Project(s) Update: Learning About Appreciation and Kindness

Jump to LINKS OF NOTE

I like the idea of a weekly update for my project(s) on The Lextopia.

I put parenthesis around the the ‘s’ because my “bachelor project” has played the part of an organizing principle for my behavior, beliefs, and action in the world. Many in my life probably think that approach to the “bachelor project” doesn’t help me. Not finishing the project gets in the way of me getting my bachelors degree, which gets in the way of my progressing career-wise and in societal symbols of maturity.

To that, I say that I actually have a fair amount of personal growth to do for maturity, which includes learning who I am, the details of my beliefs (I have this ingrained issue with ‘doing good for the sake of doing good’), accepting them, then figuring out how to execute them in the world. I’ll admit, I could choose a more luxurious way to progress through the world. Also, I have a privileged history and background that allows me this approach.

Taking everything into account, though, my current path has more benefit than cost overall. Also, my internal error checker, conscience, ruminating dialogue, obsessive sense of integrity won’t leave me alone about THIS topic and doing so on a level of perfectionism. Adopting verbiage from Design Thinking, I’m accepting that the drive to resolve my project(s) on these terms as fact, not a problem.

Strangely enough, my current branching stream of consciousness and research hopefully has a twin benefit:

• Providing a major premise for my project, one that has been bothering me for the last 16+ years, as in, I’ve believed it but didn’t know how to discuss it
• Understanding this premise should me calm down my perfectionist tendencies

Before getting deeper into that, though, quick concrete update (from a Facebook post): 4 months of writing semi-regularly 10-20 minutes before work yields "21" pages of handwritten 4th chapter. Working on 4th 1st draft rewrite [of novel]. Add on for now: I’ve transcribed a couple pages during the same morning 10-20 minutes. Enjoying this re-read. I like handwriting on super rough draft then transcribing onto the computer. It provides an enjoyable experience, allows me to note to self ideas to integrate and take, and gives me the chance to do mini-tweaks as I do a run through.

Also, I’ve re-visited the idea of releasing the novel as some type of income creating serial. I don’t think I have enough confidence in myself to release it in parts, though. I’ve done so many changes based on what to expect down the road after reaching that point, world building could get weird as I change things after learning more about the world, and I’m just uncomfortable setting things into stone earlier in the story then blocking going where I had originally planned later in the story (instead of weighing the issues on both ends).

Another way to put it: I don’t have my techniques and tricks down enough to plan ahead for details. I figure completing a novel or more and getting them published will help me get the down while also building confidence.

And some progress on the essay/intellectual basis of the project on utopianism, which brings us back to my current stream of consciousness and research this week. The last few months, I moved from trying to understand how shame contributes a lot to antisocial behavior to how compassion contributes to pro-social behavior and psychological health. Apparently, per Paul Gilbert Ph.D’s introduction in The Compassionate Mind: A New Approach to Life’s Challenges, researchers often take this path from shame to compassion.

This book has provided me a great resource for both my project and personal development. It has done a lot for helping me understand the phrase “Be kind [or compassionate] to yourself.” I don’t treat myself bad as in insulting myself, saying that I’m worthless, or anything like that. Rather, I’m hard on myself for not accomplishing the things I want to do or feeling satisfied with my “progress” in my life. Seeing the mounds to do on my task lists doesn’t help, either (both personal, household, and professionally). Thrown on knowing that I need connection and a social life, too! And also feeling the compulsion for social and political activism. . .Being a perfectionist is hard and tiring!

Installing ruminations of “Be kind to yourself” into the brain helps. Seeing it bout it out and infect perfectionism has its comedy value, too. Perfectionism goes into so many loops when it tries to perfect taking it easy and chilling out.

Seeing the personal benefits of compassion, both pointed inward and outward, has made me more comfortable with my argument that compassion/kindness should make for an indisputable argument for a rational person. How to properly apply that compassion outwardly, however, tripped me up. Another Facebook post of mine this week sent me down this road:

Couple years ago, read article with gay man saying that he didn't want just tolerance, he wanted [appreciation]. [Inspiring] sentiment.

These words fall into line with a conclusion from one of my project essays that gives me a lot of pride compared to the other essays I’ve written so far. It also falls in with psychological theory from Rollo May and a lot of discussion out there about “hard working rural white voters” and radicalization of people.

The quote and my conclusion in that essay doesn’t feel complete. They feel problematic, actually. For one, the actions taken by radicalized people because they aren’t receiving appreciation goes to far. Then, sourced in my universal acceptance/belief that appreciation is every human’s need, it’s hard to argue against privileged people fighting to keep their privilege and marginalized people fighting to get appreciation, too. Does the drive to receive a pro-social action need to lead to antisocialness, anger, violence, and other horrible things, both for those receiving an abundance of it and those with a dearth of it? Based on that, we’re in a Hobbesian State of Nature.

Then throw on there the sincerity aspect of throwing appreciation and kindness everywhere. I’ve discovered that I have a hangup about receiving personal benefit of showing kindness to the world. I have something of a martyr complex about it. It kind of goes along with the age old criticism I have with believing in God and accepting Jesus because you will go to Heaven. Is someone believing and accepting because they want to get into Heaven or do they REALLY believe and accept God and Jesus because of what they stand for?

So I’m in the middle of the sincerity of appreciation stream of consciousness. Is someone just engaging in appreciating things for their own benefit or because they REALLY appreciate something. Should someone fake until they make it? What if it’s something that really shouldn’t be appreciated, like killing and other horrible things? What if it’s something that doesn’t spark interest? What if someone doesn’t have an interest in appreciating something other than to make the world a better place, whether for themselves or some martyr reason? Can appreciation become disrespectful and fetishizing? What if someone has been taught that a perfectly harmless thing is horrible? Or what if something really does have conflicting good and bad values one way or the other? What if being kind and appreciative sacrifices your identity, integrity, and body? When is that OK? And is it OK to enjoy being kind and appreciative? Can someone lose the privilege of receiving appreciation and kindness or does being a unique combination of space, time, and biology enough to receive kindness and appreciation?

So yeah, that’s where I am with my internal dialogue, views on social justice, and my project(s).

Jump to Top

LINKS OF NOTE:

• Design Thinking
• Paul Gilbert Ph.D
• The Compassionate Mind: A New Approach to Life’s Challenges
• Rollo May
• Thomas Hobbes
• State of Nature

Increasing Creativity Part 2: Compounding Sources

SECTION JUMPS:

I. CURRENT TECH BLOCKING CREATIVE CONTENT DEPOSITS INTO MY MIND
II. NOTICED REDUCTION IN CREATIVE PRODUCTIVITY
III. INCREASED UNPUBLISHED CREATIVE CONTENT UNQUANTIFIED BY BLOG POST TABLE
IV. ANALYSIS SHOWS: CONTENT CREATION REMAINS STEADY, THE TYPE AND PUBLIC ACCESS TO IT CHANGES
V. RELATING CONSUMING/PRODUCING CONTENT TO COMPOUNDING CONTENT
VI. LINKS OF NOTE

The last entry established a groundwork by explaining compound interest. This entry will start porting compounding conceptually for increasing creativity.

