Friday morning, December 20th. Scrolling through a design portfolio where every project screams "look how unique I am!" Experimental typography. Clashing colors. Deliberately broken layouts. All of it feels... identical to every other designer trying to prove they're original. The desperate performance of difference has become its own stifling conformity.

The Thesis

Trying to be original makes you derivative. When you focus on being unique, you're optimizing for differentiation rather than quality or truth. You end up in a crowded race to be weird, where everyone's weirdness looks the same.

The pressure to be original creates a specific kind of sameness: the sameness of people all trying to stand out. They make the same moves—break conventions, invert expectations, add "unexpected" elements—and produce work that's formulaically unconventional.

Real originality is a side effect, not a goal. It emerges when you follow genuine interests deeply enough that you end up somewhere nobody else bothered to go. Not because you were trying to be different, but because you were too absorbed to notice or care whether you were.

The paradox: Stop trying to be original and you might actually become distinctive. Keep trying to be original and you'll blend into the crowd of people performing uniqueness.

The Originality Performance

The Pattern

What happens when "be original" becomes the goal:

  1. Survey what exists - Study the landscape to find gaps
  2. Identify conventions - Figure out what everyone else does
  3. Invert or avoid them - Deliberately do something different
  4. Add "surprising" elements - Insert randomness or subversion
  5. Perform novelty - Signal that you're being innovative

The result: Work that's technically original (different from what came before) but spiritually derivative (copying the formula for being different).

Examples of Originality Theater

In design:

  • Deliberately ugly aesthetics (brutalism for its own sake)
  • Breaking grids just to break them
  • Clash fonts specifically to violate typography rules
  • Everyone doing "weird" in identical ways

In writing:

  • Starting with lowercase letters
  • Removing punctuation to be "experimental"
  • Using unusual formatting that adds no meaning
  • The essay that begins "this essay will be different" (it won't be)

In music:

  • Adding dissonance for shock value rather than expression
  • Odd time signatures that serve no musical purpose
  • Genre-mashing as a checkbox ("nobody's done folk-metal-jazz before!")
  • Making things "experimental" by making them unlistenable

In startups:

  • "We're like Uber but for X"
  • Disrupting for disruption's sake
  • Adding crypto/AI to everything regardless of fit
  • Innovation theater without solving real problems

The dynamic: When everyone is trying to be original in the same way—by being deliberately unconventional—you get a new conformity. The avant-garde becomes the mainstream. Breaking the rules becomes the rule.

Why the Originality Trap Happens

Cause 1: Markets Reward Differentiation Signaling

The economic reality:

  • Crowded markets demand standing out
  • Attention is scarce, novelty catches eyes
  • "Unique" gets clicks, shares, virality
  • Being different = marketing advantage

The response:

  • People optimize for "looking original"
  • Novelty becomes the metric
  • Weirdness becomes strategic
  • Everyone chases the same differentiation

The problem: When differentiation itself becomes the goal, you're no longer differentiating. You're joining the crowd of differentiators.

Cause 2: We Mistake Novelty for Quality

The confusion:

  • Original work is often good
  • Therefore being original = being good
  • If I make something original, it must be good
  • Quality becomes secondary to uniqueness

The truth:

  • Good work is sometimes original (as side effect)
  • Bad work can be extremely original
  • Novelty ≠ value
  • Most original things are weird AND bad

Example:

Original but worthless: A social network where you can only communicate in haiku during full moons

Unoriginal but valuable: Another good pizza place in your neighborhood

The trap: Optimizing for originality often means sacrificing utility, clarity, or quality. You make things weird at the expense of making them work.

Cause 3: We Confuse Authentic with Performative

The authentic version:

  • You have a genuine interest or perspective
  • You explore it deeply without worrying about originality
  • Your work reflects your actual taste and judgment
  • Distinctiveness emerges naturally from your specific combination of influences

The performative version:

  • You decide to "be original"
  • You study what's conventional to deliberately avoid it
  • You add weirdness as decoration
  • You signal uniqueness louder than you create value

How to tell the difference:

Authentic originality: "I made this because I wanted to see it exist"

Performed originality: "I made this because nobody else has done this exact thing"

The difference: One is created for its own sake. The other is created to be different.

What Real Originality Looks Like

1. Following Taste Somewhere Specific

The pattern:

You're deeply interested in A and B. Most people who care about A don't care about B. Most people who care about B don't care about A. You combine them because that's what genuinely interests you, not because "nobody's done it."

Examples:

  • Mathematician + poetry → Lewis Carroll writing Alice in Wonderland
  • Computer science + typography → Donald Knuth creating TeX
  • Biology + design → Biomimetic architecture
  • Economics + psychology → Behavioral economics

The key: You're not asking "what's original?" You're asking "what do I genuinely want to explore?" The originality is a byproduct of following two interests that rarely intersect.

2. Solving Real Problems Without Caring About Novelty

The pattern:

You encounter a genuine problem. You try existing solutions. They don't work well enough. You build something that actually solves your problem. You don't care if it's original—you care if it works.

