The Loneliness Nobody Mentions and the Freedom Nobody Warns You About

Working alone with chronic illness is both harder and better than anyone said. The loneliness is real. The freedom is real. Both things, simultaneously, all the time.

There is a moment around 11am on a Tuesday when the apartment is quiet and the work is there and no one knows I'm having a bad day. No one in the sense of: there is no hallway. No one who walks past and reads the body language. No one who says, "you seem off today," which is annoying when you're fine and invaluable when you're not.

I've worked alone — from home, from bed, from the careful radius of whatever my body allowed that day — for most of my adult working life. By necessity first. Then by design. The distinction matters. Necessity means you didn't choose it. Design means you learned the necessity long enough to make something deliberate from it.

What no one tells you about working alone is that the loneliness and the freedom arrive together. They are not sequential. You don't get the freedom first and then the loneliness creeps in. They are simultaneous, the same fact seen from two angles. This is not a paradox to be resolved. It is the actual shape of the thing.

The loneliness is specific. It isn't the loneliness of having no friends or no community — I have both, with effort, in the constrained way that chronic illness shapes social life. It is the loneliness of: no one saw that I did that. No one witnessed the hour I spent on the problem before I found the answer. No one knows what the morning cost. In an office, effort is somewhat visible — you're there, in the chair, at the desk, and even if the quality of your thinking is invisible, the fact of your presence is not. Working alone, you can do significant things that vanish the moment they're done, because there is no one to register them.

This sounds trivial. It is not trivial. The human need to be witnessed in one's effort is not vanity. It is something much older. When it consistently goes unmet, it accumulates.

AND the freedom. The specific freedom that I did not understand until I no longer had to perform capability at a fixed location for a fixed number of hours regardless of what my body was doing.

Here is what the freedom looks like: it looks like deciding at 10am that I can work for ninety minutes and then I need to lie flat for two hours, and being able to do exactly that without negotiating with anyone, without triggering a performance review, without having to pretend the two hours didn't happen. It looks like building my schedule around my body's actual capacity rather than around an infrastructure designed for bodies that operate within predictable parameters. It looks like, on a good day, working until midnight because the capacity is there and the problem is interesting and no one is waiting for me to turn my lights off and go home.

For someone with chronic illness, this is not a preference. It is survival infrastructure.

I built eight organizations from bed. Not despite working alone. Because of it. Because the constraint of working alone — no office, no support staff, no infrastructure — forced me to build systems that could function with variable input, which is exactly what you need when variable input is your reality. I couldn't afford waste. I couldn't afford inefficiency. I couldn't afford anything that required more energy than it returned.

What I found is that most work, when examined, is mostly performance. The meeting that could have been an email. The office hour that enforces presence without producing output. The visible effort that gets rewarded instead of the invisible quality of the thing produced. Strip the performance infrastructure away and what remains — the actual work — takes much less time and much more of you simultaneously. That ratio is brutal and also clarifying.

The loneliness hasn't gotten easier. I want to be honest about that. Some days the 11am quiet is the exact quiet I need and some days it is the specific silence of a person working inside a constraint that most people don't understand and wouldn't choose. Both days are real. The freedom that comes from designing my own structure doesn't touch the loneliness of having no hallway. AND I would not trade the structure. These two things coexist without resolving.

What I've found useful: to name it. To say, when someone asks how working alone is going, "the loneliness is real and the freedom is real and I can't have one without the other." This is more useful than saying "it's great" or "it's hard." It's the actual true sentence. And the people who can receive the actual true sentence — who don't immediately try to fix the loneliness or minimize the freedom — those are the people worth having the conversation with.

Originally published on Substack. Republished here as part of the written tradition behind [The Honest Room](/workshops) and the methodology of [Testimony-Based Presence](/methodology).

*Want to experience this work in person?** The Honest Room — Intensive runs in Vienna. 10 people. No slides. Apply for June 6 →

Or join the bi-weekly Vienna meetup. Free. Find out more →