The short quick answer: Our minds can work like an interest-bearing bank account. Instead of increasing the balance of monetary value, our minds can increase the balance of creative content.

The mind should probably be looked more like an income stock that can go up and down in value day-to-day but still pays dividends and capital gains. The vagaries and demands of life and near-certain biological degredation of the body causes this additional nuance.

Understanding doesn't always come with short answers. Read further for elaboration.

Return to beginning

CURRENT TECH BLOCKING CREATIVE CONTENT DEPOSITS INTO MY MIND

My access to other blogs has become problematic. I like reading them on my mobile devices: 2+ year old LG Android and first generation iPad. I use the Feedly app, on the mobile devices and on my laptop.

Blog reading works fine on the laptop. I have no complaints about the technology. My issue revolves around my attitude problem. I don't care for consuming content on the laptop, except for background media like music. Laptops and desktops should focus on producing and developing content. I feel lazy and passive consuming content on these devices.

The Android works fine, but the small screen makes reading difficult and it gets slow. I get impatient. My eyes and brain strain focusing on such a small device and scrolling so often.

The iPad has the best dimensions and user interface for reading blogs via Feedly. I don't have to scroll much. When I do, I simply flick the wrist.

First generation iPads have become overweight paperweights, though. Apple no longer supports them or provides OS updates. An OS update would likely cause more problems. The first generation iPad doesn't have enough memory. To make things even worse, it can't handle the methods new apps use to manage memory.

My iPad has the habit of closing apps with little notice. OK, maybe some notice. It stops doing anything onscreen for a few seconds then closes. Using the browser or anything with major graphics for awhile likely triggers this reaction. Even without some kind of obvious trigger, music stops and an app will close after extended use. Music has also taken to skipping like a scratched CD Without clicking.

Webpages with lots of ads and sophisticated coding makes text flash in and out multiple times before stabilizing. Many times this indicates a trigger that an app will shut down. Even if it stablizes, it gets annoying.

I want fast action on my mobile device, consuming content, especially articles. I could get information faster from a newspaper or book.

My mobile tech has become obsolete. It happens. I've come up with an affordable solution: buy a high-end big-screen mobile phone. It provides the benefits of:

• Having just one device and provider
• Continued unlimited data
• Decreased costs
• Added network access flexibility

Hopefully it will last and provide me with ease of use.

Return to beginning

NOTICED REDUCTION IN CREATIVE PRODUCTIVITY

I inarticulately addressed this topic previously a little more than eight years ago. I ruminated about feeling disconnected from the world since I had no Internet. You can read it by clicking here.

It has more of an emotional philosophical tone to it. This time, creative content development is king.

I develop more creatieve content when I maximize my creative, information or news content consumption. Since my mobile content consumption has slowed down, I've noticed a reduction in generation and publishing of my own creative content.

My RSS feed reading and resolution to post more creative content and more regularly started around January 2013. The table below shows the trend of my blog posting for the months between January and June for the years 2013 and 2014. I include this entry on the table.

Month	2013	2014
January	4	1
February	0	2
March	2	1
April	2	0
May	3	3
June	3	1
Total	14	8

Other than creative, information and news content consumption reduction, these explanations could also apply:

Increased hours at work from January to market and verify delivery of health insurance policies after retail market purchases during the first Affordable Care Act retail Open Enrollment and launching of healthare.gov could have played a part. This issue spanned from January to April. Entries posted during this time span was 8 in 2013 (not ACA affected) and 4 in 2014. That matches the overall trend.

The decline trend also remains relatively consistent for the months of May and June. 6 in 2013, 4 in 2014. I have a hard time correlating the decline with the Affordable Care Act. Besides, I did most of my creative, information and news content reading during private times that polite company doesn't discuss. That activity has remained consistent.

I have taken on more DIY projects and chores at home. I have increased the steps/procedures for my dental hygiene. Both of these increases add to reproductive chore time and take away from leisure/production time. I can't dispute the contribution this factor has played into reducing time to write creative content.

Even while engaging in reproductive activities, though, I often ruminate on concepts, information and ideas. I do it without trying. My brain does it to stay occupied while doing an activity that requires little attention. The little monkey in my brain doesn't stop.

Personal issues also go through my mind during such ruminations, too. I observed a lower frequency of those during this span of time in 2014.

Reduction in cognitive and time resources, in general, have probably played a marked influence on my reduction in creative content creation. Above has already addressed time issues.

Riding in temperatures down to -20 degrees Fahrenheit created by the weakened polar vortex in very constricting layers took its toll. I'm still traumatized and expect sudden downturns at any time. The emotional toll of trauma, no matter the absence or presence of evil, has its costs.

Teaching and selling a product and system while learning it thoroughly at the same time makes for a rough time. Add onto that managing time to make sure money gets made rather than just tutoring people. Frustrated people facing much increased costs and getting marginalized by not-fully-thought through requirements weighs down the emotions. Such a cognitive load will take away resources from creative content creation.

May remained steady between the two years, which supports the Affordable Care Act hypothesis and weakens the cognitive load argument.

June makes the Affordable Care Act hypothesis less strong but strengthens the cognitive load argument. I have had a hard time with time management lately. So many things to do and so many people to see. I'm back to fighting for my time again.

Return to beginning

INCREASED UNPUBLISHED CREATIVE CONTENT UNQUANTIFIED BY BLOG POST TABLE

I rediscovered Rollo May. More apt, I found his work discussing how much significance and meaning has to do with people's happiness and well being. These works also had less talk about love. May's writing about love felt a little too wishy washy and mystical for my tastes.

May's writing about significance and meaning had so much to do with my project that I found myself inspired. I had to get another book of his about about violence. It focuses more on how lack of inherent significance and meaning can lead to violence and/or an ideology of violence. These days with terrorism, shootings at schools, violence against the marginalized and many stories hitting the news, May's writing doesn't just ring true for my project. It also has relevance to the contemporary human condition.

I've also rediscovered and started reading Dr. Chris Ferns' Narrating Utopia: Ideology, Gender, Form in Utopian Literature. I had bought it years and years ago in my spate of getting as many sources on utopianism as I could, looking for a definition or characterization that I could use.

Narrating Utopia helped me dig deep to discover/remember the purpose for my project and led me to rediscover Rollo May. In addition, I have a better understanding why The Project consumes me. Suffice to say, it remains a core process I started as a teenager to find my identity then move onto my next step. I like to think of it as a meta-project. I study how other people have defined significance/meaning and try to create an ideal humman and society based on that definition. I want to help society and me to better find significance/meaning and fill life with it.

I started The Project years and years ago without knowing why and forget it every once in awhile. At least I tell myself that. Seriously, I should just read the beginning of one character's journey in my novel's first draft. He practically says word-for-word my question and goal.

