Solitude and Leadership

This term refers to the generally accepted ideas or opinions on a subject. Because of the familiarity of such beliefs, they often go unquestioned. Given the speed and frequency of information exchange through electronic media, Deresiewicz warns the cadets against “marinating yourself in the conventional wisdom” and existing in “a stream of other people’s thoughts” (Paragraph 39). Described as a barrier to independent thinking, conventional wisdom must be escaped before original ideas can be formed.

Deresiewicz paradoxically describes friendship as a form of solitude. He acknowledges the counterintuitive nature of his claim, given that friendship implies interacting with another person. He argues that sustained, intimate discussions can lead to personal discovery and the formation of original ideas, which is the goal of solitude as endorsed by Deresiewicz. In this way, friendship is a form of introspection. It is talking to oneself by speaking with someone else. Cursory interactions via electronic media do not meet Deresiewicz’s narrow definition of friendship.

Deresiewicz points out that leadership is often equated with a position of authority, but he dismisses this association as a misconception. He argues that many individuals who advance through hierarchies into managerial or administrative roles are not leaders. They merely maintain the status quo. His definition of leadership has two parts: the ability to think independently and the courage to act on personal beliefs. That is, true leaders question established practices and plot new directions.

Solitude generally refers to being alone, particularly being secluded from society. However, Deresiewicz uses the term to refer to the separation from conventional wisdom to explore one’s personal beliefs. This can take the form of pure introspection, independent work, focused reading of books, or intimate discussions. The defining aspect of solitude is the opportunity to escape the preexisting opinion environment and form original thoughts. He argues that solitude is essential to independent thinking, which is the basis of leadership.

Deresiewicz uses the term technocrat to refer to a person who holds a managerial position based on a narrow, technical skillset. He argues that bureaucracies tend to reward conformity, meaning individuals often master the expectations of a specific role or institution to advance. In his assessment, positions of authority are often held by people who merely adhere to bureaucratic standards and keep established routines going. Technocrats lack an original, big-picture perspective and the ability to truly lead.