so much of work is ugly and so much of your ability to work is just your ability to eat shit and move on.
there’s a small sample of jobs reserved for the purists. the academics (full professors), the semi-retired CEOs (of successful companies), the film directors (with a final cut!). and even they have had to eat shit at some point in their lives: grinding through grant approvals or a successful exit is no noble work.
more than that: some positions’ whole point hinges on your ability to produce copious amounts of pretty low level menial work: junior investment bankers and consultants famously “move around icons in powerpoint” and have 100-hour workweeks. even in fields where we believe in a higher level of intellectual capacity as a requirement, the work is reduced down to an ugly floor: highly trained judges deal with self-representing criminals that shout in the courtroom, engineers move dots on a screen at 3am to deliver a design in time for a deadline, quantum physicists use scotch tape to get a good layer of graphene after yet another etching failure. is this just friction towards a goal or humiliation?
to restate my hypothesis succinctly: my guess is most careers are not limited by intelligence, taste, or even ambition but by how much sustained shit a person can take without quitting or becoming bitter and letting it poison their sense of self.
maybe this is why “success stories” feel dishonest. we like to tell tales about passion and brilliance because they’re pleasing, but the more accurate story is probably procedural and most value in the world is created not by eureka moments, but by people who can operate at (and even enjoy) the ugly floor long enough to, maybe, sometimes, touch the ceiling.