This month it's a bit of swag in the form of an original Zombie Apocalypse T-Shirt (image by me, loosely based on the Public Enemy album cover Fear of a Black Planet).
Insight and longevity.
Thursday, March 7, 2013
March Give-Away!
I appologize for being a bit late with this, but it's here finally, The March Give-Away.
This month it's a bit of swag in the form of an original Zombie Apocalypse T-Shirt (image by me, loosely based on the Public Enemy album cover Fear of a Black Planet).
All you need to do to have a chance at winning, is to follow this blog and leave a comment in one of the March posts. The winner will be drawn at random from all qualifiers at the end of the month. Best of luck.
Insight and longevity.
This month it's a bit of swag in the form of an original Zombie Apocalypse T-Shirt (image by me, loosely based on the Public Enemy album cover Fear of a Black Planet).
Insight and longevity.
Monday, March 4, 2013
Science. What is dat thing anyway?
'Sup? The Devil's in the Details
Music: Heavyweight Champion of the World by Reverend and The Makers
I believe it's crucially important, especially as we move into the brave new world that is the future, that everyone understands what science is. Because, far too few people seem to, and this lack of understanding in many difficulties and even hardships for society.
I have heard claims that scientists sit in their ivory towers and make decrees, we've seen in the papers the use of a few errant e-mails to attempt to discredit the work of thousands aroun the world. These attacks on science originate either from the misinformed or from those with an agenda, but in both cases, the complaint is not valid. Yes, scientists are human. But science, by its nature, rises above human weaknesses. Eventually.
First off, science is not some council of wizards sitting in a tower deciding how the world should work. Nothing could be further from the truth. Such beliefs are often put forward by the religious who seem largely upset at the perception that another 'viewpoint' supercedes their own. Of course, science is not a 'viewpoint'. But more on that soon.
Nor is science dependent on, or created by, the views, or manipulations on a few individuals. The strength of science is that, in principle, anyone is able to confirm or deny conclusions of even the most well respected scientists. Of course, that doesn't happen much. Not because said scientists are put on pedestals and untouchable, but because, more often than not, their work, their understanding of their chosen field, and their research, is impecable. But one does not get to this stage in science by decree.
It's also important to note that science is not physics, nor biology, nor chemistry. Science is not Newton's laws of motion, or the laws of thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, or even evolution. These are aspects of nature put into forms that humans can understand and use and science has helped us uncover and understand them. But they are not science, only the outcome of science.
Because science is not a thing, but a process. It's not a belief, but a method. Science is an objective means for interogating the world, ourselves, even the nature of reality. Although science is not a religion, it does require you have one believe. Namely, that humans are capable of understanding reality. Or at least that our ability will grow with our knowledge so that future generations will have insight and understanding that we currently lack.
This wonderful thing called science can be summed by the following simple process that is available to everyone for immediate use:
1) Make an observation about something of interest
2) From the observation, make a hypothesis of why it is that way
3) Test the hypothesis in an objective, non-biased manner
4) Revise the hypothesis based on the tests
5) return to step one
The cycle continues, carried out by the initial investigator and any or all other interested parties, until a hypothesis is arrived at the matches all data on the subject as close as possible.
Even then, future observations and experiments can overturn the hypothesis if they are conducted very well, and shed new light on the subject.
Through countless iterations, science ends up producing interpretations of the world that subsequently fit future observations. This is its strength. But science, itself, is only the process.
It is crucially important that the distinction be made between process and product. Because, in all instances, the former drives the latter. Science is often compared to and challenged by religion.
Religion began as science, as humanity's attempt at understanding the world and the universe in ways that were accessible to our level of understanding at the time. Spirits, gods, all seemed valuable explanations of events that were beyond our control or understanding. But religion lacked the rigorous approach of science. It lack the contstant questioning--or perhaps the speed of human development was simply too slow at the time--and due to its nature, it was prone to abuse by those seeking power. It stagnated, stalled, and grew into an immobile means for control that no longer has any interest in questioning anything.
All endeavours to better humanity, all endeavours to understand our world, to improve our situation, are prone to abuse by those seeking an advantage over others. That includes the use, and products, of science. But the power of science is that every person is capable of doing science, and every person can challenge previous studies, previous findings, previous understandings.
Science depends on questions and questioning. From everyone. Including its opponents. Anyone and everyone can and should do science. Even if it is basic science. We can't all understand quantum mechanics, molecular biology or physical chemistry, but we can all do science in our everyday lives. We are all capable of questioning, capable of interpretting our observations, and capable of revising our hypotheses in light of new observations and understanding.
