One of the most common pieces of advice given to young people, especially the creative ones, is that they need something to fall back on.

The phrase sounds harmless. Responsible, even. And in many cases it makes sense. Get a degree just in case that music thing does not work out. Learn a trade in case the acting falls flat (Robin William’s father insisted he learn how to weld)If the sporting dream collapses, at least there is a profession waiting.

This advice is usually offered in good faith. It comes from adults who know that rent requires real money, that bodies break down, that the market is indifferent to talent. It comes from people who have seen what instability can do to a life. It also comes from a fair place. As Paul Graham once put it, parents share more of the risk than the reward. They do not get much of the excitement if the dream works out, but if it falls flat, they are often the ones left dealing with the consequences.

Still, there is a deadening quality to the advice. For some people, a fallback plan is not a safeguard. It is an exit hatch. It is a way of never giving themselves fully to the thing that matters most. A way of never finding out whether the gift had any real depth, or any real chance. 

That is why the opposite view has such force. If there is something in you that feels wholly yours, some artistic pull, some athletic gift, some deep and difficult attraction, then perhaps you owe it to yourself to go all in. Caution to the wind. Accept the uncertainty. Jump and the net will appear. Let your peers pursue the white-picket-fence version of adulthood. Pursue the thing that feels like it has your name on it.

There is courage in that view. There is also danger. As with most things, the truth sits in the nuance.

“Follow your passion” has probably done as much harm as good. It may be one of the worst pieces of advice we give young people.

The trouble is not passion itself. The trouble is interpretation. Desire is rarely self-explanatory. A young person may feel an intense pull and still have no idea what, exactly, they are pulled toward.

“I want to be a singer,” someone says. Perhaps. But is the real hunger for singing, or for expression, beauty, release, performance, admiration, the chance to move people, the chance to be seen? Or is it something more compromised than that: fantasy, status, seduction, a life borrowed from social media?

The first object of desire is not always the real one. That is why adults should be careful not to dignify every strong feeling too quickly. A teenager may not yet know what they want in any finished sense. They may only know that something in them feels charged, wounded, restless, or drawn toward a certain kind of life.

And there's credence to that. Though, it is just not the same thing as understanding. Better understanding needs better questions. What keeps returning? What kind of practice can they bear? What effort are they willing to suffer through? What part of this is real, and what part is vanity, imitation, or escape?

The adult’s role is not to kill the impulse with practicality, nor to claim as destiny. It is to help the young person distinguish seduction from commitment, glamour from substance, and fantasy from something that might actually be built into a life.

Keith Richards (the famously anti-establishment guitarist of the Rolling Stones) tells a story in his autobiography about being in a school choir as a boy. The choir won competitions. He and the others were taken out of class to travel and perform. Then their voices broke. The choir master discarded them. To add insult to injury, they were told they would have to repeat a full year of school to make up for the classes they had missed, and the choir master did not lift a finger to defend them.

Richards described it as a kick in the guts. It lit a fuse in him. He began to see authority not as protective but as hypocritical, arbitrary, and bullying. Something in him hardened and turned.

What is striking about that story is that music may not have been the deepest thing in it. The deeper thing may have been betrayal. Rebellion. A refusal to submit to authority or the status quo. Music gave that anger somewhere to go. It gave it structure, style, and form. It turned a raw force into art.

Without music, perhaps the same current would have found another outlet. Not all of them would have been good.

That is what makes the story useful. It reminds us that the first object of desire is not always the real object. Sometimes a person is drawn not only to the form itself, but to what the form allows them to do with some deeper material inside them.

A young person may think they want to act when what they really want is embodiment. They may think they want to sing when what they really want is release. They may think they want a life in sport when what they really crave is discipline, contest, mastery, or initiation into a tribe.

The adult task is not to mock that confusion. It is not to romanticise it either. It is to help them read it.

There is another problem. Even when a young person finds the right pursuit, the danger does not end there.

At nineteen, identity can be useful. “I am a musician.” “I am an athlete.” “I am a writer.” Sometimes that is what gives a person the courage to begin. It helps them choose. It helps them persist. It keeps them from being dissolved by other people’s expectations.

But identity hardens very easily. The thing that helps you begin can become the thing that traps you.

This is true not only of people who fail. It is true of successful people too. Perhaps especially of them. Once the world confirms the role, once the applause and adulation arrive, once the image is fixed, it becomes much harder to ask whether the identity is still serving life, or whether life is now being sacrificed to the identity.

That, to me, is part of what feels tragic about figures like Elvis Presley and Michael Jackson. Both reached heights that almost no one reaches. They became the thing in full. They won. And yet in the end one cannot help wondering what that identity had come to serve. The role seems to have grown larger than the person. Or swallowed the person entirely.

Success does not settle the question of meaning. In some cases it sharpens it. What if the thing that once saved you becomes a machine that now consumes you?

Bruce Springsteen offers a different model. What is striking about him is not simply that he endured, but that he kept moving. He did not let the public’s idea of Bruce Springsteen become the final word on what Bruce Springsteen was allowed to make.

Nebraska (the album) remains the best example. It was stark, inward, stripped down. It did not sound like a man trapped inside his own mythology. It sounded like a man still listening for what the work required.

That may be the real test of growth. Not whether a pursuit gives you a strong identity, but whether it leaves you free enough to change. Free enough to risk a new form. Free enough to answer a new demand.

A young person may be seduced by a profession and still be wrong about whether it is for them.

One of the best tests is social. Do they actually like the people around the craft? Do they want to belong to that world, be judged by its standards, earn the respect of its peers? The question is not only, “Do I want this?” It is also, “Do I want to be formed by these people?”

Young people need a home as much as a dream. A good tribe does more than encourage. It sharpens taste, imposes standards, and holds people accountable. University can do some of that. But often the decisive places are smaller and more exacting: the comedy club, the rehearsal room, the startup cohort, the workshop. The attraction cannot just be to the profession in the abstract. It has to include some respect for the people, the standards, and the daily life around it.

That daily life matters more than the fantasy version. A creative life is not proved by attraction to the winners. It is proved by love of the work and acceptance of the ordinary life that usually comes with it. Not the life of the few who make it, but the average life of the craft. Jerry Seinfeld did not get his show until he was thirty-five. For years he was simply writing jokes and performing in clubs. That is the life that has to be loved first.

Will Ferrell tells a similar story from the other side of the problem. When he told his father he wanted to give acting a real shot, his father said that if it were based solely on talent, he would not worry. But there was so much luck involved. So give it a shot. And if it ever reached the point where he was banging his head against the wall and it did not feel fun anymore, it was okay to quit. Ferrell said that rather than discouraging him, it took the pressure off. He could stop treating it as destiny and start treating it as a serious attempt.

So young person (who probably wont read this) take your longings seriously. But interrogate them. Test them in reality. Submit them to discipline. Let fantasy die. Let vanity be exposed. Let belonging be separated from mere image. Let the thing prove itself through time, boredom, obscurity, and effort. But do not confuse seriousness with martyrdom.

That, finally, is where adults matter. Their role is not to crush the impulse or flatter it. It is to smooth the path for the young to find the right rooms, the right people, and the right standards, so that desire can be tested honestly and made real.

Finally, the question is not whether a young person should have a fallback. The question is whether the fallback protects the deeper pursuit or replaces it. Most do not need to burn all bridges. But neither should they be handed a life so padded with safety that they never discover what was real in them in the first place.

I