Why Couldn’t We Dance?

What’s your top Music from 2020?

In my former life as Head Coach of a CrossFit gym, I used to ask a daily Question of the Day (I’ve written about the practice before). In the beginning of December, as everyone was flooding their Instagram stories with their Spotify Top Tens, my curiosity was prompted about what music people in the gym listened to in their free time. Now, I must say, asking “what’s your favorite music?” is a poor man’s Question of the Day, this I admit. They can’t all be crafts of creativity. But, since we played music 100% of the time we were in the gym and it was a current trend on social media, I asked “What music have you listened to the most in the past year?” 

I got a lot of standard answers. Artist names you know, genres that dominate certain age groups. I got a few answers I’d never heard of, which you expect as well, there’s always a hip iconoclast in the group. One answer that I’d never heard of, though, stuck out to me: “Jerusalema” by Master KG. This was the answer of one of our members who was originally from Albania. He told me, “No one in the US has heard it, but it’s the biggest song in the rest of the world.” 


I had to check it out. I searched the song on Spotify, there were a ton of versions, many remixes. I listened to what I thought was the standard version. A standard beat to start, a building melody, climaxes and drops back in. Good song, catchy. I then found out that there was an attendant dance to go along with the song. I’ve always been interested in these group dances, going back to the “Tootsie Roll” when I was in middle school, to the snap dance when I was in college, to “Teach Me How to Dougie”, and many more in my post college years; I at least want to grasp the basics, most of them are pretty similar. I searched on YouTube for the “Jerusalema dance”…there were thousands of videos.

All over the world. All ages. Kids, grandparents. Nuns, priests, teachers, flight attendants, athletes, maybe even a few trained dancers. The videos haven’t stopped being posted.  Police in Ireland recently answered the #jeruslalemachallenge from police in Switzerland. The song, originally recorded and released in South Africa in 2019, was a hit in Africa and then spread across Europe and the world, reaching #1 in the charts in many countries. I must say though, few of the videos were submitted from the US, a couple from dance studios. My Albanian friend was right: everyone else in the world was dancing to this song, but we in the US were not joining in. Why?

Not That Kind Of Party

There is one easy answer for why we didn’t jump on the dance craze in the US: the song wasn’t in English. While the rest of the world may be very multilingual or linguistically open, we’re much more rigid here in the states. While that may be true to an extent, that argument falls apart when you look at the success of songs like “Macarena” or “Gangam Style”, international hits with attendant dances and little english in the lyrics. I was a kid when the “Macarena” hit and don’t think I’ve seen a dance craze quite like that.

Of course, 2020 wasn’t a good time for a dance party. COVID-19, ever heard of it? Well, that argument falls by the wayside when you acknowledge that this is a global pandemic. There are plenty of Jerusalema Challenge videos from Italy, where the song was not only #1, but they had some of the most serious outbreaks and harshest lockdowns. For much of the world, “Jerusalema” acted as a unifying source of shared hope and joy.

Therein lies the rub, the US was anything but unified in 2020. There was the largest civil unrest since 1968 in the wake of the killing of George Floyd. We then had a contentious election where each side depicted the other as a mortal foe of the republic: a global socialist on one side against a fascist tyrant on the other. The stakes were too high. No time for dancing.

“Fair enough.” I thought. Not our year to have fun with a global dance craze. We had too much terrible stuff to worry about.

Masaka Kids Africana

As a wonderful by product of my search through the Jerusalema Dance Challenge videos, I came across Masaka Kids Africana, a group of kids from Uganda who post dance videos and songs of their own on social media and YouTube. I started following them on Instagram and one of their posts always brings a smile to my face when it comes up in my feed. I was so treated yesterday, when one of their recent posts came up. I watched the shoeless children dance next to corroding brick buildings, wearing mismatched clothing with the biggest smiles that faces can hold. They are holding joy and light in this world.