Religion fairly quickly became a top-down system, in which the powerful decree, and the faithful believe. Science is, by its nature, a bottom-up system. Understandings of the world derived from scientific investigations are dependent on many, many independent observations. That necessitates as many people as possible being involved, and their results filter up.
The results, of course, can be supressed by the powerful, by those with an agenda, temporariliy, but the reality they uncover remains. A great quote from Canadian rock band Rush sums it up:
So if a government, or a religious body, decrees x = y, it doesn't mean x = y, it just means that everyone will act as if x = y. Often with disastrous consequences. For example, mid-20th century biology in the Soviet Union stagnated because of such decrees, harming their agriculture and leaving their people starved for food and their research starved for answers.
Another example is the climate change issue. It's easy to ignore, or to decide it needs more study and to decree that an influencial country won't have any part in reducing emmissions, Even going so far as to attempt to discredit a few scientists working on the project. But reality won't budge. And there will be unprecedented glacial melting, and record numbers of tornadoes, and record-breaking hurricanes, giant snow storms, and ten-times the number of record high temperatures as record lows. Because reality doesn't care what humans think.
To be fair, there have been several examples in the last few decades to highlight bad science, to demonstrate that scientists are human, that they are susceptible to the same temptations as everyone else. But these same cases demonstrate the strength of the scientific approach and that it transcends human weeknesses. Each case is eventually called out by other researchers studying the same topics who are unable to replicate the experiments. When enough people are unable to reproduce the data, the fraudulent claim can be culled.
So, if everyone practices science, then everyone will question. Everything. (in reality, just everything that interests them personally, but that is enough). And when everyone questions everything, in an intelligent manner, then falsehood and fraudulant claims cannot thrive. It's only when we accept, without thought, what we're told that we are subject to being abused, taken advantage of, and maniupulated.
I cannot stress this enough. We are strongest when everyone questions everything. Always. Intelligently and without agenda. And this is precisely what science is.
Reality doesn't care what humans think. This is why science, in all its objective glory, is so powerful. Because science uncovers the truth about reality (at least, as far as we are currently able to understand it, but that also improves with each iteration).
So please remember, Newton's laws, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, chemistry, biology, modern medicine, computers, cars, rockets, satellites, television, none of these are science. But they are all a testament to the power of the scientific process and what we can accomplish with an objective understanding of the world.
Insight and longevity.
Music: Heavyweight Champion of the World by Reverend and The Makers
I believe it's crucially important, especially as we move into the brave new world that is the future, that everyone understands what science is. Because, far too few people seem to, and this lack of understanding in many difficulties and even hardships for society.
I have heard claims that scientists sit in their ivory towers and make decrees, we've seen in the papers the use of a few errant e-mails to attempt to discredit the work of thousands aroun the world. These attacks on science originate either from the misinformed or from those with an agenda, but in both cases, the complaint is not valid. Yes, scientists are human. But science, by its nature, rises above human weaknesses. Eventually.
First off, science is not some council of wizards sitting in a tower deciding how the world should work. Nothing could be further from the truth. Such beliefs are often put forward by the religious who seem largely upset at the perception that another 'viewpoint' supercedes their own. Of course, science is not a 'viewpoint'. But more on that soon.
Nor is science dependent on, or created by, the views, or manipulations on a few individuals. The strength of science is that, in principle, anyone is able to confirm or deny conclusions of even the most well respected scientists. Of course, that doesn't happen much. Not because said scientists are put on pedestals and untouchable, but because, more often than not, their work, their understanding of their chosen field, and their research, is impecable. But one does not get to this stage in science by decree.
It's also important to note that science is not physics, nor biology, nor chemistry. Science is not Newton's laws of motion, or the laws of thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, electromagnetism, or even evolution. These are aspects of nature put into forms that humans can understand and use and science has helped us uncover and understand them. But they are not science, only the outcome of science.
Because science is not a thing, but a process. It's not a belief, but a method. Science is an objective means for interogating the world, ourselves, even the nature of reality. Although science is not a religion, it does require you have one believe. Namely, that humans are capable of understanding reality. Or at least that our ability will grow with our knowledge so that future generations will have insight and understanding that we currently lack.
