The Mystery/Mastery Love Paradox
I’ve been working over a theory in my head. I call it the Mystery/Mastery Love Paradox. (I’m generally not good at giving short, catchy names to things, so if you can come up with a pithier name for it, please let me know). It basically states that when people are faced with a mystery, which is an initial challenge they dream of mastering but have no idea how, they will be motivated by a sincere love for it. But once they actually do conquer the challenge and get so good at it that they achieve mastery, they will no longer love it because they have deciphered it, realized it wasn’t as interesting, alluring or mysterious as they originally thought, and then begin to actively disdain it because it becomes utterly predictable to them. It’s basically the main reason why once we conquer that impossible challenge that at one point consumed and mystified us, we are rarely as satisfied as we expected to be. It’s the reason why happiness constantly eludes us, even after we get what we thought we wanted. We are driven to conquer things, but destined to get bored with them once we master them, leading us to want new things to conquer, causing the cycle to repeat.
Before I get in-depth with it, let’s start off with a quote (with emphasis added by me) from Neil Strauss’s book The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists. Strauss, a former chump with women, gets himself mentored by the world’s greatest pickup artists, reads a ton of books, compares notes with other pickup artists in training and field tests techniques until he reaches the point that he can not only pick up a woman using a prewritten scripts and stock techniques, but they got it down to such a science that they were able to reduce it all to a teachable routine that even a social misfit could memorize, practice and get results from almost immediately:
On our last day with Papa, we went to a club called Guvernment. I pushed him into sets and watched him repeat, like a robot, the openers, outines, and negs Mystery and I had taught him. And women were responding to him now. It was amazing how effective just a few simple lines could be?and it was also a little depressing. The first thing aspiring standup comics do is develop a tight five-minute routine that can win over any audience. But after seeing hundreds of rooms fill with laughter on cue at he exact same points, they begin to lose respect for their audience for being so easily manipulated. Being a successful pickup artist meant risking the same side effect.
Think about this for a sec. That comedian, the one that you admire so much for being able to make you and everyone else in the room laugh, the one you feel a special connection to, has done this time and time before and in his mind probably finds your reaction predictable and banal. The same probably goes for directors like Steven Spielberg or Alfred Hitchcock who mastered pushing audiences’ different emotion buttons at will with the same tricks repeatedly. They learned how to make an audience cheer, cry or hang on the edge of its seat on cue, and once they got their craft down audiences weren’t even a challenge for them to manipulate anymore. And like the comedian, once they mastered their particular audience, they lost respect for them. Sure they enjoy the quick ego boost gained by the public adulation and easy successes they achieve, but the lack of challenge also makes them discontent to a degree.
That’s why successful people have to reframe challenges in order to stay interested and motivated. Once they realize that making people laugh is now easy, they switch to the challenge of trying to get more money and fame than their rival comedians. Or maybe they compete to be funnier than their top competitors. Or for the movie director that’s mastered crowd pleasing, he may turn his attention to the still-unconquered challenge of winning the love and respect of his peers by getting an Academy Award. Similarly, in The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists, for Strauss and his fellow pickup artists the hookups and sex start becoming almost mundane in comparison to competing with other pickup artists to be the best and innovate the most techniques.
Yet all these people at one point were in absolute awe of the very thing they are now bored by. The stand up comedian, at the point he was just starting out and unsure of himself, probably believed that just figuring out how to make people laugh consistently would be his ultimate dream. He basically put audiences on a pedestal and craved their approval. Likewise, the film director probably got a rush the first time he screened a movie for an audience and managed to push the right emotional buttons with one of his films and get the reactions he wanted, even if that audience was just his film school class or his family. Similarly in The Game, when Neil Strauss was totally clueless about women he was craving their approval and making them into mysterious goddesses in his mind. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Mystery/Mastery Love Paradox is what drove Michael Jordan to try baseball for a while.
And the Michael Jordan example is fitting because it leads into another aspect of the love paradox: as unchallenging and boring as mastery of something is, the easy rewards and ego boosts that come from mastery can make you become too comfortable to give it up and try something new. So even though the mystery is gone and you don’t have the same fire for the former challenge as you once did, it’s become an easily accessible source of instant validation and ego boost, and that’s hard to give up. That’s why people get comfortable in jobs that don’t challenge them. They may crave a challenge and may no longer love and respect the area they mastered, but the thought of risking the comfort and security they have to chase another challenge that they might fail at scares them into staying where they are.