Masaka Kids Africana is an organization that cares for orphaned children in Uganda. According to their website, these children have been orphaned due to “due to the AIDS epidemic, extreme poverty, and decades of civil conflict.” So then, we have to ask, was our last year worse than the conditions of orphans in Uganda? The country has had actual dictators, coups, and decades of violence in the streets. Have we been so spoiled, gotten so entitled, lost so much perspective, so completely ungrateful that we can’t smile in the face of adversity. Are we so averse to unity and hope? 

Dance Together

So, we’re left with the question again, why couldn’t the US join in on the dance? Dancing is the physical embodiment of joy and harmony. We have been the embodiment of fear and resentment. You can’t dance while afraid. You can’t dance when ruminating in resentment. You can’t dance with a closed heart. You must give your body over to the movements of the music in a joyful manner. That shouldn’t be an impossible task, despite hardships. We would do well to head the words of Nigerian recording artist Burna Boy when speaking about the dance, “My hope is that it unites us through our divisions and misunderstandings and dance together.”

Roll The Dice

Question of the Day

I start each class with a question. The Question of the Day. This could be construed as an ice-breaker exercise similar to those held in stuffy corporate settings. To some extent, the purpose is similar. To a greater extent, our setting and purpose is much different. I run a gym. People come to our gym to stay fit and healthy, but also blow off steam from the rest of their day. By being pushed through challenging workouts, our members can both find release from their day-to-day demands and find a bond with everyone in class who shares in the experience of persevering through the physical challenge. I ask the Question of the Day to shake people out of their early morning fog or early evening cloud. To answer the question, you must be present. There is also an ensuing discussion over the commonalities or differences among the various answers.

The Question of the Day can come from anywhere. I describe the Question of the Day to a new gym member with “It can be fitness related, but usually not.” Some of my longtime members will scoff. It’s rarely fitness related. I often spend the last few minutes before a class starts bouncing questions through my head. I’ve resolved to always come up with the questions on my own. 

I have a couple regular questions. At the beginning of a month, I ask: “What are you going to work on this month?” At the end of a month, I ask: “What went well in the last month?” I ask seasonal questions, such as: “When has the season unofficially turned? Not the calendar date of change, but informal signatures such as the first lemonade of summer or pumpkin spice latte of fall.” Some questions reveal quirks of character or interests, such as: “If a song played whenever you entered a room, what would it be?” or “If someone wrote a profile article about you, what publication would you want the article to be in?” Some questions are sheerly for fun: “If you were a professional wrestler, what would your stage name be?” or “What is your go-to karaoke song?” Many questions provide a small window into personal values: “Would you rather always be late or always have to wait for other people?” “Would you rather have people view you as dishonest or incompetent?” I try to not get too controversial or heavy, but some answers lead in that direction.

I recently asked a question that provided a great insight into the way people think about the world. The question included a rational mathematical decision, cognitive bias, and has strong implications for how a person chooses to live their life to the fullest. 

The Question

I sat before the computer screen looking at the roster of members for my 5:30 class. I was again racking my brain for a good Question of the Day. My mind started venturing in the direction of a cash reward for one of two risky endeavors. I was trying to think of two potential challenges that were achievable, but not with 100% certainty. Say, “You can win a $100,000 by performing a perfect parallel parking job or hitting a basketball shot from the free throw line. What do you choose?” That felt unsatisfactory; not everyone plays basketball and we live in a city where not everyone drives. I needed something more uniformly accessible. My mind somehow landed on the rolling of dice. Everyone can roll dice. What I settled on was “You have one roll of a die to win a cash prize. You win the money if you land on the number 3. You can either roll a 6-sided die for the chance to win $100,000 or roll a 64-sided die for the chance to win $1,000,000. What do you choose?”

