Interests Section? Forum

[Flips88]

Would skydiving be something that should be put in the interest section or left out?

Reason for putting it in, it can show that I am not afraid to take educated risks.

Reason for leaving it out, it can show that I am crazy and take risks.

Thoughts?

Is it something you've done multiple times? or did so in a memorable place or on a special occasion? For instance, one of my friend's went skydiving for his birthday over the Swiss Alps, which seems like a pretty cool thing. But if it's just you jumping out of a plan into a field in the middle of Kansas and you only did it once, then probably no.

23 solo jumps and counting. So not a one time thing

Then yeah, I'd say you could put it on there

[Heartford]

My interests included video games, basketball, baseball, music and skiing (obviously I didn't just list them out like that).

How did you list music as an interest...I've been struggling on how to word this. I'm big into music criticism (Lester Bangs, etc.) but also enjoy listening to vinyl and audiophile type speakers.

Watch it with this. Vinyl is a controversial subject among people who care about music. While it's inferior to modern mediums, the partners (and others) I've talked with usually haven't figured that out. For those who have, they'll think slightly less of you for it. Unless you know in advance, it's better not to bring it up. Ditto anything else that can make you look like a dilettante to the person reading the resume (e.g., enjoy French Wine).

How expert do you have to be in the subjects you put down? Like let's say you did put French wine. Would it be enough to name a handful of wines that you liked or would you actually be expected to know everything there was to know about it?

I think the former. It's the "interests" section, not the "doctoral thesis" section.

[quakeroats]

My interests included video games, basketball, baseball, music and skiing (obviously I didn't just list them out like that).

How did you list music as an interest...I've been struggling on how to word this. I'm big into music criticism (Lester Bangs, etc.) but also enjoy listening to vinyl and audiophile type speakers.

Watch it with this. Vinyl is a controversial subject among people who care about music. While it's inferior to modern mediums, the partners (and others) I've talked with usually haven't figured that out. For those who have, they'll think slightly less of you for it. Unless you know in advance, it's better not to bring it up. Ditto anything else that can make you look like a dilettante to the person reading the resume (e.g., enjoy French Wine).

How expert do you have to be in the subjects you put down? Like let's say you did put French wine. Would it be enough to name a handful of wines that you liked or would you actually be expected to know everything there was to know about it?

The problem with putting something down like, "enjoy french wine"--other than that it involves alcohol which is a resume taboo--is what it says to a serious wine drinker. The message I get is "concerned more with status than wine." French wine can be very good, but talking about wine-producing countries with such broad strokes--particularly when popular opinion has it that French wine is superior--makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about. It's really hard to talk about wine without getting to appellation, winery, grape, and vintage. Even the best Wineries and wine regions have bad years, and to imply that just because it's French it means more to you is to say something you shouldn't.

[Kilpatrick]

The problem with putting something down like "enjoy french wine"--other than that it involves alcohol which is a resume taboo--is what it says to a serious wine drinker. The message I get is "concerned more with status than wine." French wine can be very good, but talking about wine-producing countries with such broad strokes--particularly when popular opinion has it that French wine is superior--makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about. It's really hard to talk about wine without getting to appellation, winery, grape, and vintage. Even the best Wineries and wine regions have bad years, and to imply that just because it's French it means more to you is to say something you shouldn't.

Ah ok I see. I didn't understand what saying "enjoy French wine" would signify to someone serious about wine. I guess my question was more, what if I say I like drinking wine and can name a few wines. Will the employer expect me to know what stuff like appellation means?

[Flips88]

The problem with putting something down like "enjoy french wine"--other than that it involves alcohol which is a resume taboo--is what it says to a serious wine drinker. The message I get is "concerned more with status than wine." French wine can be very good, but talking about wine-producing countries with such broad strokes--particularly when popular opinion has it that French wine is superior--makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about. It's really hard to talk about wine without getting to appellation, winery, grape, and vintage. Even the best Wineries and wine regions have bad years, and to imply that just because it's French it means more to you is to say something you shouldn't.