I think this is probably what made Michael Jordan come back to basketball eventually. He mastered the game. He mastered the money aspect of the NBA. He beat all his competitors and easily outshone them. He mastered winning championships and All-Star Games. He was probably bored stiff and wanted that rush of conquering something else, of mastering another mystery. But when his new challenge wasn’t going the way he planned, he went back to the safe bet: basketball.
The Mystery/Mastery Love Paradox applies to human relationships too. When someone we date is new and mysterious to us, we have dopamine and a bunch of other hormones flooding our brains, the attraction is peak, we’re trying to unravel who the other person is; they are mysterious, new and exciting to us and we’re turned on like crazy. When someone or something is mysterious to us, it allows us to fill in the blanks by projecting our fantasies and desires onto them. Our grasp on them is tenuous and we fear that we may lose them at any moment if we do anything wrong. They’re too new to take for granted. Yet the more intimately we get to know them, the more the mystery wears off and those former blanks that we filled with wild, exciting fantasies get replaced by mundane, disappointing realities, and eventually people get taken for granted. Some people look for new mysteries to unravel and master, while some are happier with the comfort and security of their current situation, even if the mystery is now gone.
I was telling a friend about this theory to get some feedback on it, and he asked a good question: “I see what you’re saying and there’s some truth to it. But at the end of the day, is it a good thing or a bad thing?” Strangely enough, that question actually never crossed my mind. I never considered if it was a good or bad thing, and I’m not even sure I entirely care. It’s just human nature. It just is what it is, and it’s up to us to deal with it.
Recommended Reading:

I went to a Tool concert recently. My first one. I couldnt enjoy it as much as I’d hoped. Singing the same set night after night would become extremely boring for me too. How can you get into a song youve literally sung a couple thousand times? And to add, the lead singer has moved on/”taken a break” A new band with a completley dif sound and a serious winemaking business. Your article confirmed my feelings my friends dismissed. Even if i was on mushrooms.
Ippy, love the example. So appropriate. I used to always think the band or the comedians at shows I went to were having as awesome a time as I was, that we were having some incredible connection. Now I just think “Man, this means so much to me but it’s just a one night stand to them. This night will just blend into 1000 other similar nights to them.”
Meeting women and getting bored is no great accomplishment. In fact it is the discipline of children. This idea of ‘Game’ is also the discipline of children. It is simply the art of indulgence and deception. It implies no great skill but only to entertain dullards. True mastery you have not dealt with, sadly only the discipline of children. To have a new thing and get bored can also mean you have ran out of knowledge!
Aaron, the mystery/mastery love paradox is not just in relation to women and game. It’s in relation to everything. Once you master something it bores you, like my Michael Jordan example where he got bored with basketball at his peak and got interested in baseball instead. I think you got so fixated on the specific example of women and Game that you missed the bigger point of the post.
I think your observations are accurate in regards to most human activities except the highest ones. Can you conceive Mozart becoming bored with his music? Picasso with his paitings? Ansel Adams with his photographs? Or a zen master retiring? When something is done for itself, and without an exterior source of validation being necessary to supply the satisfaction we seek – as was the case throughout history with most artists and thinkers -, it forever eludes our attempts to completely control it, to completely comprehended it. A man may become a perfect master of his craft, but there will be always an untouched core in it, forever unassailable; even if you domesticate a wild beast, there’s a living part of it that will always be there inacessible to our endevors to control it. If something is worthy of being called an art, and thus the person proficient in it deserving the title of master, it must first be worthy of mastery; perhaps most of the examples you and most people give would be better suited to the word expertise, but not mastery – and this is most certainly not a mere semantic observation. If an activity stems from something greater than oneself, requiring everything you can give, your whole life even, then it will certainly never leave you; for then there won’t be any You left.
this is a marvelous publish and I would the five associated with five rating to it. Need some more articles like this to end up done. a person and looking for more of this kind.