‘Fanaticism tugs at the core of who someone is’

The book begins with your own fanaticism, and you've gone nicely Route One – Star Trek, a cultural movement which you note scholars have compared to 'a form of living religion'. How do you think your own fanship prepared you for other forms you encountered in writing the book?
Writing this book forced me to question what fanships I truly have. I like watching and participating in loads of activities and could easily classify myself as a professional dabbler. Yet, there are a few activities, like playing music, running, and fencing, where I am a consistent participant and have built up that specialist knowledge and skills that are hallmarks of being a fanatic. Through these pursuits, I have learned how to empathise with all the fanatics I profiled, even if their pursuits are very different from my own; the frustration that is experienced before making a jump in skill, the enjoyment that comes when sharing a passion, and the regret or guilt that comes from skipping a session.  

There were absolutely times when I was confused by the fanatics I profiled, wondering how and why they were doing what they were doing, but I forced myself to keep an open mind and even try it out. This is how I found myself digging up an old privy in the search of bottles, which is not as gross as it sounds. Yet it was through these types of experiences that I was able to make a bridge to my own motivations and gain an appreciation for others' passions, even if their activities were ultimately not for me.

Perhaps the most interesting and useful aspect of the book, for our audience, is that you encounter practitioners who use fanaticism to build relationships with clients, create safe spaces to unpack personal challenges, and to try out something new. Can you talk us through a few of the pros and possibly cons of such an approach? 
Fanaticism tugs at the core of who someone is, as personal identity is very much linked to their passion activities. As such, these activities provide a rich canvas to explore relationships and self-concepts, through analogy. For example, the practitioners I spoke with would ask clients which characters they related to most and would explore how the chosen character would react when presented with a challenge. Such questions worked as a conversation starter that could potentially open up a difficult topic. From there, fanships could provide a pathway to try out a novel approach, through role play in how a character could deal with a challenge and the likely impact. 

Yet, this type of therapy is not for every client or practitioner. Clients require a compatible fanship for the therapy to be effective, as well as a willingness to make a conceptual jump into fantasy and role playing. For the practitioner, knowing the fanship deeply is essential to ensuring an authentic connection with the client and a believable conversation about actions and implications.

A lot of the positives of fanaticism you outline rest with the importance of community. But did you encounter those whose fandom is very much an isolated, personal pursuit? 

Although social connection was a key feature for many of the activities I profiled, it does not have to be the core motivation. For example, ultramarathon runners spend a significant amount of time on their own practicing for a race and are often driven more by feelings of euphoria, flow, and achievement than social connection. Many runners also are attracted to the outdoors and the natural beauty of trail running. This is not to say that runners under-appreciate their family, friends, and pacers who lend support during a race, or the camaraderie they enjoy with fellow runners, but social relationships fall lower on the list of what attracts them to ultramarathons. 

The same pattern applies to some of the creative fanatics I met, who work in isolation, but are quick to share a completed project. At the minimum, communities are working in the background reinforcing our interest and dedication to our passions.

I don't think you actually talk about neurodivergence much in the book. Was that a conscious choice? 
So much of the research I did for the book was focused on the passion area, like skydiving or collecting, that any type of demographic difference across activities was not immediately evident. I have little doubt that some activities might appeal more to a specific gender or be aligned to neurodivergent thinking. Yet, what I found most interesting was a handful of personality traits that appear universal to whether someone would likely become a fanatic in the first place. Traits like openness to experience, sensation seeking, and fear of failure can all contribute to whether an individual seeks out activities, whereas traits like resilience, persistence, and need for control work to predict whether an individual is likely to stick with it. As a potential area for future research, exploring how these traits vary between groups and whether this leads to a disproportionate number of fanatics across socio-demographic lines could be interesting.

And what about an addiction perspective – do you find that useful? 
Throughout the book, I attempt to call out where the line is between healthy fanaticism and when a passion area becomes problematic for healthy living. What surprised me when talking to experts was the range of passion areas that had the potential for addiction. A rule of thumb that stuck with me from these conversations involved how a fanatic scheduled their day. For example, does an ultramarathoner schedule a run around their day or their day around the run? If they did the latter consistently, their running would likely squeeze out relationships, work responsibilities, and become way too time-consuming. Additional harm could be done if they decided to run on a major injury or at the expense of a major commitment, to overcome the anxiety of taking a week off. 

What remains unresolved to me is if there is a difference between a fanatic and a professional working in their passion area, such as an Olympian. My guess is that the rules are flexible on what designates unhealthy living, with a mix of work and exercise addiction leading to the same end of defining when the strain is too much.

I guess one of the main messages for psychologists might be that if fanaticism has an escape motive to it, we obviously need to consider what people are escaping from, and why…

For some of the fanatics I profiled, this was absolutely the case. For fanatics looking to do good in the world by volunteering their time for a special cause, they often were dealing with some sort of major trauma in their lives and looking for a way to make sense of their experience. Although very different, gamers often enter their virtual worlds to try out a new identity or become that superhero they always dreamt to be. Or for thrill seekers, they thrive on a few minutes of freedom that accompanies an amazing roller coaster ride or a jump from a plane. In short, escapism comes in many different flavours, but can play a part in transporting a fanatic away from life's worries.

But to turn it back to the positive, the word 'love' is in your title twice for a reason, right?
There is a lot of love underlying the topics in this book. Without love for an activity, it is unlikely that a person could ever become a true fanatic of a passion area and dedicate so much time and energy towards it. Over time, our passions become a core part of our identity and when shared with others, the activities provide an opportunity both for connection and self-love. We become collectors, food connoisseurs, guitar players, or any number of labels that define what we love doing. Our passions provide purpose and meaning to our lives, making the world a much more interesting place to live.  

A core message to this book is that nearly everyone is a fanatic about something – it is up to all of us to ask each other about our passions. Not only will this build stronger social bonds through genuine interest in others, but it helps reinforce how special each one of us are.  

Has writing the book, and immersing yourself in fanaticism, changed your approach to your own work as a registered psychologist and Principal at Ernst and Young LLP?
Now that the book is done, I am attempting to put my own advice into practice, specifically by carving out time in my day to ensure that I keep up with my passions, as well as encouraging others to do the same. As a psychologist who focuses on the workplace, I am much more aware of the importance of serious leisure on personal well-being and the maintenance of a healthy work-life balance. So often, it is easy for workers to end a busy day by sitting on the couch, rather than taking up another activity. When it feels most like a burden to pack up for a lesson or to gear up for a competition, it is exactly at this time when a person will benefit most from serious leisure. Passion activities pull upon a different side of our psyche, allowing us to come home recharged and grounded, providing space to put life's worries into perspective. Although work makes up a significant part of our daily routine and contributes towards both life satisfaction and identity, it should not be the sole feature of someone's life. Additionally, passion activities provide the opportunity for genuine social connection. To this end, I am attempting to be a much better listener at work. If I don't know what a colleague's passion area is, I now make an effort to find out. 

What's the next book?
I am now fascinated by one specific concept featured in the book, specifically the idea of Benign Masochism, where people become attracted to activities that they should be repulsed by. I've started to dig deeper on the topic, with the hope of writing my next book tentatively called Cringe: The fine line between pleasure and pain. No doubt I will run into some intriguing fanatics and experiences along the way.

• Fanatic: Why we Love the Things we Love is published by Oxford University Press.