This wonderful thing called science can be summed by the following simple process that is available to everyone for immediate use:
1) Make an observation about something of interest
2) From the observation, make a hypothesis of why it is that way
3) Test the hypothesis in an objective, non-biased manner
4) Revise the hypothesis based on the tests
5) return to step one
The cycle continues, carried out by the initial investigator and any or all other interested parties, until a hypothesis is arrived at the matches all data on the subject as close as possible.
Even then, future observations and experiments can overturn the hypothesis if they are conducted very well, and shed new light on the subject.
Through countless iterations, science ends up producing interpretations of the world that subsequently fit future observations. This is its strength. But science, itself, is only the process.
It is crucially important that the distinction be made between process and product. Because, in all instances, the former drives the latter. Science is often compared to and challenged by religion.
Religion began as science, as humanity's attempt at understanding the world and the universe in ways that were accessible to our level of understanding at the time. Spirits, gods, all seemed valuable explanations of events that were beyond our control or understanding. But religion lacked the rigorous approach of science. It lack the contstant questioning--or perhaps the speed of human development was simply too slow at the time--and due to its nature, it was prone to abuse by those seeking power. It stagnated, stalled, and grew into an immobile means for control that no longer has any interest in questioning anything.
All endeavours to better humanity, all endeavours to understand our world, to improve our situation, are prone to abuse by those seeking an advantage over others. That includes the use, and products, of science. But the power of science is that every person is capable of doing science, and every person can challenge previous studies, previous findings, previous understandings.
Science depends on questions and questioning. From everyone. Including its opponents. Anyone and everyone can and should do science. Even if it is basic science. We can't all understand quantum mechanics, molecular biology or physical chemistry, but we can all do science in our everyday lives. We are all capable of questioning, capable of interpretting our observations, and capable of revising our hypotheses in light of new observations and understanding.
Religion fairly quickly became a top-down system, in which the powerful decree, and the faithful believe. Science is, by its nature, a bottom-up system. Understandings of the world derived from scientific investigations are dependent on many, many independent observations. That necessitates as many people as possible being involved, and their results filter up.
The results, of course, can be supressed by the powerful, by those with an agenda, temporariliy, but the reality they uncover remains. A great quote from Canadian rock band Rush sums it up:
You can change perception, but reality won't budge.
So if a government, or a religious body, decrees x = y, it doesn't mean x = y, it just means that everyone will act as if x = y. Often with disastrous consequences. For example, mid-20th century biology in the Soviet Union stagnated because of such decrees, harming their agriculture and leaving their people starved for food and their research starved for answers.
Another example is the climate change issue. It's easy to ignore, or to decide it needs more study and to decree that an influencial country won't have any part in reducing emmissions, Even going so far as to attempt to discredit a few scientists working on the project. But reality won't budge. And there will be unprecedented glacial melting, and record numbers of tornadoes, and record-breaking hurricanes, giant snow storms, and ten-times the number of record high temperatures as record lows. Because reality doesn't care what humans think.
To be fair, there have been several examples in the last few decades to highlight bad science, to demonstrate that scientists are human, that they are susceptible to the same temptations as everyone else. But these same cases demonstrate the strength of the scientific approach and that it transcends human weeknesses. Each case is eventually called out by other researchers studying the same topics who are unable to replicate the experiments. When enough people are unable to reproduce the data, the fraudulent claim can be culled.
So, if everyone practices science, then everyone will question. Everything. (in reality, just everything that interests them personally, but that is enough). And when everyone questions everything, in an intelligent manner, then falsehood and fraudulant claims cannot thrive. It's only when we accept, without thought, what we're told that we are subject to being abused, taken advantage of, and maniupulated.
I cannot stress this enough. We are strongest when everyone questions everything. Always. Intelligently and without agenda. And this is precisely what science is.
Reality doesn't care what humans think. This is why science, in all its objective glory, is so powerful. Because science uncovers the truth about reality (at least, as far as we are currently able to understand it, but that also improves with each iteration).
So please remember, Newton's laws, thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, chemistry, biology, modern medicine, computers, cars, rockets, satellites, television, none of these are science. But they are all a testament to the power of the scientific process and what we can accomplish with an objective understanding of the world.
Insight and longevity.
Friday, February 1, 2013
Come Get Some! (Free stuff, that is)
'Sup? It's time for some FREE STUFF!! :))
Music: I'm the one that's cool by Jed Whedon and Felicia Day
That's right, it's just what it says on the tin. For the month of February, I'm giving away a print copy of one Utility Fog Press anthology per week: either Assassins' Canon or Farspace 2 (I'll announce which at the begging of each week). This week it's Assassins' Canon.
