Solitude and Leadership

William Deresiewicz uses this term to refer to an institution, such as a business, government agency, or university, that functions according to a hierarchy and routine. Emphasizing the rules, procedures, and power struggles characteristic of such organizations, he contends that advancement tends to come through conformity. As a result, people without true leadership skills often hold positions of authority. This fact is the basis of Deresiewicz’s urgency to develop leaders who can question established practices and formulate original ideas.

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.