A little explanation on why I chose those numbers. Both sums of money are large, but neither are enough to retire away on. That said, $1,000,000 is more of a life-changing sum and $100,000 would alter your financial comfort, but not be enough to do something drastic like pay for a house or college education. The 6-sided die was chosen because it’s the standard-issue die and I chose the 64-sided die to make the big win just more than 10 times as risky, since the payout is exactly 10 times as large. I figured if I raised the chances exactly proportional, people would all just play the game for the big money. Since I always play Question of the Day with the class, I knew my answer would be to take the shot with the 64-sided die and go for the big shot. I imagined we’d have some risk takers, but most people would play it safe. After the first round of the question, I would ask some follow ups to see how many people I could get to change their mind by either changing the amounts or changing the odds on the die.

I was a little surprised that in my first class of about 10 people, only 1 person said they would roll for the big prize. My surprise was compounded when I changed the circumstances to a 32-sided die for the $1,000,000. No one budged. I was astounded when I changed the prize of the 6-sided die to $10,000 and kept the 32-sided die at $1,000,000. Only a few people changed their mind. In my morning classes the next day, I didn’t even open with the 64-sided die, I went straight to 32 and no one would take the shot at the $1,000,000. Lowering the payout of the 6-sided die had a similarly small rate of conversion to the risky 32-sided die. 

Number Crunching

There are some relevant mathematical, economic, and psychological elements that provide insight into this question, the response, and my surprise. First off is the Theorem of Expected Value. First arrived at by French mathematicians in the 17th century, Expected Value states that the value of a future gain should be directly proportional to the chance of receiving the gain. In this question, as opposed to some future stock speculation, the chance or probability of the outcome is easily determined because it is fixed by the number of sides of each die, either 1/6, 1/64, or 1/32.

Our Expected Values breakdown is as follows:

1/6  x 100,000 = 16,666.67

1/64 x 1,000,000 = 15, 625

1/32 x 1,000,000 = 31,250 

1/6 x 10,000 = 1,666.67

What we see here is that as I originally construed the question (6-sided for $100,000 and 64-sided for $1,000,000), the expected value is higher with 6-sided die. What I thought, and this was my own reasoning, was that some people would take the risk for the more life-changing amount of $1,000,000. I was wrong. People were risk averse. I was so wrong that even when the EV was clearly higher with the 32-sided die for $1,000,000 (EV=$31,250), people still chose the “safer” route of the 6-sided die for $100,000 (EV=$16,666.67). It wasn’t until I lowered the 6-sided die to $10,000 (EV=$1,666.67) that I got some people to move, though most still chose the 6-sided die. That means that the majority of people I questioned would have chosen to roll the 6-sided dice with an EV for each roll of $1,666.67 instead of $31,250 with the 32-sided die.

There are a couple of influential factors to note. An individual’s personal financial situation is certainly relevant. An individual who never has had more than $10,000 in the bank will have a different relationship to $100,000 than an individual who already has $200,000 in savings. Similarly, an individual who could pay off immediate debt or get a jump on homeownership utilizing the $100,000 could view the higher chance of success as more important. The chance of success with the 6-sided die is 16.67% and the 32-side is 3.1%. You are certainly more likely to come away with something rather than nothing with the 6-sided die. The closer your personal financial situation is to nothing you may consider it “rational” to get something, though this still wouldn’t be rational in the classical economic sense of maximizing value. I should also note that a couple investment savvy individuals did the exact calculation for EV and made the choice immediately.

A treatment of this Question of the Day and the response cannot leave out Prospect Theory, a theory of behavioral economics and cognitive bias developed by psychologists Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. Kahneman went on to win the Nobel Prize for his work on the theory. A complete expounding of the theory is beyond the scope of this essay, but the theory deals with the different cognitive biases individuals have in situations of gain and loss. One conclusion of the theory is that in a situation of potential gains, individuals become risk averse. Essentially, just what we saw with the response to the dice question. Even though the potential gains were greater and a rational mathematical analysis would tell you to roll the 32-sided die for the chance at $1,000,000, my limited group of responders overwhelmingly sought the smaller gains due to the lower risk of getting nothing. It’s also worth noting that Prospect Theory also states that in a situation of loss, individuals become risk seeking. So if I were to flip the question to the prospect of losing $100,000 or $1,000,000, I would theoretically get a bunch of risk seeking responders.