Ah ok I see. I didn't understand what saying "enjoy French wine" would signify to someone serious about wine. I guess my question was more, what if I say I like drinking wine and can name a few wines. Will the employer expect me to know what stuff like appellation means?

Being able to name wines =/= a wine connoisseur

[Kilpatrick]

The problem with putting something down like "enjoy french wine"--other than that it involves alcohol which is a resume taboo--is what it says to a serious wine drinker. The message I get is "concerned more with status than wine." French wine can be very good, but talking about wine-producing countries with such broad strokes--particularly when popular opinion has it that French wine is superior--makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about. It's really hard to talk about wine without getting to appellation, winery, grape, and vintage. Even the best Wineries and wine regions have bad years, and to imply that just because it's French it means more to you is to say something you shouldn't.

Ah ok I see. I didn't understand what saying "enjoy French wine" would signify to someone serious about wine. I guess my question was more, what if I say I like drinking wine and can name a few wines. Will the employer expect me to know what stuff like appellation means?

Being able to name wines =/= a wine connoisseur

So do you have to be a connoisseur to put it on the resume?

What if I put 'play the guitar' but I'm not very good at it. Is knowing a few chords enough or do I have to be able to play like Hendrix to list it?

[Marley]

The problem with putting something down like "enjoy french wine"--other than that it involves alcohol which is a resume taboo--is what it says to a serious wine drinker. The message I get is "concerned more with status than wine." French wine can be very good, but talking about wine-producing countries with such broad strokes--particularly when popular opinion has it that French wine is superior--makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about. It's really hard to talk about wine without getting to appellation, winery, grape, and vintage. Even the best Wineries and wine regions have bad years, and to imply that just because it's French it means more to you is to say something you shouldn't.

Ah ok I see. I didn't understand what saying "enjoy French wine" would signify to someone serious about wine. I guess my question was more, what if I say I like drinking wine and can name a few wines. Will the employer expect me to know what stuff like appellation means?

Being able to name wines =/= a wine connoisseur

So do you have to be a connoisseur to put it on the resume?

What if I put 'play the guitar' but I'm not very good at it. Is knowing a few chords enough or do I have to be able to play like Hendrix to list it?

You're missing the point. You want to put interests on your resume so that 1) the interviewer will have a similar interest and 2) it will translate to a SUBSTANTIVE conversation about it. If you can have that about playing the guitar (what types of guitars are best, what you like/dislike about it, what type of guitar you play and why), then go for it, even if you're not very good. But you run the risk of being called out by an interviewer who IS a guitar connoisseur and thinks you either make a habit of puffery (at best) or a liar (at worst). All your interests should be something you can hold an intelligent conversation about with someone who is an expert at the topic, just in case it happens.

[Kilpatrick]

You're missing the point. You want to put interests on your resume so that 1) the interviewer will have a similar interest and 2) it will translate to a SUBSTANTIVE conversation about it. If you can have that about playing the guitar (what types of guitars are best, what you like/dislike about it, what type of guitar you play and why), then go for it, even if you're not very good. But you run the risk of being called out by an interviewer who IS a guitar connoisseur and thinks you either make a habit of puffery (at best) or a liar (at worst). All your interests should be something you can hold an intelligent conversation about with someone who is an expert at the topic, just in case it happens.

I guess my problem is that I have a lot of interests but wouldn't consider myself an expert in any of them.

[Flips88]

You're missing the point. You want to put interests on your resume so that 1) the interviewer will have a similar interest and 2) it will translate to a SUBSTANTIVE conversation about it. If you can have that about playing the guitar (what types of guitars are best, what you like/dislike about it, what type of guitar you play and why), then go for it, even if you're not very good. But you run the risk of being called out by an interviewer who IS a guitar connoisseur and thinks you either make a habit of puffery (at best) or a liar (at worst). All your interests should be something you can hold an intelligent conversation about with someone who is an expert at the topic, just in case it happens.

I guess my problem is that I have a lot of interests but wouldn't consider myself an expert in any of them.

You don't have anything that if someone read it they would be intrigued enough to ask you about that hobby/experience?