The fact that I wrote the last four paragraphs with little effort and could write plenty easily goes back to this post's argument. Instead of working against the argument, it supports it. Yes, I haven't written many blog posts in June. Instead I've redirected my attention toward a project that I've had at the center of my teenage and adult life. The quantification of blog posts written does not contain all of my content creation.

I have produced content, just not for public consumption at this point in time.

Return to beginning

ANALYSIS SHOWS: CONTENT CREATION REMAINS STEADY, THE TYPE AND PUBLIC ACCESS TO IT CHANGES

Consuming content inspires more content. The more content taken in will lead to more content going out. Nuance brought about by analysis: the type of content coming in influences the content going out.

I started writing this post thinking that content only included creative, information or news. Like astrophysicists talking about information and black holes, I find myself broadening the definition of content to also include:

• Physical things
• Abstract objects/products (insurance really comes down to being a promise with rules as to when it applies and how it gets delivered)
• Emotions
• relationships between people

The list probably goes into infinity.

Production of content for my blog has gone down as my consumption of other inspiring blogs has gone down. During the first quarter of the year, insurance, Affordable Care Act and business content consumption increased. My output in these categories increased during that time.

DIY reproduction chore content has increased. Since it has the function of reproduction, it consumes and produces at the same time. I have little choice whether to deal with it or not. It generally must be addressed.

Reproductive content generally acts more as a time consumer. Unfortunately, time isn't content, it stores content. Like any storage device, time is limited. Unlike a storage device, we can't replace time or our allotment of it. At least not yet.

Other than reproductive content (notice that who does reproductive labor often becomes a contentious issue), the form of content generates more of that form of content. Doing reproductive content hopefully reduces it. In a sense, efficient reproductive content helps to produce future free time, or more philosophically, event-oriented content storage.

We absorb ourselves into content. Our minds ruminate over new content to adjust our concept of the world and universe. We are what we eat. Even food can be categorized as content, but probably more along the reproductive line of content. Whether we remain conscious or unconscious about our content consumption and production, the more we take in, the more we digest, the more we produce.

Return to beginning

RELATING CONSUMING/PRODUCING CONTENT TO COMPOUNDING CONTENT

This process acts as a form of compounding. Like I said in the beginning, though, our biological and social conditions make the quantity and value of our content more variable, unlike an interest-bearing bank account where the value of principal remains the same.

We can become damaged and we degrade. Content gets destroyed. Our productivity processing content, in and out, degrades. Thankfully the human race has developed technologies that can immortalize intellectual and certain experiential content.

Society and history, in a sense, can act as a mind that does the same as our own minds through material and social technology. The types of content we spread around, the more that the rest of society generates, good and bad.

Technology in the form of writing and other content form factors allow us to transcend time with our content. Neil deGrasse Tyson discussed immortality granted to us by writing in an episode of Cosmos. Tyson stresses the fact that our future generations can judge us as good or evil by our content, and we won't be around to defend ourselves.

Technology and our impact on society and other people allows our content to travel in time to the future while those in the future can connect with the past. Society then can process our content like our present day society processes it, whether to stop it or let it compound to produce more.

People and societies will determine the content's value in the marketplace of ideas like Wall Street determines the cost of stocks. Our content enters a marketplace of content, either to continue compounding in other organisms if found valuable or to possibly go extinct from lack of interest.

We consume and produce content everyday, whether conscious or unconscious of

• Doing it in the first place
• How we're doing it
• What kind to focus on

We can choose the focus and quantity of what kind we produce by choosing the kind and quantity we consume. The value of the content is up to the consumer. Content acts as the medium we use to interact with the world and leave our impact.

Manipulate it often and well to maximize your interaction in a way you want. On the one hand, what do you want take away from the world? On the other, how do you want to be remembered by the world? Who knows where it all leads?

I know we can control our content output by controlling our input, though. We have a powerful tool available to us here. I have some ideas how to use it. How do you want to use it?

Return to beginning

LINKS OF NOTE:

• The Lextopia: Increasing Creativity Part 1: Compound Interest
• Feedly: RSS Reader
• The Lextopia: Another Day
• RSS: Rich Site Summary
• first Affordable Care Act retail Open Enrollment
• healthare.gov
• DIY
• Role of weakened polar vortex in North American Cold Wave of 2013-14
• Rollo May
• Dr. Chris Ferns
• Narrating Utopia: Ideology, Gender, Form in Utopian Literature
• utopianism
• existential significance/meaning
• information and black holes
• world view
• Neil deGrasse Tyson
• Yahoo News: Neil deGrasse Tyson Asks Us to Think About the Future in This Week's 'Cosmos'
• Cosmos

Return to beginning

C2E2: Part 1 of My Response, including a John Scalzi panel and the changing forms science fiction media

My response has turned out longer than expected. I’ve broken it up into a couple entries. More will come after this one.

C2E2 ranks up there as one of the most strenuous activities I do in the year. Sounds sad, but really, stumbling around for 24+ hours in a weekend, trying to avoid people and trampling them, gets taxing for mind and body.

Didn't help that allergies muddled my mind, either. Social and cognitive activity didn't work well. This response won't have much for concrete events. I will focus more on my reactions and thoughts that bubbled up in the process.

This attendance makes for my third trip to the Chicago Comics & Entertainment Expo (C2E2). It has occurred four times in the last four years. We skipped the second one when I vacationed in Costa Rica. A tough decision, seriously, but glad I went to Costa Rica.

C2E2 has provided a great experience every year. Any general complaints I may have come from me not falling into the primary demographic. I don't get into merchandise much, don't read too many comics and don't connect so much with visual art. By nature, I don't get into permanent, materialistic things or visual mediums. Comics, I admit some prejudice in my youth and haven't found time since to explore them.

The stands had A LOT of Doctor Who merch, though. I mean, A LOT, as in about a football field’s worth of stands. Talk about oversaturation of a market. I wonder how much individual stands sold. Many other stands had a lot of similar stuff. Does the market really have that level of demand?

This remark comes from half of a couple that purchased sandblasted steins with a Dalek and a Cyberman on them. They came from a stand that had a wide variety of geek graphicked steins and mugs, though. I’m also the type of guy who spend hours at a time researching Doctor Who canon for no good reason.

My interest lies more in tabletop board and role playing gaming, TV, cultural production and literature. I find myself lacking in the latter category, even. I have more familiarity with the "golden age" of science fiction than any other. These other categories have their own cons. I should go to one of those.

I could have also partook in the gaming room run by the Chicago Game Lovers. With so much to do and people to see at C2E2, though, breaking from the familiar didn't feel appealing. Getting involved in a game then having to run off to get in a line for a panel didn't strike me as fun.

C2E2 organizers did a great job with the floor this year. They got the most gigantic room yet. A lot more stands could squeeze in. Having the dungeon bathrooms in the middle proved a godsend (especially since no one else found them, no line!). Artist alley didn't get squeezed all the way in the back, even though I didn't find it until the next day (again, gigantic!).

The floor felt well organized. Stands settled into themed neighborhoods (e.g. merchandise, comics, Artist Alley, celebrities, etc.). If managed my time better, it would have been perfect.