The Game of Life      

Oftentimes, I view a Question of the Day that has such a one-sided response as a bit of failure. Not in this case. This was one of my favorite questions and answers. I have often been asked by members of my gym, “Do you record our answers somewhere? Are you going to do anything with them?” This is the only time I’ve felt compelled to do so, and it’s not because of the implications of how people spend or save or invest their money. I’m actually not a person especially concerned with money. I think most people overestimate its value.

And there’s the rub, I am very interested in values. What do you really value? What is important to you? How do you value Joy or Fulfillment? We have a limited time in this life. Are you living your life in a way that maximizes those values?

I can give some concrete examples from my own life. I didn’t always run a gym. I used to be a university administrator. I made a decent salary, had a stable career with an upward trajectory, and worked in a generally respected field. One problem: I hated my day-to-day life. I went to an office full of cubicles and couldn’t wait to get out of it. I experienced no joy in what I did. I value the joy of life. I had a passion for fitness and helping people. Leaving that steady job to work in a different field seemed so risky. Would I make the same money? What would people think of me? I stayed in education administration for years. I chose the safe route. Eventually, though, I started to think about what I valued in life. Was it living a safe life or an enjoyable one? Did I want to dread the space I walked into each day or have reverence for it? I took a leap. I gave up a bunch in salary to start. I worked really odd hours. I had to hustle from one gym to the next. I made it work. When I was a child, gym class was my favorite time of day, I now teach gym class to adults every day. I hang with ex-athletes and talk sports. I teach people who have never been in the gym how to lift weights and see their self-confidence rise. In the fitness industry we have a mantra of making a class the “best hour of their day”. That means that everyday I play a role in the best part of someone’s day multiple times a day. I help facilitate physical development, social bonds, and the joy of play. When making the decision to leave my role in administration, I chose the higher expected value in a joyful life than the financially safe play. I took the risk to live out what was truly valuable to me.

Similarly, I write every day. I am editing the draft of a book. I have ideas for my next two books. I’m finishing up this essay right here. The most likely outcome is that not many people read this. The books I write may never even get published. The safe play would be for me to devote time to personal training and remote programming. I now make a more stable salary than in those initial days in fitness, but the safe thing to do would be to make more money using the skills I have. Why would I waste time writing? People don’t even read anymore. The answer is because I value living a life fully engaged in intellectual and creative pursuits. I value having my voice present in the discussion of ideas. I will take on the risk of writing that book that no one read because I place value in engaging in creative expression. I will take that shot. If I am able to be successful in that endeavor, that is a more radically life altering than getting the income from a few extra clients. I want to live my life to the fullest expression of my values.

Many times, in response to the dice question, people asked, “Can we get multiple rolls of the dice?” I held firm that you could only get one roll. You only get one shot at this life. If you value something, it’s worth taking the risk. To not do so would be irrational.   

Joie De Vivre: A Case For Reading Fiction

More often than not, when I talk to people about what they read, I’ll hear something to the effect of “I only really read nonfiction. If I’m going to invest the time in a book, I want to get some tangible take away.” This makes me sad.

Given my proclivities as a child and young person, my advocating that people read more seems hypocritical. As a child, I didn’t like to read. I liked watching TV, playing GI Joes or Ninja Turtles, and watching TV. My father, who grew up a voracious reader hated it and once punished me for getting in trouble at school by having me read a book. I love that book to this day. In college, the switch flipped. As a double major in Political Science and Philosophy, I had a ton of reading assigned–dense, complex reading. I actually did it. For my electives, I opted to take courses in literature and English, because the books assigned were enjoyable novels. Most of my classmates didn’t do the reading; I read everything. 

After graduation, I still read a lot. I started every day of my job search period by reading some interesting book, not finding a job. I stayed engaged in philosophy and politics. I also received recommendations for fiction that lead me to some new interesting authors. I’ve never been the fastest reader, but I always try to keep a couple books going at a time. Usually something hard and objective, something more philosophical, and something fictional or story based. I’ll admit, getting a job and a life has meant that I don’t read as much as I would like, but I keep at it. 

