mASF post by "Design"
posted on: mASF forum: General Discussion newsgroup, January 1, 2005The way I see it, there are two basic kinds of approaches to Pick Up: Pick Up
Engineers and Pick Up Artists.
The Pick Up Engineers are the guys like Mystery and Tyler Durden, who can break
down every element of PU. They tend to be very structured and tend to use lots
of material -- not because they can't do natural pick ups, but because canned
material is preferable if you aim to achieve very specific ends with every
story you tell or line you use.
The Pick Up Artists are guys like Juggler. They have a very broad picture of
what they are trying to accomplish, and go about it in a more intuitive, round
about way. Often, they either eschew canned material completely, or they use
it very conservatively.
A lot of the flame wars we see here reduce to arguments as to which approach is
better. But rarely does anyone stop to ask: better, to whom and for what?
My favorite philosopher, Ayn Rand, once pointed out that all actions of
consciousness can be reduced to one of two processes: differentiation and
integration...or, analysis and synthesis...or, breaking apart and putting
together.
All of us do each of these, but most people are better at one than the other.
Engineers, for example, tend to prefer differentiation. They approach a
problem by doing the same thing over and over, changing only a single variable
at a time, observing the outcome, and reaching conclusions about which
variables in which order lead to which outcomes. (Incidentally, modern
philosophy is made up almost exclusively of analysts, so it makes sense TD
would fall into this category).
Artists, for example, tend to prefer integration. They rely primarily on
intuition, focusing more on a total end product they aim to create, rather than
the pieces that will lead them there.
So what's better, differentiation or integration? Neither. They're merely
different. And, in fact, they are complementary. In my case, I would fall
into the Pick Up *Artist* category, but even so, my model is TD. I will never
be able to emulate him, but by studying his approach and internalizing it, my
PU intuition has gone through the roof.
Of what practical value is all this? Well, I'll tell you how it's helped me.
I spent a lot of time trying to turn myself into a Pick Up Engineer, but the
harder I tried, the worse my game got. I should have known better.
I'm in business. It used to be common wisdom that you should spend a lot of
time working to overcome your weaknesses, but it turns out the common wisdom is
wrong. You're better off nurturing your strengths. With that in mind, once I
made the connection regarding the two basic approaches to Pick Up, I've been
able to improve my game exponentially.
Rather than try to go into set with a structured set of routines, I've
internalized a basic structure (Open, Attract, Qualify, Comfort, Seduce),
internalized the kinds of material that appropriate to each stage of that
structure, and allowed my subconscious to do the rest. Just as important,
recognizing that I'm built to be a PUA, not a PUE has enabled me to stop
feeling guilty for failing to phase shift in C2 or whatever, and feeling proud
of just rolling with the punches since that is my natural style. By the same
token, it might help you PUE's feel less guilty for using canned material.
Anyway, that's all I have to say. Feel free to flame away if you disagree.
Design
--
Life By Design
http://designexists.blogspot.com
|