I only found one game stand: Chicagoland Games/The Dice Dojo. If there were more, I blame myself. I didn't have the clarity of mind to take in everything and manage my time better. Like with the gaming room, though, getting in line for the panels proved a pesky detriment.

Organization of the panels makes for the biggest shortcoming this year. Michi cited a statistic that the panel audience this year equaled the people roaming the floor. (Michi - formerly, The_Wife. . .now won't hesitate to use her name since her name has become something of brand.) Panels have elevated C2E2 above other fan/comic/pop culture conventions I've attended. This statistic goes to show that other fans have a similar opinion, if not the same.

I made the misfounded complaint that few of the panels looked interesting. Looking at the schedule now, it overwhelmed me while at the convention. This year I didn't prep by studying the schedule beforehand or use my computer to schedule and decide between conflicts. Fault on me there.

At worst, few of the panel titles jumped out at me and the schedule grid just had so much on it. I don't know how much of that has to do with me failing to prep before going. Having so many panels shows their success.

Titles failing to grab attention could contribute to making things look a little bland. At the same time, I'm not the prime demographic for these cons (even though past years had panel names that stood out). Maybe their titles attracted the attention of other people attending.

Long lines and small rooms for panels made for big disruption. I already mentioned that I didn’t partake in some activities because I didn’t want them disrupted by having to run for a panel.

The first year of C2E2, nothing to worry about rooms filling up or long lines. I had faced more trouble finding panel rooms in the labyrinth of McCormick Place. Getting in and finding a good seat had proven little difficulty.

Michi and some others tried to get into the Fierce Females of Television panel without luck. They got in line too late. Apparently the organizers had divided rooms in half for most panels. Doing so helps provide many panels and a variety of topics. Having to turn people away at the door or disrupting other activities sucks, though. Talk about huge opportunity cost to sit in on a panel.

Of course, C2E2 is still young and learning. I have to give them credit for trying to increase the variety of panel topics. I also think the increased industry and celebrity presence caused disruption. Typically those panels should get prime attention since they draw people to the con.

Panels with less assumed drawing power in the past have done a lot to build the C2E2’s reputation for great panels and contributed much to this year’s equal attendance for panels and floor. A difficult balance to strike, but I think giving more credence to topic-oriented and less-assumed audience drawing can go a long way.

Less panels with bigger rooms also might help. After all, anything that doesn’t make the schedule can get scheduled for the following year.

Has it become obvious that I didn't attend too many panels. I only went to three:

• FUTURISTIC FRIGHT: Science-Fiction Novelists Imagine Far-Future World with John Scalzi and Alex Hughes
• Peter Davison's Q&A
• Exorcising the Spectre of the Fake Geek Girl: Discussing Geek Culture, Gate-Keeping and Sexism> with Michi Trota, Karlyn Meyer, Laura Koroski, Dawn Xiana Moon, Erin Tipton, (absent because of scheduling conflict: Jen Dollface) and moderator, Carlye Frank - sponsored by the Chicago Nerd Social Club

I had some personal connection or interest in them all:

• FUTURISTIC FRIGHT, I read John Scalzi's blog on a regular basis
• Peter Davison portrays my Classic Doctor Who
• Exorcising the Spectre of the Fake Geek Girl, Michi put it together

FUTURISTIC FRIGHT PANEL

For FUTURISTIC FRIGHT, John Scalzi and Alex Hughes had a fairly free form discussion about

• Imagining the future
• Their own imaginings and story ideas
• Navigating the publishing industry to market their imaginations
• Some of the parodies we all make about
  
  • Red Shirts of a landing crew
  • Reversing polarities to save the day
  • Varied reactions to Tolkien’s writing (or dramatizing his world building)

A moderator helped to start the conversations by asking some questions. Scalzi, Hughes and the moderator all had good presence. They had a pretty good rapport with audience. I don't have the best recall of topics other than ideas and the development of technology make for an interesting interaction.

I regret that I don’t remember much about Alex Hughes. She made a great remark, though, about how to deal with an author having an idea that scientists and engineers are developing. Make your story better than reality, she said.

Michi bought Hughes’s first book, Clean. Michi liked it a lot and plans on reading the sequels. I plan on giving it a shot, too. Being the first time I heard of Hughes, my brain hadn’t calibrated that much for emotional investment at the panel.

Scalzi provided a lecture on the evolution of the form taken by science fiction media. In the beginning, science fiction came as small pulp magazines in the supermarket.

The industry somewhere along the line decided to consolidate the wholesale distribution channel from a lot down to two or three. Book stores came into the picture, especially big stores like Barnes & Noble. They asked for science fiction to come in the form of a book with page counts between 120 to 300 or so as we have become used to.

Now we find ourselves in the electronic Internet age. Many other medias have gone through chaos: music, movie and TV. The story of Internet music distribution has all but been finished by the acceptance of iTunes and other means. We see the stories of movie and TV unfolding in the news every day with Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Prime, Youtube and Bit Torrent.

The evolution of electronic distributing stories, fiction and poetry doesn't make it into the news that much, though. Scalzi has jumped to the front of experimenting with this realm. He wrote The Human Division. It’s a series of related but not directly connected episodes all released separately, about a week apart from each other. TOR will collect it into an individual volume and release it soon.

Episodic short-form fiction makes or an expensive undertaking in the time of paper. Especially if the industry pushes to have it in book form of 120 to 300 pages. Episodic short-form issued electronically makes for a less expensive of an undertaking.

I bet this approach has other advantages, too. I can't think of it all. Releasing something new on a regular, shorter basis keeps a brand on the mind of consumers. Infrequent releases of something longer form may not stay in the public’s mind as long. In this day and age when there's so much going on, publishing something often like The Human Division will keep Scalzi on peoples' radars.

I have no illusions that one paradigm is better than another, just better suited for a situation. History and anthropology show us that humanity organizes technology to adapt to their environments, whether that be natural or socially human created. Human adaptation creates feedback loops that have gotten us where we are now and will get us to where we go in the future.

I respect Scalzi and everyone else who can keep up with all this change. Albeit they have more of an immediate necessity than I do at the moment. They get their everyday livelihood by keeping abreast of these things and staying ahead of everyone else.

My fear comes from feeling behind. Right now, I'm just working on developing material to market and distribute. Whereas Scalzi and others have an interesting interplay of how their ideas interact with distribution. . .I'm somewhat stuck in an old paradigm, the novel. I'm hoping to make enough of a splash with a novel that I can write another one because people want another one.

It's great to see people thriving in this environment and willing to share their knowledge about it. Despite all that, it's kinda scary and intimidating to a beginner. I just hope to figure out how to navigate all this someday. . ..

More forthcoming. . ..

