Negative Space?

        A man that I know was teaching some high school kids to play together in a band. He told me afterwards that each kid was thrilled to be able to play in an actual band, and was determined to do exactly that: play. This guy had to go to great lengths to get them to stop; explaining to me that "the essence of music is NOT playing." When everyone plays simultaneously, it is less like music and more like noise.
        As I began to roll that idea around, it struck me that this thought has application everywhere in life. In the print advertising industry, the term "negative space" is used to describe the empty page around the dominant element of an ad. More of that emptiness is better; when I have a page that's full, it takes away from what I'm selling. Absolut Vodka is iconic in its use of understatement...who would argue that they need more artwork on their page? In conversation, the best ones are defined by someone who is willing to listen to you. Their use of verbal "negative space" gives your words more impact. If everyone were talking to your audience simultaneously, how much less would your words mean? In sports, the phrase "play your position" is painfully cliche', but only because we believe that we are ubiquitous. We have to be taught that we cannot play everywhere. Our application of negative space on the court provides someone else the opportunity to execute. (The best example of the converse of that principle is a six-year-old's soccer game: ten kids packed tightly around a single ball, all kicking furiously.)
        It is this principle that explains why micromanagement isn't leadership. A micro-manager believes that his hand; his impact must be felt in every decision. A leader understands that the best music is created with the judicious use of silence. Rather than insisting on playing every measure of the song, a strong leader is willing to let other people play. A micro-manager is revealed as a weak leader by their unwillingness (their fear of) letting others pick up an instrument. Shut up, let go, relax and give someone else a turn. Our fear of their screw-ups keep us from really good music.
        

       Crocs are quantitatively not as good as Birkenstocks. While Crocodiles are certainly wide enough in the toe to accommodate human feet, this is a design cue taken from Birkenstock (the original "Gesundheit Schuh"). The originality they bring is in their material choice: petroleum products. Although I'm a big fan of plastics, let's be honest: they go badly with flesh. Anyone remember their yellow raincoat from grade school? After a twenty-five minute bus ride you were as wet from sweat as you would have been from the rain. My Crocs have the same issue. I can never wear them without socks because they don't (can't) breathe.


Birks, on the other hand are made from cow. Their new slogan should be: "From animals. By animals. For animals." There is no substitute for the magic of leather. Birks breathe, allowing my feet to do the same. So I lose a little bit of versatility (I don't like to wear my Birks at the sandy beach) but I gain both traction and fashion. (Crocs are slippery as well.) 


In conclusion: Birks breathe and aren't slippery. Crocs make noise when I wear them without socks. Cork soles are cooler than foam rubber. Birks are German, Crocs are Chinese. Crocs are better at the beach or poolside, but Birks are better everywhere else.


Birkenstocks win.