Even better, I will be having regular give-aways all this year where you could win books, T-shirts, mugs, mouse pads or a variety of other items to be announced, each featuring original artwork of mine. All you have to do to have a chance at winning is to follow my blog. All followers are automatically entered for each draw.
If you want a quick summary, in this blog I focus mostly on writing. Sometimes analysis of books, or genre tropes and how to work them. Sometimes futurist ideas. And sometimes real life and how I seek to use life events to influence and improve my writing. And sure, I'm only human, so there is the occasional rant included, free of charge.
So I look forward to seeing you here, and best of luck in the draws.
Insight and longevity.
Music: I'm the one that's cool by Jed Whedon and Felicia Day
That's right, it's just what it says on the tin. For the month of February, I'm giving away a print copy of one Utility Fog Press anthology per week: either Assassins' Canon or Farspace 2 (I'll announce which at the begging of each week). This week it's Assassins' Canon.
Even better, I will be having regular give-aways all this year where you could win books, T-shirts, mugs, mouse pads or a variety of other items to be announced, each featuring original artwork of mine. All you have to do to have a chance at winning is to follow my blog. All followers are automatically entered for each draw.
If you want a quick summary, in this blog I focus mostly on writing. Sometimes analysis of books, or genre tropes and how to work them. Sometimes futurist ideas. And sometimes real life and how I seek to use life events to influence and improve my writing. And sure, I'm only human, so there is the occasional rant included, free of charge.
So I look forward to seeing you here, and best of luck in the draws.
Insight and longevity.
Saturday, January 26, 2013
Just One of Those Weeks
'Sup? Peeps, why you gotta be like that?
Music: When We Stand Together by Nickelback
Hey, what's up? Not much here. Writing-wise, I mean.
It's been a slow start to the year, after the extra week of vacation for the little one, I got into a bit of writing, finishing off a chapter of revision and starting on the next 3, which are effectively a block. But then the medical and snow days, and looming tax deadline, have sidelined me again.
Yep, I'm back to physio, one last attempt to fix up my foot. The strat seems to be toning the legs to improve fine control, with the hope that that takes force off the ball foot. Well, we'll see if it works. We also had an impromptu and unnecessary snow day. It was made more frustrating by the fact that the schools didn't close when we had sheet ice covering the ground everywhere--I mean, to the point where you'd slide off the sidewalk if it tilted into the street a little--but a bit of snow and they close. Anyway, they were wise enough to only close for one day.
And then there's taxes. Made worse, of course, because of my procrastination. Each year I wonder why I don't do my taxes in May. Or October. But no, I wait until the last week of January every year. So atm, my taxes are still unfinished and I've got five days left.
But that's not enough, not for the first month of the new year.
So today, we had a couple knock on our door complaining that our back fence--that we had problems installing last summer after a complaint by a different neighbour--was encroaching on their property, that was their parents and they want to prep for sale. Essentially, the woman was insisting that our fence was 3 feet too far into their property, despite the fact that our new fence is inside the boundaries of where the old fence was. And, of course, despite the fact that there is no way you can be that precise with a 1:1250 scale map that wasn't even made from an actual survey. Note that with a 1:1250, a millimeter error on drawing or measuring from the map, translates into a 1.25 meter error on the ground. That's almost 4 feet! And this lady was arguing with us over the space of less than 3 feet! Yet she is the second person, including the first neighbour, the somehow fails to understand this simply concept.
You see, our property was developed in 1932, before the UK gov started doing any kind of official property surveys. So the 'land deeds' are not actually land deeds, they're simply crude maps drawn up by the original developer. I know this because I've check with a surveyor, and I've check on www.landregistry.gov.uk. No land claim has been filed, meaning there is no official survey, and no official agreement, past or present, between neighbours regarding the boundaries. That means that the current structures define the property as legally as any survey. And when we moved in, the most obvious boundary-defining structure was a wire mesh fence surrounding the property.
The fence, however, was in such disrepair on the back corner that our daughter and her friends could sneak through into the neighbours yard. So we decided, finally, to repair it last summer. It seems that a wiremesh fence is not a problem, but everyone suddenly freaks when that turns into a wooden fence. Even if they're getting more land than they originally had.
