Broadcasting Brain

So, if you’re wondering why I’m not posting here as often as I once did:

Most of my recent writing is going into a little hardcover journal that I bought a few months ago.  I’m tracking some of the minutia of my life in this book, including some habit changes that I’ve been working on.  I seem to go through paper journal writing phases in my life.  If memory serves, it’s been about ten years since I last maintained this kind of journal with any kind of regular activity.

Why a paper journal?  Easy:  it’s portable and private.  It’s not that I’m writing a lot of confidential stuff in this journal (well, OK, maybe some), but what I’m writing is mainly personal and of limited relevance to anyone else.  Writing by hand (and this is cursive writing, not printing, for the most part) seems to activate certain mental pathways that typing doesn’t, which is important.  Plus I don’t have to fire up my computer to do this.

So, while getting a D on the revered social media “transparency” exam, I’ll take a B+ for meeting my own needs.  Or does the “transparency” stuff actually only apply to organizations and not to people?

Between this new journal writing habit, and a series of other routine, thinking, and schedule changes, my focus on blogging, or any other kind of writing, is at a two year low.  I do have things that I’m still interested in writing about, but right now I’m not trying to live up to some kind of daily posting schedule as I have in the past.

I do want to take a moment to tip my hat to the many folks out there who do seem to be able to keep up the daily posting routine with a high level of quality and professionalism.  Where there’s a will (and some talent) there’s a way, no doubt.

Onward.

If you're new here, welcome! Please consider subscribing to my RSS feed to stay up to date with my latest posts and articles. Thanks for visiting!

Here are two interesting, funny, and valuable quotes about the process of creation and writing from the late Douglas Adams, creator of the now-legendary SF comedy franchise The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.  The two quotes appeared in a piece called “Where do you get all your ideas from?” that appeared in The Hitch-hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy:  The Original Radio Scripts (which, incidentally, is the original version of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy - a BBC radio show).

The first quote is rather blunt about the fact that writing can be hard work:

An idea is only an idea.

An actual script [Adams was writing about radio script writing in this piece], on the other hand, is hundreds of ideas bashed around, screwed up, thrown into the bin, fished out of the bin an hour later and folded up into thick wads and put under the leg of a table to stop it wobbling.  And then the same again for the next line, and the next, and so on, until you have a whole page or the table finally keels over.

Quote the second, which is Adams imagining how he came up with the name of the character Zaphod Beeblebrox (or maybe this is how it really happened, I’m not sure):

I sat and stared out of the window for a while, trying to think of a good name for a character.  I old myself that, as a reward, I would let myself go and make a Bovril sandwich once I’d thought of it.

I stared out of the window some more and thought that probably what I really needed to help get the creative juices going was to have a Bovril sandwich now, which presented with a problem that I could only successfully resolve by thinking it over in the bath.

An hour, a bath, three Bovril sandwiches, another bath and a cup of coffee later, I realized that I still hadn’t thought of a good name for a character, and decided that I would try calling him Zaphod Beeblebrox and see if that worked.

I sat and stared out of the window for a while, trying to think of something for him to say…

This second quote says two things to me:

One is that writers, like other people, can procrastinate an awful lot when they are trying to work on something.

The second is that sometimes you just need to pick a name, topic, word, phrase out of the blue and just start working with it.  Otherwise, you’re back to the bath and the sandwiches all over again.

Consciously or subconsciously, this little story about the naming of Zaphod Beeblebrox has influenced me tremendously in the small bit of fiction writing that I’ve done.  Here’s an example from the novel that I started over a year ago with some enthusiasm, wrote about 15 pages for, and then locked away in a box, which I think about occasionally, but I’m not sure that I’ll ever complete:

I was trying to think of a name for my protagonist, an accountant (really, a bookkeeper) who was going to have some amazing adventures in a story similar to the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.  I came up with the name Herbert Muckfeather, which sounded nerdy, odd, and very unlikely for a protagonist’s name.  It wasn’t very good, but at least it helped me keep going.  Later on,  I changed his name to Neil Clerk, which isn’t much better, but, honestly, is just the set up for a dumb joke that would appear later in the novel.  But it IS shorter and easier to remember.

See, if I can come up with a silly little anecdote like this, I bet you have a story that is much, much better.  So if you do (or you don’t, for that matter) have a good writing/naming story like this, why not share it in the comments section?  Please? 

To help keep yourself from panicking, try subscribing to Broadcasting Brain, the ideas should calm you down a bit.

Photo by Soundman1024

I’m writing this post about that staple of fiction writing, the climax – when the most exciting, most important event in a story happens.

(No, this isn’t one of those how-to sexual technique posts. But you wouldn’t have expected that here, would you?)

Is your writing dull and uninspiring? Not getting traffic? Maybe it just needs a standard fiction technique to spice it up a bit.