LINKS OF INTEREST:

• C2E2
• Doctor Who
• Dalek
• Cyberman
• Chicago Game Lovers
• The Geek Melange: Michi Trota’s blog
• McCormick Place
• Whatever: John Scalzi’s blog
• Alex Hughes
• >Peter Davison's
• Challenge by Geek: Laura Koroski’s blog
• Dawn Xiana Moon
• Jen Dollface
• Chicago Nerd Social Club
• Red Shirts
• Tolkien’s
• J.R.R. Tolkien
• Clean
• Barnes & Noble
• iTunes
• Netflix
• Hulu
• Amazon Prime
• Youtube
• Bit Torrent
• The Human Division
• TOR

No Matter Which Hobbit It Is, It's Still Tolkien's Hobbit

A little more than a week ago, I read the Huffington Post article, "Dislike Peter Jackson's The Hobbit? Then You Don't Know Tolkien" by Seth Abramson. I agree with Abramson, but I also don't think he fully appreciates the history behind The Hobbit, as we know it today. If he did, I don't think he'd have as much trouble with the Tolkien philistine critics out there.

It took Abramson's article for me to reach this conclusion. Like him and many others out there, I think Peter Jackson could have cut a bit and emphasized different aspects of the film to make a more enjoyable viewing experience. I won't get too deep into the actual film or its narrative, though. I had fun watching it and don't have strong enough feelings to criticize the film itself.

I won't get all that deep into the technological aspects of the frame speed, 3D vs 2D or anything like that. I saw the 24 frames per second (fps) in 3D version. It looked fine with only one or two things that took me out of the action and drama but nothing that stands out too much. I haven't seen any of it in 48 fps. I'm curious to do so some day, though, just to see what all the fuss is about.

Something else has struck my interest more than these two aspects: the arguments over Jackson's loyalty to the original books. Many people have criticized him for stretching it out to three films when the source material is one book (a lot of that argument seems to revolve around Jackson and/or the film company being greedy and cynical). They also argue that The Hobbit, or There and Back Again, was a simple, fun adventure romp, not some kind of epic quest to save the world. Where would the material come from to fill all that extra time?

Abramson and others, on the other hand, point out that these critics who just want a simple adventure romp have it wrong. They fail to know or understand that Tolkien left behind plenty of source material in the appendices at the end of The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King. I read the appendices once, maybe twice, and some other pieces of work that had tons of information about larger events and people that happened concurrently and led up to The War of the Ring.

In my view, both sides of have it right. I see only one part where both sides are wrong: saying that the other side is wrong, they don't understand and that there is a right or wrong answer. I take this approach because at one time or another, Tolkien had imagined The Hobbit in so many different ways on his own, as a standalone story, as something of a prelude to The Lord of the Rings and as probably everything else inbetween.

Tolkien originally came up with The Hobbit as a way to entertain his children or his children or grandchildren (I think he notes this point as in introduction to an edition of The Hobbit, or There and Back Again). Even the first edition published didn't have the One Ring in it. It was just a magical ring of invisibility. Also, Gollum willingly bet it in the game of riddles.

I haven't read the older editions. I don't have any further details of changes from earlier editions to more current ones. Nonetheless, it still stands: the earlier editions of The Hobbit, or There and Back Again was a standalone, not a planned prequel to the Lord of the Rings.

Later, down the road, though, The Hobbit, or There and Back Again did become a prequel. Tolkien kept updating new editions as they got released to make the stories consistent. As mentioned before, he also wrote material that he put in the appendices at the end of The Return of the King.

Tokien had also written a story called "The Quest of Erebor". Based on the link, Tolkien originally wanted to include it in the appendices of The Return of the King. He ended up not putting it in, though, to save space. This story fills the gaps in how Gandalf and Thorin put together their scheme, why they included Bilbo and other such topics not addressed in The Hobbit, or There and Back Again.

Peter Jackson just conflates all these different sources into a series of movies. The people criticizing Jackson for creating new plot points or anything like that just to fill time don't have the most solid ground to stand on. From my understanding, Jackson does do it a little by giving the orcs in The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey a motivation rather than just random encounters met by the dwarves. I haven't read The Hobbit, or There and Back Again in awhile, but my instincts tell me that characters with motivations lead to a more absorbing story rather than not.

Abramson makes a valid point that these "haters" probably don't know Tolkien. I think he misses the point, though, that the movie the "haters" wanted would have been just as valid of a movie of The Hobbit: There and Back Again as the one Peter Jackson has and will make. Simply put: every version that a faction argues is the real version is a real version. Tolkien wrote most, if not all, the source material that Jackson is pulling from.

I, personally, enjoy that an argument such as this one can be made. Part of me wishes that the copyright had expired and anyone who wants could take and retool the story without needing any special rights or permissions. Tolkien had done a fun job of creating something of an artificial verbal history of Middle Earth as he had come up with new stories and worked to make them all consistent with each other, altering and developing the canon to make it richer each and every time.

Will the stories of Middle Earth become legend and myth for future civilizations as our current one falls or fades away? Will Middle Earth be like the myths we tell of Greek gods and goddesses, Persian gods and goddesses, Gilgamesh and Enkidu and all the rest of the stories that we have from our ancient history? I wish I had a time machine or the ability to observe some future time to see if this potentiality becomes actuality.

Just imagine the stories that would come about through errors in translation! Imagine all the different stories that could be developed for futue generations through the innovations of non-Tolkien writers! It would make an interesting sight to see, that's for sure.

LINKS OF NOTE:

• "Dislike Peter Jackson's The Hobbit? Then You Don't Know Tolkien"
• Seth Abramson
• Tolkien
• Peter Jackson
• From Forbes: "Why Are So Many People Against The Hobbit Being Shown in 48 FPS?
• The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
• The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King
• The War of the Ring
• The Hobbit, or There and Back Again
• One Ring
• Gollum
• "The Quest of Erebor"
• Gandalf
• Thorin Oakenshield II
• Bilbo
• The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
• Middle Earth

Tips for Developing Story from Nothing

I gave the following tips to a friend for starting development on a story from nothing:

1. Try to relax for idea generation and let the ideas bubble up
2. Put yourself in a different environment for idea generation, make yourself uncomfortable and accept the anxiety. Make the anxiety part of you as natural part of the process (getting up in the morning and working first thing helps me – have to push past drowsiness, but I think my mind also comes up with connections and ideas I wouldn’t come up with when fully awake)
3. All ideas are valid for this part of the process. It’s not time for critical thinking. You can get critical later
4. Look at it like a school assignment or a job:
   
   1. give yourself a deadline
   2. give yourself a quota of how many ideas you need to come up with
   3. Allot a certain amount of time that you need to work on it and WORK ON IT
5. Don’t censor yourself: think it, write it down on your brainstorming sheet or word processor

Right now, it’s about quantity, not quality. Just get any idea down on paper or the computer screen. You can make it better later. What’s the saying out there? 10%-20% is the writing, 80%-90% is revising. And to become professional, there’s probably some amount that goes into networking and marketing.

Speculation or Reasonably Logical Connection?

Considering my bad time management and difficulty prioritizing over the last year or so, I think I've made some good progress on my bachelor's project. I've done more research than needed for the level of academic rigor required. With some good advice from a past teacher, I’ve started an early morning writing habit. Work is getting done.

