Yesterday I came across Paul Graham’s essay Hackers and Painters and I really, really, really wish I’d found it a few years ago. It’s a must-read for anyone who makes things (particularly programmers, but it’s relevant across a wider variety of disciplines). Very good stuff. I’ll be reading through the rest of his essays over the next week.
So, why is it so good? For me personally, it struck at the heart of the matter, which is the difference between creators and scientists. I’m interested in science, but in reading Graham’s essay I realized that I’m not a scientist and never will be. It’s not in my blood. I am a hacker, a writer, a graphic designer — someone who makes things. I can’t not make things. Beyond that, Graham’s discussion about beauty and writing good software is great. And he talks about getting a day job and writing beautiful software on the side, which is exactly what I’ve been planning to do.
One thing I’ve noticed is that he’s a big proponent of Lisp. I learned a little bit of Lisp way back — six or seven years ago — but have forgotten most of it (other than that there are lots of parentheses :)). It does seem really intriguing right now, however…
[tags]programming, hackers, Paul Graham, Hackers and Painters[/tags]
Comments
I have the book of the same title. I liked his contention that a hacker and a painter are both creative individuals, but the concept was in the book flap and the rest of the words were kind of a waste. I couldn’t even finish it and I’m really anal about finishing books – I even read to the end of “The Plot Against America,” and I hated every second of it.
Hmm, my guess is that you run Windows and like Microsoft. Am I right? :) It seems like Microsoft junkies would find Graham’s essays boring. For me, however, they’re anything but a waste, and I suspect most people of the sort Graham describes — real hackers — would agree.
Throw in your two cents