TV shows, novels, plays and movies use scenes, dilemmas, and conflicts as ways to build excitement, tension and anticipation about how a story will end.  The climax occurs in a scene when the central conflict or dilemma of a story comes to a head, something happens and there’s a resolution of some kind, like:

• Luke Skywalker destroys the Death Star
• Richard Gere’s character proposes to or marries Julia Robert’s character
• The soldiers finally do save Private Ryan

Here are some suggestions on how you can emulate this technique in your writing (this can include article writing, blogging, etc.):

• Start with a mystery, a question, or a controversial idea and construct a way to tell a story that addresses this topic.
• Gradually reveal clues or facts that either support or detract from the idea.  Think of this like presenting a series of scenes (or paragraphs) that describe the concept in more detail.  Take the reader on a journey from point A to point Z and all points inbetween.
• Work up to a revelation, including one or more surprises.  We all love twists and turns in fiction!
• Make the revelation colorful and exciting.  Sometimes predictable revelations are perfectly fine; other times something unexpected is really appropriate.
• Provide food for thought to your reader at the end:  did they learn anything?  Are they motivated to think or act differently?

Non-fiction doesn’t have to be boring.  Borrow some literary techniques and you might be surprised at how your content comes to life!

Following up a bit on yesterday’s post about following a calling, sometimes I wonder where the words come from.

This story helps to illustrate the point. At one point, a music journalist was interviewing a British rock star: I believe Mick Jagger or Keith Richards (both of The Rolling Stones) was being interviewed – we’ll assume it was Mick. The journalist asked Mick about songwriting. Pete Townsend, the guitarist and main songwriter for The Who, had talked about songwriting in interviews and said that his song lyrics came from divine inspiration. He felt that he was the conduit or channel by which some higher power was communicating.  The journalist asked Mich what he thought about this idea. Read the rest of this entry »

Just write.

Forget about how awful you think it will be.

Forget about how uncomfortable writing makes you feel.

Forget about who might read it.

Forget about worrying what to write.

Just write.  Let whatever comes out come out.

Editing can fix any mistake, omission, or suckage.

You need to write so it gets out.  Then, like Play Doh, you can mold it into the correct shape.  You can fix the problems.  You can even change it completely so that it’s not recognizable from its original form.

But you must write in order to get the idea out.  Nothing else can happen until you take that step.

It can be hard, but it’s worth pushing yourself a bit to do it.

Just write.

Here’s a little snippet of a project that I’m working on:

The Internet is like the world’s biggest amusement park. Amusement parks are full of attractions: rides, games, shows, and lots of people. Picture Walt Disney World for a moment. It has four major theme parks, a major shopping and entertainment area, and a number of hotels and resorts to stay in, plus many stores, rides, eateries, and other attractions.

Imagine one hundred million Disney Worlds and you start to get an appreciation of the size and complexity of the Internet. There is no way that you could visit one million Disney Worlds in one lifetime!

The Internet and the World Wide Web are a lot like one million Disney Worlds. There’s a staggering number of websites for you to explore, devoted to almost every topic imaginable. You can buy, sell, learn, or talk about almost anything on the Internet.

If you’d like to get a sneak preview of the entire document, you can either sign up for the Thought Radiation newsletter E-Mail list (email markdykeman at gmail dot com to register; no need to register again if you’ve already sent your information to me) or you can subscribe to this blog by E-Mail (E-Mail is the only way I’m distributing the sneak peak; ergo I need your E-Mail address).

I have a privacy policy in place if you’re worried about giving out your E-Mail, so please rest assured about that.

Between the green movement and the habits of the mobile computing device age, there’s a growing movement against the unnecessary use of paper.

Let’s state that a different way: more and more people think it’s evil to use paper documents.

Even though paper comes from a renewable resource, there are many downsides to the process of making paper, including pollution, clutter, and garbage.

When it comes to writing (and computing in general), more and more people are getting in the habit of doing everything on a computer screen: writing, editing, and reading.

As a member of Generation X, I spent many, many years both handwriting and using a typewriter to create documents. Every single assignment that I did in high school was done by hand. 90% of the assignments that I did in university were either done by hand or on an electric typewriter.

I use a heck of a lot of paper at work, too. I’m not proud of this, it’s just the habit that I’ve developed.

I’m trying to cut back on my use of paper, at least a little bit, but it’s not going away.

Here’s the thing: I do my best document editing on paper.

I’m doing a little experiment at the moment whereby I’m taking a blog post of about 800 words and I’m forcing myself to edit it. A lot. I have a goal of editing and proofing the post 15 times to see if I can really make something exceptional. I’ve even set up a separate blog to track the editing process, mainly for my own information, but I’ll link to it when this project is done for anyone who’s curious to see.

Here’s the thing that I’m noticing about the editing process: the more substantial, higher quality edits are occurring on paper.

• I can edit for spelling and grammar reasonably well on screen.
• I can rearrange sentences or phrases fairly well on screen, normally within the same paragraph.