Before this point, I had focused on developing my thoughts and molding the source material into usable form. Trouble now arises when I try to fill conceptual empty spaces between facts and coherent, cohesive conclusions. Each time I make this kind of attempt, I ask whether the new premise comes from utter speculation or whether I've made a reasonably, logical connection.

I don't know of any hard and fast rule for making this determination. In the past, I would research my ass off to find answers. I would follow three directions for my research:

1. Primary and secondary sources directly addressing the historical events and people
2. Materials regarding the phenomena at hand (ie utopianism)
3. From Wikipedia to anywhere on the Internet to the physical library, whatever topic came to mind:
   
   • Social psychology
   • Cognitive science
   • Social/moral/political philosophy
   • Sociology
   • Anthropology
   • Economics
   • Cultural studies
   • Religion
   • Spirituality
   • Literary criticism
   • Literary theory
   • and the list goes on and on ad infinitum

I got some mileage through this approach. However, it got exhausting and results entered diminishing returns, probably about a year ago.

At the point of diminishing returns, I get less out of research the more work I put into it. It takes time to develop ideas and grind out demonstrable work, even if just brainstorming or drafting. Just sitting down at my creative desk with pen and paper at this point would more than likely just frustrate and throw me into a dead end.

At my day job, I have a good opportunity to let my brain free reign to ruminate and develop ideas to say sane. Otherwise I'd just focus on angsty, personal unproductive thoughts.

Brainstorming ideas is fun. My brain, at least, has an excellent talent for it. A lot of great results come from my brainstorming, and much of it has potential, too. These prospects get even better when they have a sound basis.

The problem arrives at this point:

• Are the ideas I'm coming up with pure speculation or a reasonably logical connection?
• Am I pulling an idea out of my ass that just sounds good or would be fun to write about?
• Does my idea have grounding in history and theory, or am I just enamored with a theory that I want to force onto history?
• Am I just using the first idea that comes to mind, or do I have an idea that will stand some test of academic rigor?
• How do you test the academic rigor of these kinds of ideas?

For now, I'm testing these types of ideas by asking

1. Is the idea simple and elegant, does it beg the minimum number of questions compared to other ideas and
   
2. Does the idea lend coherence and cohesiveness to the larger argument and project?

This approach serves my purposes for now. Is it something that can serve your purpose or do have your own approach?

Finding Out I was Trying to Re-Invent the Wheel with My Research

Last night I bought a book for my bachelors project. Nothing too exciting in that statement. In many ways, though, this new book acts as a continuation on a book I bought and read more than ten years ago.

The authors of the new book don't say as much. They say that they're exploring territory that the first book and other books in the field didn't look at. The general field I'm trying to use, the sociology of knowledge, has something to do with my project.

The main thrust of the first book doesn't go in the direction that I need or my project, though. I think the direction of the second book will go where I need to go. Just from the preface, I feel like I'm going to learn the language and vocabulary that I need to talk about my project.

Researching without an instructor or having proficiency in research techniques causes this type of problem. Without either of these types of guidance, learning or coming up with a theory almost turns into re-inventing the wheel. Adult working has taught me that this approach wastes valuable time.

A Java programming book I read introduced the concept to me, but I was too naive at the time to understand. Apparently programmers like to share templates for menial subroutines. Much faster to copy and paste a simple template then move onto doing something more creative and higher level. It's out there. Why waste time re-inventing the wheel?

I have yet to start reading the main body of this new book. I just read the Introduction and Preface. It has gotten me excited so far. My situation frustrates me a little, not having been introduced ten years to this book written in the 1966. It is what it is, though. Life always has lessons for us.

Who's really to say that I have a lesson to learn here, though? I found the book while brainstorming how to articulate some thoughts in my mind by using Wikipedia. Maybe I hadn't found this book more than ten years ago because the technology, Wikipedia, wasn't there for me to explore my thoughts.

I couldn't even intelligently talk about my thoughts or the particular books given to me to read more than ten years ago. Maybe I didn't have the technology available to explore my thoughts in relation to the world of ideas without having to explain and justify myself.

Who knows? I didn't even really know what I was doing with this project more than ten years ago. I just wanted to write a dystopian novel to graduate college. I had primordial ideas. I originally wanted to write a thriller based on angst and boredom than some kind of heady meditation on social justice.

I appreciated what I have learned, though. The process has taught me how to learn. I've had some interesting experiences going through library and historical society archives. I've seen how the growth of the Internet helps researchers engage in more efficient research from their own den or kitchen table rather than having to travel everywhere. I've also learned how to prospect for sources through book references, journal article references and, heck, on Wikipedia!

All in all, I've come out well enough in the deal. And, who knows? Maybe if I hadn't been taking this long to make this progress on my project, maybe I wouldn't have kept up with online research processes as well as I have.


LINKS OF INTEREST: sociology of knowledge, Wikipedia

Combining the Powers of iPad & Blackberry

For the last couple months when time has presented itself (seriously, I had no time control or management during July), I've worked on transcribing a handwritten sermon by George Ripley. He was a Unitarian minister at the Purchase Street Church in Boston during the 1830's.

The sermon is called On Common Sense in the Affairs of Religion. The content of the sermon doesn't matter for this essay.

Rather, I want to focus on how my iPad and Blackberry have combined into a useful set of tools. The specific brand and models of the mobile devices probably don't make a huge difference. A Playbook and iPhone may work just as well.

Actually. . .an iPhone may not work as well. I use the Blackberry's Memo app to type in the transcription. Any app that accepts text, saves it and will sync it up with other devices will work fine. Software doesn't cause the issue.

The hardware might. I've encountered people with strong opinions about touch screen keyboards versus hard material keyboards. The dynamism of iPhone screens compared to static unmoving keyboards play a big part. While transcribing Ripley's sermon, I rarely look at the Blackberry keyboard. My thumbs know where to find the right keys, and the keys stay in place.

I'm guessing you can lock the orientation of the iPhone screen and keyboard to keep it from flipping all around. Maybe that's not as big of an issue as I had originally thought. My preference probably has more to do with physically pushing the Blackberry keys.

A tech nerd friend of mine once told the story of Steve Jobs's genius behind getting the iPhone and iPad to click when pushing a key on the virtual keyboard. Apparently people wanted more than just visual feedback when they pushed a key. People wanted some other sensory feedback. The sound of a click made all the difference to people in marketing survey groups.

The feeling of separate keys on the little Blackberry keyboard, however, provides me orientation while typing but not looking. Through my many years of typing and taking a class or two, I've gotten the QWERTY keyboard mapped out in mind and body.

QWERTY keyboards can vary in size. The letters on it don't change position, though. A virtual keyboard can only provide me orientation while looking at it. I don't have to move my eyes around to keep track of my hands and fingers, but I have to gaze at the keyboard while typing to map the board according to key size.