[rinkrat19]

You're missing the point. You want to put interests on your resume so that 1) the interviewer will have a similar interest and 2) it will translate to a SUBSTANTIVE conversation about it. If you can have that about playing the guitar (what types of guitars are best, what you like/dislike about it, what type of guitar you play and why), then go for it, even if you're not very good. But you run the risk of being called out by an interviewer who IS a guitar connoisseur and thinks you either make a habit of puffery (at best) or a liar (at worst). All your interests should be something you can hold an intelligent conversation about with someone who is an expert at the topic, just in case it happens.

I guess my problem is that I have a lot of interests but wouldn't consider myself an expert in any of them.

There's a wide range between 'being an expert at it' and 'being able to talk intelligently and enthusiastically about it'.

I play ice hockey. I've played recreationally for 10 years. I can talk about game strategy, tournaments and cities in which I've played, why I prefer men's/coed to women's leagues, and why I use composite one-piece sticks. I will never play in the NHL ("expert"), but it's a legitimate interest.

[Cupidity]

I'd throw your resume in the trash.

Why's that?

Vinyl is suprerior. Records are made through a physical process that accurately captures and delivers the full range of sounds created by the artist. Digital recording captures only a small percentage of his data, and accordingly, produces a far less detailed sound. The argument then comes down to two issues, can the human sensory system actually perceive the differences between the two, and if so, is the slightly deeper sound quality worth the trade off for the whistles and pops you hear as a record warps and ages? Plus, traditional vinyl has the cool factor of being physically carved by the sound waves produced by the artist in the studio. Jimmy Page's guitar moved a needle, that cut a master, that cut my record.

[Kilpatrick]

Sure I have things that would be interesting and I can hold a conversation about. What I'm worried about is I put something down like "stamp collecting" because I like stamps and I have a couple hundred and I can talk about my favorites and stuff like that. Then I run into an interviewer who is into nothing but stamp collecting and he subscribes to Stamp Collectors Monthly and he starts asking me detailed questions about my favorite kinds of stamp paper and shit and I look like an idiot because I'm just not that hardcore about stamps. Should I be worried about stuff like this or is a general knowledge of something enough?

[NotMyRealName09]

I was specifically hired into litigation because I listed litigation in my interests. The hiring committee chair at my firm told me (after I'd begun as an attorney) that if I hadn't listed litigation as an interest, they would not have hired me. True story.

Go ahead, why not? You randomly may come across an interviewer with the same random interest. You have nothing to lose in my opinion.

BUT, don't mention anything political, and probably not religious. Those could both really work in your favor, or doom your chances, depending on the interviewer.

[NotMyRealName09]

Sure I have things that would be interesting and I can hold a conversation about. What I'm worried about is I put something down like "stamp collecting" because I like stamps and I have a couple hundred and I can talk about my favorites and stuff like that. Then I run into an interviewer who is into nothing but stamp collecting and he subscribes to Stamp Collectors Monthly and he starts asking me detailed questions about my favorite kinds of stamp paper and shit and I look like an idiot because I'm just not that hardcore about stamps. Should I be worried about stuff like this or is a general knowledge of something enough?

Lol, no. If that were the case, just say its a hobby but you've never had as much time as you'd like to spend on it. That you could speak even remotely intelligently about the topic - even novice level - may help build a bond.

[mikunta]

Sure I have things that would be interesting and I can hold a conversation about. What I'm worried about is I put something down like "stamp collecting" because I like stamps and I have a couple hundred and I can talk about my favorites and stuff like that. Then I run into an interviewer who is into nothing but stamp collecting and he subscribes to Stamp Collectors Monthly and he starts asking me detailed questions about my favorite kinds of stamp paper and shit and I look like an idiot because I'm just not that hardcore about stamps. Should I be worried about stuff like this or is a general knowledge of something enough?