I guess everyone has a bad neighbour, and perhaps we were lucky meeting two good neighbours to either side. Perhaps it's just karma that we've gotten two bad, paranoid, and imo not too bright, neighbours in the back. Even more so because both brought up lawyers almost immediately in the discussion. The first guy we argued with for 2 weeks and eventually gave in simply to get the fence built, as the builders were waiting. Now that the fence is up though, we'll be calling the second neighbour's bluff before we take the fence down. In fact, I understand from the surveyor we talked to, that such legal proceedings can cost upward of £10,000, so we offered to move the fence to where they want it, if they give us £5000.
Today ended with us showing them the property, explaining the situation that happened with the other neighbour and how our new fence related to the position of the old, even showing them, as remnants of the old fence are still there, and suggesting that, if they don't believe us, they should contact their own surveyor and check the land registry site. It was clear that the man believed us that we had intended no funny business and have acted legally and morally. The woman, who's parents lived their until recently, seemed particularly stubborn and didn't appear interested in listening to reason. Still, I'd be surprised if anything legal comes of this. It's just annoying.
PROs: As a writer, there are always pros to this kind of thing. The pro here is the ability to witness different people functioning in a fairly standard confrontational environment, to witness the full possibilities of emotions and then to be able to apply these to my characters for greater verisimilitude. Life experiences may not always be enjoyable, but they are always learning opportunities.
Insight and longevity.
Music: When We Stand Together by Nickelback
Hey, what's up? Not much here. Writing-wise, I mean.
It's been a slow start to the year, after the extra week of vacation for the little one, I got into a bit of writing, finishing off a chapter of revision and starting on the next 3, which are effectively a block. But then the medical and snow days, and looming tax deadline, have sidelined me again.
Yep, I'm back to physio, one last attempt to fix up my foot. The strat seems to be toning the legs to improve fine control, with the hope that that takes force off the ball foot. Well, we'll see if it works. We also had an impromptu and unnecessary snow day. It was made more frustrating by the fact that the schools didn't close when we had sheet ice covering the ground everywhere--I mean, to the point where you'd slide off the sidewalk if it tilted into the street a little--but a bit of snow and they close. Anyway, they were wise enough to only close for one day.
And then there's taxes. Made worse, of course, because of my procrastination. Each year I wonder why I don't do my taxes in May. Or October. But no, I wait until the last week of January every year. So atm, my taxes are still unfinished and I've got five days left.
But that's not enough, not for the first month of the new year.
So today, we had a couple knock on our door complaining that our back fence--that we had problems installing last summer after a complaint by a different neighbour--was encroaching on their property, that was their parents and they want to prep for sale. Essentially, the woman was insisting that our fence was 3 feet too far into their property, despite the fact that our new fence is inside the boundaries of where the old fence was. And, of course, despite the fact that there is no way you can be that precise with a 1:1250 scale map that wasn't even made from an actual survey. Note that with a 1:1250, a millimeter error on drawing or measuring from the map, translates into a 1.25 meter error on the ground. That's almost 4 feet! And this lady was arguing with us over the space of less than 3 feet! Yet she is the second person, including the first neighbour, the somehow fails to understand this simply concept.
You see, our property was developed in 1932, before the UK gov started doing any kind of official property surveys. So the 'land deeds' are not actually land deeds, they're simply crude maps drawn up by the original developer. I know this because I've check with a surveyor, and I've check on www.landregistry.gov.uk. No land claim has been filed, meaning there is no official survey, and no official agreement, past or present, between neighbours regarding the boundaries. That means that the current structures define the property as legally as any survey. And when we moved in, the most obvious boundary-defining structure was a wire mesh fence surrounding the property.
The fence, however, was in such disrepair on the back corner that our daughter and her friends could sneak through into the neighbours yard. So we decided, finally, to repair it last summer. It seems that a wiremesh fence is not a problem, but everyone suddenly freaks when that turns into a wooden fence. Even if they're getting more land than they originally had.
I guess everyone has a bad neighbour, and perhaps we were lucky meeting two good neighbours to either side. Perhaps it's just karma that we've gotten two bad, paranoid, and imo not too bright, neighbours in the back. Even more so because both brought up lawyers almost immediately in the discussion. The first guy we argued with for 2 weeks and eventually gave in simply to get the fence built, as the builders were waiting. Now that the fence is up though, we'll be calling the second neighbour's bluff before we take the fence down. In fact, I understand from the surveyor we talked to, that such legal proceedings can cost upward of £10,000, so we offered to move the fence to where they want it, if they give us £5000.