BUT

• When it comes to analyzing a paragraph to determine whether it’s necessary
• When I need to determine if the paragraph as a whole makes sense
• When it comes to determining whether or not entire sections of a document flow well

I’m reliant on paper.

There’s something about being able to lay out the pages side by side that I’ve never been able (or interested) to do either efficiently or effectively onscreen.

My conclusion is that paper is still required to do effective editing. Even if some trees must die.

Now that I’ll be barred from ever joining the green movement, I’d like to hear your thoughts. Are you able to do 100% of your blog post or document editing (including BIG documents) on screen? If so, how the heck do you do it?!?

Image by nightthree

Writing continues to transform into a rapid-fire burst of characters that spew out without filters or second thoughts. Get it out, include a link or two and BAM! Your words are on the Web faster than a thundering Emeril (don’t click on this; it’s kind of dumb).

Is this the future of writing?

Fifteen bloody rewrites? Are you a loony?

One thing that stuck in my mind after listening to a recent John Cleese podcast was the idea of drafts or versions of a document. He mentioned doing fifteen (!) drafts on a script. The number of drafts that the episodes of Fawlty Towers that he and Connie Booth went through for each episode is legendary.

In all seriousness, can you ever imagine yourself writing FIFTEEN drafts of a document (unless, of course, you are a professional writer)?

Can you imagine washing your car fifteen times in a row? Making your bed?

Cooking a meal?

OK, bad examples, but do you know what I mean?

Professional writer AND blogger - contrast

Andrew Sullivan, author of The Daily Dish, is a prolific blogger who focuses on short, focused posts including links and quotes to other web pages. I don’t know how much time his average post takes to write, but it doesn’t seem that it would take a long time. These are likely one-draft posts. Blog and go. Apparently they are only 20 minutes apart at times.

By contrast, Sullivan recently provided a well-crafted and thoughtful article about why he blogs. How many drafts did it take him to write that, I wonder?

[Note: podcast with Andrew Sullivan discussing this article is here - MY POST CONTINUES AFTER THE VIDEO]

It takes a village of rewrites to grow a battlestar

Meanwhile, from the Colonial podcast zone, I get the impression that virtually every single episode of the new Battlestar Galactica went through no less than ten drafts, not including scads of minor changes that occurred during filming and editing. Granted, the process of developing screenplays is much, much different than standard documents, mainly because you have to deal with changes that occur when you finally see what your creation looks like in three dimensions.

But still. That is a whole lot of writing.

That’s too complicated for me to write - how about a blog post instead? OR A TXT MSG FTW!

QUESTION: if more and more people keep blogging short bursts of prose on a continual basis, are we gradually going to lose the ability to do the research, analysis, and deep thinking to write traditional long form prose?  [EDIT:  are we losing the knack for revising, proofing, and editing documents into world-class material?  Or are we dealing with a new generation of content creators who don't appreciate the need to EDIT?]

What do you think?

Between listening to Ronald D. Moore’s Battlestar Galactica podcasts and reading this very cool post by Merlin Mann about creative story arcs in content creation, I’ve really come to realize that I really like the idea of making stuff, particularly from a design, planning, and plotting level.

I wonder if there’s a job out there called content architect or content engineer?

I’ve tried writing both fiction and non-fiction. I think I have become a good non-fiction writer; don’t think I’m doing great, awesome or amazing stuff yet.

Writing fiction, good stories with strong characters, moving plots, and overall literary goodness… that’s a bigger challenge for me. And yet creating strong fiction seems like a much more satisfying goal to me. I think I’m in love with the idea of universe building.

How about you? Don’t you love a good story? Ever think about all of the background work that goes into it?

One of my pet projects that I had shelved for a long time was to develop a treatment for a science fiction TV series. It would be a remake of a 1970s show and, honestly, I’d be attempting to do something very similar to what Moore did by remaking Battlestar Galactica. That does worry me a bit because it would just be derivative, and wrong, to copy his formulas and methods too much.

I also have another idea for an original science fiction series. It’s languishing. But, to be fair, so are a number of my other creative ideas.

I read an interesting post at In the Mirror which asked the question: why do you write?

This is what I had to say in response:

The short answer is that I write because I have things to say to an audience.

The somewhat longer answer is that I write because I see it as a necessary step in my growth as a person. Writing is an exercise in self-actualization to me. I was a content consumer for most of my life and I’ve thought about it enough that I’m wanting to create my own. So I do. I also have a dream of being good enough at this and sufficiently networked to make this a much more significant part of my life, including making it a big part of my livelihood.

Plus it’s fun to make things.

So now you have my thoughts on this. How about you? Why do you create content, if you do? What is it that you’d like to create?

Like the title says, I’m now considered to be a Mashable.com Contributor. I’ve been writing a few posts there during the past couple of months and I guess I passed the audition.

Thanks to Adam Ostrow for giving me a chance and Pete Cashmore for blazing the trail.

Don’t worry: Broadcasting Brain is here to stay and will continue to go on strong!