A couple notes before I get into the actual topic of this essay. First, I have tried to use an electronic reader, in my case a Kindle. The practicality of having multiple books held in one sleek object was great. The Kindle saved space on my dining room, coffee and bedside tables to be sure. But, I just couldn’t stick with it. I like real books. I underline some, flip back pages, and concentrate better on a page than a screen. Mostly, I just like the feeling of an actual book. Second, reading is reading; listening is listening. While listening to an audiobook is certainly nothing to be critical of, compared to the myriad of other ways of spending your time, it’s listening, not reading. Does it feel easier than reading an actual book? That’s because it is. If you listen to an audiobook in the car because reading an actual book would take your attention dangerously away from the road, you’re acknowledging that you use more attention and are more engaged with actual reading than listening. If I say I’ve read a book, I’ve read it. If you listen to a book and say you’ve read it, that doesn’t count…in my book.

The statement “Nobody reads anymore” feels like I’m either an old man saying “kids these days” or a school librarian crafting a pitch for the next book fair. From an intellectual standpoint, I don’t think I have to make much of an argument. I think everyone knows that the next set of Nobel prize winners will have an office full of books rather than a browsing history strewn with TED Talks and Netflix documentaries (probably worth noting that the people giving TED Talks and making Netflix documentaries also have offices full of books).

The issue I’m taking up is perhaps even more fringe. Of the people who read the occasional book, no one seems to be reading any fiction! In order to be a big picture thinker, people read Sapiens, and maybe bulk up their intellectual cred by reading Homo Deus as well. In order to start winning at every turn in their career, people grab Crushing It or the Four Hour Work Week. In order to gain some insight into their emotional health, people read Daring Greatly or The Power of Now. All of these are great books to read, they actually come from a great tradition of nonfiction literature that addresses these topics, but they’re not the only books to read. 

I actually think there’s an argument to be made that reading fiction would make you a better producer of things. I could argue that engaging your imagination in a creative sphere for prolonged periods of time would allow you to problem solve in a more effective manner. I am not really interested in making that argument, but I just want to note that it could be made.

Joie de vivre is a french phrase that translates to “the joy of living.” If you don’t intrinsically know what the phrase is alluding to, the situation is worse than I thought. Joie de vivre connects to the actions in life that give us joy simply unto themselves without additional attachment– dancing to your favorite song, eating an exquisite meal, or simply enjoying a walk in the sun can all evoke a joie de vivre. The act has no aim outside of the joy you feel for experiencing life in that moment. When I read fiction that resonates with me, I am experiencing joie de vivre. 

One of my favorite authors is Haruki Murakami. He has written a  number of novels and collections of short stories that I’ve seen classified in the science fiction, fantasy, or mystery genres. While some stories start off in seemingly mundane ways, things usually get weird. The twists, turns, and developments often take jumps that bend the mind to fully understand where the story is going. I’ll be honest, I’m not sure that I get it. If you were to ask me my favorite books that he’s written, I would tell you Kafka on the Shore and The Wind Up Bird Chronicle. If you asked me what those two books were about, I’d struggle to give you a coherent answer. That said, I do not waiver in telling you that I love those books. When I sit down to read some Murakami, I just settle in to read some enjoyable writing–I enjoy his rhythm; I enjoy his characters; and I enjoy it not needing to even make sense all the time. I simply enjoy the ride’s ride.

Am I a better coach, manager, or partner for reading Murakami? Fittingly, I don’t know. I may not be. I could have used that time learning new business strategies and mental configurations for a winning mindset. I could have learned some factual history that would give me conversation material for my next cocktail party. Instead, I spent that time imagining and interpreting; anticipating and judging; shifting and positioning. I may not have advanced anywhere, but I appreciated the ride. That gives me joy.