I can feel my way around the letter keys on a Blackberry, though. Put my thumbs on the home keys or even just the space bar, and I know where all the other keys are. I often type on it without looking while I walk down the street or with my hands and Blackberry in a pocket. I can handle the keyboard because I can feel it.

It's just as easy to have my eyes on a monitor with text and type the text into the Blackberry by feel. In the meanwhile, the iPad's direct and intuitive interface keeps cognitive load at a minimum.

A big screened desktop or laptop provides an easy view, as long as I don’t need to change the size of what I’m viewing or change the brightness of the screen. Things get complicated from that point on.

For screen size or degree of zoom on the computer, commands vary by program. Even then, so many ways for making the changes. We have menu tabs at the top of the screen with options under them. Going this route half the time, you then have to choose a value of zoom, usually in the form of a percent.

Or maybe you prefer the icon menu underneath the tabs. You can make your cursor into an magnifying glass then choose where to zoom in. You can click as many times as you like to reach the level of zoom you want. But if you want to zoom out, you have to change the icon then click to go in reverse.

Then we have the keyboard “shortcuts.” Anybody remember the days of DOS when we only had the keyboard as our main input device? Typing ctrl-+ and ctrl-- has its elegance and instant gratification, but the computer decides where to zoom. You get the great challenge of getting to where you want to read or look at afterward.

It’s like a game, but who wants to play a game when reading a document? Especially when the author of the document has horrible, horrible handwriting?

With the iPad, though, you just use your index finger and middle finger. Place them close together and spread them apart or vice versa, wherever you want to zoom. You can also directly manipulate the screen view without using your keyboard or mouse as an intermediary. Your fingers have become a direct input interface to the iPad.

Adjusting the brightness on the desktop or laptop monitor becomes a hassle, too. The laptop at least provides the convenience of a keyboard shortcut. With the desktop, though, you must change paradigms switching from the mouse/keyboard combo to play with some knobs on the monitor. Then for both of them, you go back and forth, tinier and tinier movements until your reach the perfect illumination.

Our operating systems have in-system options for switching brightness, too. Instead of changing paradigms on the keyboard or from two completely different types of controls, you get to jump around from program to program.

With OSes these days, it doesn’t necessarily come off as inconvenient but something new gets to pop up onto the screen. Yay. . .more clutter.

Again, the iPad provides the immediate, direct experience. Adjusting the brightness requires nothing less than pushing the button on the left side of the screen (or whichever side you prefer), swiping the bar that pops up at the bottom in the direction your right then moving a virtual knob to the left and right until you reach the desired brightness.

Maybe the iPad requires just as many steps as the desktop or laptop. But it’s all right in front of you, on one flat piece of technology that you can hold with your two hands. Every step of the way you control it with the tips of your fingers.

The iPad doesn’t leave the user at the mercy of having to interact through two or three layers of interface: hand to keyboard/mouse, keyboard/mouse to cursor, cursor to end result. The most indirect interface on the iPad is when you’re typing. Even then, it’s all on the same screen.

But putting the cursor in the middle of a word can become a hassle. Making corrections can become a problem. Without the sense of touch and consistent spacing between keys, making mistypes becomes easy.

Now I’ve gone full circle. That’s why I’ve got the Blackberry to keep notes and the laptop to write documents. Every paradigm has its strong points and weak points. The laptop/desktop makes for good content creation. The iPad alone (or any tablet?) makes for good content consumption, especially online and out of home.

The iPad/Blackberry combo makes for an awesome transcribing machine: iPad for viewing and Blackberry for transcribing. Even better: they’re both super portable.

A neat feature about this essay: I wrote the first at the beginning of August; the second part at the beginning of September. The passion and excitement for the endeavor remains, even if I never finished the transcription and moved onto a different approach for my project. The method of transcription had nothing to do with the new angle. Maybe the bad handwriting had something to do with losing my interest.

The main thing motivating the change has to do with seeing life pass me by as much as it does. That’s a whole other story, though.

Links of Note: George Ripley, Unitarian, Purchase Street Church, All Things Dork

Benefits and Lure of Flow Experience with My Bachelors Project

Did you know that when you're engrossed in an activity that you enjoy, your brain can enter a near-meditative state, beneficial to body, mind and soul?

- Humana Financial Protection Products brochure

I got this quote from a brochure I received with the policy kit for my Critical Illness insurance policy. It hits upon how I feel about my writing and the type of experiences we should look for in life (as long the behavior, itself, isn't immoral and hurts others).

In full disclosure for those who don't know me: I am licensed as a personal lines, life, health and accident insurance agent in the State of Illinois. It's not my first choice, but I am finding myself enjoying working with people to put together a personal plan of financial protection.

These days I'm working most often with health, dental, vision, critical illness and hospital indemnity plans. I agree that these things can be so intimidating that consumers may grow frustrated, but I feel a good agent can provide access and craft a personal plan to provide great peace of mind. Don't hesitate to e-mail me if you live in Illinois and want to see what peace of
mind could be available to you.

Enough self promotion for my day job.

I've randomly encountered the concept of Flow for the last thirteen years or so. A friend wrote about it in a college paper. I've experienced it here and there. Personalities on TV, generally sports stars, have discussed it. I've tried to mine it for material to write my project.

An insurance company putting it into a brochure legitimizes Flow as something worth looking into and trying to work into life.

I've incorporated it in my life already with my research and writing activities. Throughout the years I've likened my bachelors project as an abusive relationship. The frustration becomes so exhausting sometimes that I feel like it has beat me up.

I can't quit it, though. Reaching the point when I just want to throw it down and move on with life, it sucks me back in. I can't stop thinking about it. I have had great times with it. I've learned a lot while working on it. What does it say about me if I quit it? Will any activities be just a backtrack to look at the project with a new perspective or will it be something independent that I really want to do for its own merits? And think of all the great times I've had with this bachelors project. I've come so far with it, how can I just stop here?

There is an academic paper available for purchase online called The Role of Flow Experience in Cyber-Game Addiction. I haven't read it. Nonetheless, having it come up in a Google search using "flow" and "addiction" illustrates that Flow can have some part in the addiction process.

I don't know. The jury is still out. But Sunday night, I did some intense researching that will hopefully bear some fruit. I wasn't the most pleasant person to be around, and I procrastinated on some of my duties (one which didn't need doing because of fortuitous events the next day, anyway).

I dreamt that night, though. I can't remember having any dreams in a long awhile. I made up for my Sunday night sociopathy on Monday night with the wife. I felt great at work during the day Monday when I would have rather been at home doing some more research or writing about the research I had done. I even had the ability to think about and discuss other things. I'm often obsessed about the project when not in the midst of getting my "fix."

So, who knows? Getting into the Flow greatly improves life, but it has the possibility of addiction? An insurance company, almost inherently a conservative entity, states that the Flow experience (using more words than that) has benefits.

As with all things in life, striking the balance between Flow and everyday life, even joyful parts in life, becomes a challenge. Challenge isn't bad, even when it becomes difficult. What doesn't kill us, makes us stronger, they say.