Examples:

  • Spreadsheet software - Not original (just automated accounting), but solved a massive real problem
  • Post-it notes - Accidental invention from failed adhesive, kept because genuinely useful
  • Wikipedia - Encyclopedia on the internet (not original concept), but execution solved knowledge access

The dynamic: When you focus on solving real problems, you naturally end up doing something different because you're not copying the solutions that didn't work. But you're optimizing for "works better" not "looks original."

3. Deep Craft Leading Somewhere New

The pattern:

You practice a craft deeply for its own sake. You master conventions before breaking them. You earn the right to deviate by first understanding why things work. Your innovations come from deep knowledge, not shallow rebellion.

Examples:

  • Picasso - Mastered classical painting before cubism. His abstractions came from understanding, not ignorance
  • Jazz musicians - Learn standards deeply before improvising. Their innovation comes from expertise
  • Modernist architects - Studied classical architecture before "breaking" rules. Breaking was informed, not random

The difference:

Shallow originality: "I'll ignore conventions to be different"

Deep originality: "I understand conventions so deeply I can see their limitations and transcend them purposefully"

The test: Can you explain why the convention exists before you violate it? If not, you're performing rebellion, not creating value.

4. Being Oblivious to the Game

The pattern:

You're so absorbed in the work that you're not thinking about how it positions you. You're not performing for an audience or trying to signal uniqueness. You're just... making the thing you want to make.

The mindset:

  • Not asking "is this original?"
  • Not checking if someone else did it
  • Not worrying about standing out
  • Just pursuing genuine curiosity

The result: Work that feels authentic because it IS authentic. It might be similar to existing things (fine!) or surprisingly novel (also fine!). Either way, it's real.

Example:

Person A (originality trap): "Nobody's made a meditation app with AI-generated binaural beats and NFT achievements. This will stand out!"

Person B (authentic): "I can't find a meditation timer that just does X the way I want. I'll build one." (Might be the 1000th meditation app, but solves their real need)

Person A is thinking about differentiation. Person B is thinking about the problem. Person B's work will probably be better, even if less "original."

The Cost of Chasing Originality

Cost 1: You Sacrifice Quality for Novelty

The trade-off:

When originality is the goal, you optimize for different rather than good. You make choices that are unique but worse.

Examples:

  • Using an unusual color palette that's harder to read (but original!)
  • Writing with no paragraph breaks for uniqueness (but exhausting to read)
  • Building a feature nobody asked for (but novel!)
  • Making navigation weird to be distinctive (but frustrating to use)

The loss: Users don't care about your originality. They care about whether your thing works for them. When you sacrifice usability for uniqueness, you lose.

Cost 2: You Constrain Your Influences

The trap:

To be original, you avoid influences that might make you derivative. You don't study existing work deeply. You don't engage with your field's canon. You intentionally ignore what came before.

The result:

  • Shallow understanding of your craft
  • Reinventing wheels poorly
  • Missing the shoulders of giants
  • "Original" work that's actually just rediscovering old ideas badly

The irony: The most original creators are often the most influenced. They consume voraciously, steal from everywhere, and synthesize broadly. Their originality comes FROM deep influence, not from avoiding it.

Cost 3: You Create for Signal, Not Substance

The performance:

Your work becomes about demonstrating your originality rather than creating value. The meta-message ("look how unique this is!") overwhelms the actual message.

Examples:

  • Design so "experimental" it stops communicating
  • Writing so stylized you can't extract meaning
  • Products so novel they solve problems nobody has
  • Art so conceptual it requires extensive explanation

The problem: When the point is "this is original," the work becomes self-referential. It's about itself rather than about the world. It's signaling rather than substance.

Takeaways

Core insight: Trying to be original makes you derivative because you're copying everyone else who's trying to stand out. Real distinctiveness emerges from authentic interests, not performed uniqueness.

What's actually true:

  1. "Be original" as a goal leads to formula-following (the formula for being different)
  2. Markets reward novelty signals, which creates fake originality theater
  3. Real originality is a side effect of deep interest, craft, or problem-solving
  4. The most distinctive work comes from people who weren't trying to be distinctive
  5. Obsessing over uniqueness makes you sacrifice quality, constrain influences, and signal rather than create

What to do:

  1. Follow genuine interests - Combine things you actually care about, not things that would be novel to combine
  2. Solve real problems - Optimize for "works better" not "looks different"
  3. Master before breaking - Understand conventions deeply before violating them
  4. Steal widely - Don't avoid influences; synthesize them
  5. Ignore the originality question - Focus on quality and let distinctiveness emerge naturally

The shift:

Stop asking: "Is this original?"

Start asking: "Is this good? Does it solve a real problem? Does it reflect my actual judgment and taste?"

The paradox:

The desperate pursuit of originality produces sameness (everyone performing uniqueness identically).

The genuine pursuit of quality produces distinctiveness (your specific combination of taste, skill, and interests is inherently unique).

Originality is like happiness: chase it directly and it eludes you. Pursue something meaningful and it arrives as a byproduct.

Stop performing uniqueness. Start following genuine curiosity. The work that emerges will be distinctive not because you tried to make it different, but because you made it yours.

Today's Sketch

December 20, 2025