Way over thinking this bro. It's not supposed to be a quiz, it's just a conversation starter. Of course there are various levels of expertise in all this stuff but that's ok. You don't need to know everything or be an expert, just demonstrate that it is in fact an interest.

ie if you put stamp collecting down and the interviewer says "oh I see you collect stamps, tell me about your collection" then all you have to do is talk about it. This is supposed to be something you are interested in. If the dude knows more than you that's totally ok, it's a shared interest and you can just bullshit about stamps or whatever for a bit and make a connection with the guy for twenty minutes.

[Heartford]

I was specifically hired into litigation because I listed litigation in my interests. The hiring committee chair at my firm told me (after I'd begun as an attorney) that if I hadn't listed litigation as an interest, they would not have hired me. True story.

Can't tell if serious...

Wouldn't they have been able to pick up on your litigation interest from you cover letter, where you (presumedly) told them that you were interested in their litigation practice?

[Kilpatrick]

Sure I have things that would be interesting and I can hold a conversation about. What I'm worried about is I put something down like "stamp collecting" because I like stamps and I have a couple hundred and I can talk about my favorites and stuff like that. Then I run into an interviewer who is into nothing but stamp collecting and he subscribes to Stamp Collectors Monthly and he starts asking me detailed questions about my favorite kinds of stamp paper and shit and I look like an idiot because I'm just not that hardcore about stamps. Should I be worried about stuff like this or is a general knowledge of something enough?

Way over thinking this bro. It's not supposed to be a quiz, it's just a conversation starter. Of course there are various levels of expertise in all this stuff but that's ok. You don't need to know everything or be an expert, just demonstrate that it is in fact an interest.

ie if you put stamp collecting down and the interviewer says "oh I see you collect stamps, tell me about your collection" then all you have to do is talk about it. This is supposed to be something you are interested in. If the dude knows more than you that's totally ok, it's a shared interest and you can just bullshit about stamps or whatever for a bit and make a connection with the guy for twenty minutes.

Thanks. I figured as much but I'm neurotic by nature

[California Babe]

I was specifically hired into litigation because I listed litigation in my interests. The hiring committee chair at my firm told me (after I'd begun as an attorney) that if I hadn't listed litigation as an interest, they would not have hired me. True story.

Can't tell if serious...

Wouldn't they have been able to pick up on your litigation interest from you cover letter, where you (presumedly) told them that you were interested in their litigation practice?

I was hired as a Supreme Court clerk because in my interests section I wrote, "Clerking for the Supreme Court." Ginsburg said she hired me specifically because I listed that on my resume. She knew I was serious about clerking because it was in my interests.

[Aston2412]

Everyone that's been through OCI who I talked to (all gainfully employed with BigLaw in DC) have recommended putting an interests section on the resume.

I included it and listed some scholarly and leisurely pursuits.

I hope someone asks me about my comic book "interests." This will almost assuredly turn into a call back. Unless they say they like Hulk or Superman. Then we'll have issues.

[quakeroats]

I'd throw your resume in the trash.

Why's that?

Vinyl is suprerior. Records are made through a physical process that accurately captures and delivers the full range of sounds created by the artist. Digital recording captures only a small percentage of his data, and accordingly, produces a far less detailed sound. The argument then comes down to two issues, can the human sensory system actually perceive the differences between the two, and if so, is the slightly deeper sound quality worth the trade off for the whistles and pops you hear as a record warps and ages? Plus, traditional vinyl has the cool factor of being physically carved by the sound waves produced by the artist in the studio. Jimmy Page's guitar moved a needle, that cut a master, that cut my record.

Nonsense. Like wine and cookery, there's a lot of received wisdom--I'm looking at you $40,000 speaker cables (http://www.stereophile.com/ces2009/fabl ... index.html )--that's more superstition than reality. Blind testing sorts fact from fiction rather well, but audiophiles often refuse to believe it (here's a cute test where audiophiles were unable to distinguish Monster Cable from coathangers http://consumerist.com/2008/03/do-coat- ... ables.html ). Vinyl is no different, but double-blind studies haven't done much to affect vinyl enthusiasts' evangelical zeal.

[Flips88]

I'd throw your resume in the trash.

Why's that?