In my adult life, though, I often feel that it's those Flow experiences that make life worth living. I'll keep pursuing them for now.


Links of interest: Humana Financial Protection Products brochure, Flow, The Role of Flow Experience in Cyber-Game Addiction

Review of a Guide to Writing History

Thrashing about to find a workable thesis for my current paper on Brook Farm and utopianism, I found Reading, Writing, and Researching for History: A Guide for College Students by Patrick Rael, Bowdoin College. Looks like they put it in the writing guide section of their Website.

Rael has targeted this guide to students, most likely undergrads. People looking to teach themselves history writing skills or others looking for a refresher, however, will find this Webpage useful.

The guide has provided my autodidactic self a lot of good tips, most especially how to come up with questions and use them to drill down to a workable thesis and a structure for my paper. I haven't experiemented with the tips yet, but I feel more confident just reading them. I plan on developing questions after finishing my praise of the guide.

Coming up with questions and theses plays an important part in history paper writing. History essay writing has plenty of other aspects, too, that need attention. Reading, Writing, and Researching for History: A Guide for College Students introduces and covers them. They include.

• Reading secondary and primary sources like a fierce, effective predator
• Developing and analyzing arguments (including generating questions & theses)
• Research techniques
• Structuring the paper, from the thesis to conclusion to facts to rhetoric
• Presenting and citing sources in the paper
• Editing and revising the essay after first draft
• Even a model to provide inspiration

The layout comes across simple and easy to use. On top find the title and author. To the left, a table of contents with links to different chapters. The main body awaits your reading eyes to the right. Each chapter only takes up a few screens; nothing to worry about.

The Guide has PDF versions available for each chapter and one for the entire work. Just save it to your hard drive or print it out. No need for Internet access!

Rael adopts a great tone. Acknowledging that students often find the discipline of history intimidating, he goes out of his way to make the reader feel comfortable.

The academy talks down to the student. Rael wants to speak with the student as a person. History becomes cold, useless and meaningless to the general student because they can't connect to it. It takes the rare student who already has the history bug to make it through a course and do something with their knowledge. Rael admits this fault with the academy.

He made this guide as a remedy. He writes in everyday language, provides examples and encourages students of history to ask questions of others and of history.

My schooling didn't discourage asking questions. It just didn't teach how to ask questions. From what I remember about writing essays, I remember learning structure for the 5-paragraph essay:

1. Introduce thesis in first paragaph
2. First argument supporting thesis in second paragraph with 3-4 sentences supporting argument
3. Second argument supporting thesis in third paragraph with 3-4 sentences supporting argument
4. Third argument supporting thesis in forth paragraph with 3-4 sentences supporting argument
5. Tie things up in fifth paragraph with conclusion and a couple wrapping up comments

I don't remember spending much time on developing that thesis and argument. We were supposed to just come up with a thesis, arguments and all the support.

Suffice to say, I did fine with this structure on high school tests and even on short essays in college. I can't really say how I did fine, though. It just all worked out.

How much fault can students take if facts just get passively poured into them then receive skeleton instructions to use all that random information to make some kind of argument? Where does their motivation come from if they don't learn the significance of those facts and how to feel that significance? How can we expect them to just throw down historical arguments when they don't learn how to develop historical ideas, questions and arguments?

Teaching them to develop ideas can help to teach them passion for the topic.

Just from the introduction page of Reading, Writing, and Researching for History: A Guide for College Students, Rael shows his hope of transferring his love of history to his students and readers. Readers willing to take the journey will find an inspiring guide for developing questions that will make history more significant, meaningful and, dare I say it, exciting.

Reading, Writing, and Researching for History: A Guide for College Students makes for a great read. It could easily become a go to resource for any student from high school level to the decline of your mental facilities.

In fact, curriculum's should make this guide a must read. It would probably have one drawback, though: too many students will want to become historians, taking away workers from other industries. Oh well, I think our future selves will know how to handle that problem better than we do now. Let's deal with it then.


Links of interest: Brook Farm, utopianism, Reading, Writing, and Researching for History: A Guide for College Students

Complaint About Stream of Consciousness Writing: Don't Always Know When I'm Done

Previous entry in this series is Start of a Series -- Two Experiments in One: Beat Structure and Shorter Blog Entries.

Stream of consciousness writing doesn't provide obvious clues of completion. For instance, I started drafting the last paragraph [of the last blog entry] using stream of consciousness process. I could have spent hours writing, ending up with a page or two of unneeded text. Thankfully, during some downtime, I realized that I had gone on a useless tangent.

In that case, I tried justifying that wasted time caused by stream of consciousness writing, as a topic, deserved a whole section of its own. Things I don't like about stream of consciousness writing all end up wasting time. Instead of being a topic, in itself, wasting time provides a transition and introduction to my complaints.

Sometimes a subject or topic seems good to put into a piece or seems vital to give receive attention, for whatever reason. Maybe the subject or topic incidentally popped into my head and it has nothing to do with the project. A conclusion or direction taken may end up moving away from the original intention. I often reach a point where I want a topic or angle in the piece, but the topic or angle doesn't fit gracefully.

I want to have these things in the piece, but it doesn't feel right. I just need to keep exploring the facts, the ideas and the logic. I need to justify having it there or discover a conclusion that feels right. Whatever happens, though, the task just keeps going on and on and on.

Only overwhelming frustration and exhaustion stop me. All that work, all that investment, for hours and hours, and I get nowhere. I just wanted

• Things to work according to my vision
• To follow the stream of consciousness that came pouring out to its logical end or
• + To experience the eureka effect

Instead, the stream of consciousness whips me all about and tires me out. Maybe I can do something with some of the raw material later, but I can't predict the utility. None of it could have any worth, for all I know.

I figure I'll stop right when it feels right. The problem: it never feels right until I have a solid sense of the end goal.


Link of Interest: eureka effect

Start of a Series -- Two Experiments in One: Beat Structure and Shorter Blog Entries

This entry starts a series of entries. I started writing a larger essay then got the compulsion to publish sections of it as I finish. This way feels more amenable to the blog form compared to my usual long essay form.

I need a better writing process. An afternoon and evening wasted a couple weeks ago writing a blog entry that I never published made this point clear. Take into further consideration that

• I've been working on my bachelor's project for 10+ years
• Regular frustration of too much time spent writing without enough returns
• That I want to have a career in writing some day

I need a more efficient writing process and experimenting with a beat process feels like a good place to start.

Up to now for blog entries, I've mostly used a stream of consciousness approach. Only about five years ago did I start using an outline process for my expository writing to any extent. My outlining process still follows a linear stream of consciousness approach, however. Linear and stream of consciousness have their places; probably not with the early stages of purposeful dramatic and expository writing. I run into too many disadvantages.

Linear stream of consciousness writing with a clear end goal becomes time and effort consuming. Numerous distractions steer writers away from efficiency and productivity. To me, these pitfalls don't offer returns worth the investment.

The next entry in this series is Complaint About Stream of Consciousness Writing: Don't Always Know When I'm Done.