impactful talks are always about shifting our perspective, so Peter offers some suggestions as to how we can view the solo life on equal footing with marriage.

  • Expand the concept of “significant other” to include family, friends, and chosen family, recognizing the importance of diverse social connections.
  • Advocate for “family of one” policies, like those in Sweden, that provide a social safety net (healthcare, education, caregiving support) to all citizens individually, regardless of marital status.
  • Elevate single living to be on par with married living, recognizing it as a different, equally valid path to a remarkable life.

As you listen to Peter’s talk and read through the transcript, notice how he’s taken us on a journey that is both personal and, at the same time, universal.

Watch as he turns the spotlight from himself to the world at large, then over to the audience. We always want to know what’s next, where the story is heading. And we learn something along the way.

Transcript

My not so subtle request: Stop telling single people to get married.

20 years ago, I threw myself a bachelor party as a new professor at CU Boulder. Backs were slapped, stories were shared, glasses clinked. But there was a hitch: I wasn’t getting hitched.

My rationale, without a wedding in sight, why do married folks get to have all the fun?

Unbeknownst to me, that night I joined a movement. The solo movement, where being single isn’t just tolerated, it’s celebrated. Not less than, not better, just a different path filled with opportunities to live remarkably.

In 1960, 90% of adults in the United States would go on to get married. Today, 50% of adults in the US are unmarried. 25% of millennials are projected to never marry. And don’t get me started on what’s happening with Gen Z.

Yet, we still live in a world built for two. Married people have access to over 1,000 legal advantages unavailable to singles: tax breaks, social security benefits.

Singles invest heavily in marital milestones. This made sense when everyone got married. But for us lifelong singles, we have to buy our own crockpots.

And then there’s Aunt Sally, who keeps asking, “So, is there anyone special?” How many of us have an Aunt Sally?

Lately, a chorus of media voices have traded Aunt Sally’s question for a prescription: Get Married. You don’t believe me? There’s a book called Get Married. And it came out, of course, on Valentine’s Day.

The “Get Married” advocates like to point to data that show that married people report higher life satisfaction than single people. Their conclusion: Get married and get happy. Your bonus: you get to save civilization.

Now, you might be wondering, and the answer is no, I’m not anti-marriage. I’ve even had a couple near misses.

But I am against over-prescribing marriage based on correlational data that the “Get Married” crowd is a little too wedded to. Any serious scientist who looks at these data comes to the same conclusion: that is, the people who get married are already slightly happier to begin with.

But there is a happiness effect in the data. There’s a wedding day bump. But it fades fast. For 30K a pop, the average US wedding, at that cost, you can take 15 vacations. Without your in-laws.

But here’s the real puzzle. And it’s one that the “Get Married” crowd can’t answer. And that is this: If getting married makes you happy, why is it that the happiest places on Earth feature the most people going solo? This is especially the case in Scandinavia.

I say, rather than treating the rise of singles as a bug, let’s treat it as a feature. A feature of progress, especially for women.

The arranged marriage was invented 4,400 years ago in order to form business alliances during harsh agrarian times. Women were treated more like property than partners, with a husband receiving ownership from the father at the altar. Thankfully, today, marriage is more about love, and it’s increasingly optional.

The story of the rise of singles is the story of the rise of women. And it really got rolling with the invention of the spinning wheel. The spinsters who used it could earn their own money and escape being owned by a husband or a father.

With the invention of birth control and greater access to education and economic opportunities, “I do” is becoming, “Do I?”

The spinsters of yesterday and the cat ladies of today are not old maids. They’re trailblazers, pioneers of independence.

Urbanization, apartments, and the home appliances that were invented for housewives are spurring a huge increase in people living alone, especially in cities like Stockholm.

Intrigued by these happy Scandinavians, I swapped out my Stetson for an Indiana Jones style fedora and headed to Sweden, a global leader in gender equality. And I found lots of one-bedroom apartments filled with singles, some by choice, some by chance, but living rich, interconnected, remarkable lives.

So let’s dispense with the calls to get married. They’re either already preaching to the choir or shouting into the wind. There are the “someday” singles. They’re looking for their person, sometimes waiting hopelessly. The “just may” singles are open to possibilities, the hopeful romantics. But of single adults in the United States, half have other priorities.

They’re not looking for love or lust, whether for now or forever. And they’re channeling their time and their energy and their intention into education, building businesses, creating art. For many singles, they live meaningful lives. Singles give more time. They’re more likely to care for elderly parents and disabled friends, more so than their non-single counterparts.

So what should we tell single people rather than get married? Let’s start by expanding the concept of significant other. It originally included family and deep friendships, including family of choice. Indeed, science shows that social connections broadly predict life satisfaction.

I’ve never put a ring on a finger, but I have significant others. They are my brothers and sisters in the solo community around the world. There’s my brother from another mother, Darwin, who’s taught me more about unconditional love than any lover has. And here tonight is my soul sister, Julie, who was at my bachelor party 20 years ago. I love you, Julie.

Next, let’s advocate for policies that support a family of one. Sweden’s social safety net is given to all citizens individually: universal healthcare, free or low-cost education, affordable childcare, and eldercare. No spouse required. Amen.

And lastly, let’s elevate single living to be on par with married living. Not better, not worse, just a different path filled with opportunities to live remarkably.

I always thought that there was something wrong with me for not wanting to get married. The prospect of it felt like I would be wearing an ill-fitting suit, or worse, a straitjacket.

Now, don’t get me wrong, I have plenty of problems. There’s a lot of things wrong with me. But putting a ring on it is not going to solve my problems.

And as I was nursing a broken heart after one of my near misses, it hit me: I’m not half waiting for a whole. I’m wholehearted. I’m complete, I’m healthy, I’m financially stable, I do meaningful work, I have a wide and deep connected group of friends. I feel wholehearted, and I hope you do too.

In the end, there is no one remarkable life. There are remarkable lives. And no amount of pearl clutching or calls to get married are going to drag us back to the good old days, which, to be honest, weren’t that good to begin with.

Someday, single living and married living will stand side by side, equal. In the meantime, the solo movement has a big tent. Never married? Divorced? Separated? Widowed? Welcome. We celebrate you and our married allies.

The future is about options, not prescriptions. So let’s toast to a world that honors both the choice to settle down or go solo.

Cheers.

◆

If you enjoyed this article…
Buy me a coffee

◆

Learn more about the coaching process or
contact me to discuss your storytelling goals!

◆

Subscribe to the newsletter for the latest updates!

Copyright Storytelling with Impact® – All rights reserved