Vinyl is suprerior. Records are made through a physical process that accurately captures and delivers the full range of sounds created by the artist. Digital recording captures only a small percentage of his data, and accordingly, produces a far less detailed sound. The argument then comes down to two issues, can the human sensory system actually perceive the differences between the two, and if so, is the slightly deeper sound quality worth the trade off for the whistles and pops you hear as a record warps and ages? Plus, traditional vinyl has the cool factor of being physically carved by the sound waves produced by the artist in the studio. Jimmy Page's guitar moved a needle, that cut a master, that cut my record.

Nonsense. Like wine and cookery, there's a lot of received wisdom--I'm looking at you $40,000 speaker cables (http://www.stereophile.com/ces2009/fabl ... index.html )--that's more superstition than reality. Blind testing sorts fact from fiction rather well, but audiophiles often refuse to believe it (here's a cute test where audiophiles were unable to distinguish Monster Cable from coathangers http://consumerist.com/2008/03/do-coat- ... ables.html ). Vinyl is no different, but double-blind studies haven't done much to affect vinyl enthusiasts' evangelical zeal.

Ugh. You need not justify your love of vinyl because you think it's of superior quality. You could do it for numerous reasons, like the explanation of it's physical connection to its creation unlike a digital mp3. You could say that listening to a record is a greater experience than listening to an album on your computer. You can't skip tracks. It demands your attention. Etc.

[goodolgil]

I'd throw your resume in the trash.

Why's that?

Vinyl is suprerior. Records are made through a physical process that accurately captures and delivers the full range of sounds created by the artist. Digital recording captures only a small percentage of his data, and accordingly, produces a far less detailed sound. The argument then comes down to two issues, can the human sensory system actually perceive the differences between the two, and if so, is the slightly deeper sound quality worth the trade off for the whistles and pops you hear as a record warps and ages? Plus, traditional vinyl has the cool factor of being physically carved by the sound waves produced by the artist in the studio. Jimmy Page's guitar moved a needle, that cut a master, that cut my record.

Nonsense. Like wine and cookery, there's a lot of received wisdom--I'm looking at you $40,000 speaker cables (http://www.stereophile.com/ces2009/fabl ... index.html )--that's more superstition than reality. Blind testing sorts fact from fiction rather well, but audiophiles often refuse to believe it (here's a cute test where audiophiles were unable to distinguish Monster Cable from coathangers http://consumerist.com/2008/03/do-coat- ... ables.html ). Vinyl is no different, but double-blind studies haven't done much to affect vinyl enthusiasts' evangelical zeal.

No actual audiophile thinks Monster is anything but a garbage company.

[Flips88]

No actual audiophile thinks Monster is anything but a garbage company.

Same for anything really. Like how they charge $50 or $60 for cables for component input for Xbox360s and PS3s and shit. It's a scam to milk money out of the uninformed.

[Anonymous User]

I play ice hockey. I've played recreationally for 10 years. I can talk about game strategy, tournaments and cities in which I've played, why I prefer men's/coed to women's leagues, and why I use composite one-piece sticks. I will never play in the NHL ("expert"), but it's a legitimate interest.

Total thread derail: Is one reason because they can't check/hit? I'm a female who has gotten seriously into hockey in the last few years and was super depressed to learn that (at least in the leagues in my area), checking/hits are illegal in the women's league.

Back to the topic at hand: I've been an extra in a bunch of movies and films and I put that in my interests section, and have been asked about it on every single interview I've been on. Usually it is positive, and a really good way to show my interests, but I've occasionally been asked if I still do it anymore (basically asking if I'd be trying to take time off to do it).

[goodolgil]

No actual audiophile thinks Monster is anything but a garbage company.

Same for anything really. Like how they charge $50 or $60 for cables for component input for Xbox360s and PS3s and shit. It's a scam to milk money out of the uninformed.

The thing with a digital format is either it passes the signal through or it doesn't. Like Monster sells like $150 HDMI cables when you can buy a cable that does the same thing off of Amazon for liteally 2 bucks. The only real way for an HDMI cable to be better than another s if one doesnt work.