Today ended with us showing them the property, explaining the situation that happened with the other neighbour and how our new fence related to the position of the old, even showing them, as remnants of the old fence are still there, and suggesting that, if they don't believe us, they should contact their own surveyor and check the land registry site. It was clear that the man believed us that we had intended no funny business and have acted legally and morally. The woman, who's parents lived their until recently, seemed particularly stubborn and didn't appear interested in listening to reason. Still, I'd be surprised if anything legal comes of this. It's just annoying.
PROs: As a writer, there are always pros to this kind of thing. The pro here is the ability to witness different people functioning in a fairly standard confrontational environment, to witness the full possibilities of emotions and then to be able to apply these to my characters for greater verisimilitude. Life experiences may not always be enjoyable, but they are always learning opportunities.
Insight and longevity.
Thursday, January 10, 2013
Welcome to the New Year
'Sup? It's a new year, brah!
Music: Ghost of Navigators by Iron Maiden
Once more around the sun my friends. So much has changed in our last lap, yet so much remains the same and it's up to us to decide which we accept and which we choose to change.
As always, I have many ideas, but one thing that we all hopefully gain with age is better self-awareness.
Some lucky souls seem born with such knowledge and their character has a singularity of focus and action the allows them to accomplish great things. Others, like myself, find we are constant conflicted. Sometimes this is between action and thought, sometimes between intent and consequence, and sometimes it's between desire and duty.
My conflict has almost always fallen in the last category. I even wrote a very brief poem regarding this while studying for my doctorate. Since you asked so nicely, sure I'll share it with you. Originally, it was called Tightrope but I decided to change the title to duhka, a sanskrit word for a Budhist concept of internal conflict. Anyway, here's the poem:
High on a tight-rope.
How did I get here?
Continuously balancing,
desires on one hand,
expectation on the other.
When I fall to the abyss below,
tripped by insecurity,
is there a net?
Well, I've never claimed to be a poet.
So, what does this have to do with anything? Well, I suffer from that condition of too many ideas and not enough energy. Every year my internal analysis brings me closer to understanding how I might manage this with the limited resources and network that I have.
For example, recently, I've altered my work schedule so that I write at the library instead of at home. This gives me shorter, but more focussed time writing. The result is that I can give myself permission to work on other things with the rest of my time, whereas previously I might have attempted to write at home and then got lost surfing the web or cleaning the house, not writing anything until 5:00 then feel bad and try some more to write while accomplishing nothing on any front.
Furthermore, last year I attempted to set up two projects per day, one in the morning and one in the afternoon. Usually writing in the morning, and something else, differing each day, later. You can guess how successful that was. So now I'm being more modest. I have my morning writing in the library and one project per week that I work on in the afternoons. This could be a website, researching the next story, or another of my copious projects. I have a feeling this will work much better.
Incidentally, while I'm not going to go into all my other projects here, I will say that, in some way, they will all come together in my novels. That's it. That's your only teaser.
Well, this is a bit of a heavy post for the first one of the year, so let's lighten things up a little.
One of my other goals this year is to increase my online network--followers, audience, readers, etc. One way will be to update and reorganize my websites somewhat *watch for some new shops and products! as well as the new version of Stellar Garden*, but that alone won't do anything. "Build it and they will come" simply doesn't work for the web. I mean, searching the net is like visiting a city that has one block with billions of houses all on top of each other. I also tried crowd-funding, but that suffers from the same problem as a blog. If no one knows you're there, they can't fund you. So, what to do?
Contests!
Music: Ghost of Navigators by Iron Maiden
Once more around the sun my friends. So much has changed in our last lap, yet so much remains the same and it's up to us to decide which we accept and which we choose to change.
As always, I have many ideas, but one thing that we all hopefully gain with age is better self-awareness.
Some lucky souls seem born with such knowledge and their character has a singularity of focus and action the allows them to accomplish great things. Others, like myself, find we are constant conflicted. Sometimes this is between action and thought, sometimes between intent and consequence, and sometimes it's between desire and duty.
My conflict has almost always fallen in the last category. I even wrote a very brief poem regarding this while studying for my doctorate. Since you asked so nicely, sure I'll share it with you. Originally, it was called Tightrope but I decided to change the title to duhka, a sanskrit word for a Budhist concept of internal conflict. Anyway, here's the poem:
High on a tight-rope.
How did I get here?
Continuously balancing,
desires on one hand,
expectation on the other.
When I fall to the abyss below,
tripped by insecurity,
is there a net?
Well, I've never claimed to be a poet.
So, what does this have to do with anything? Well, I suffer from that condition of too many ideas and not enough energy. Every year my internal analysis brings me closer to understanding how I might manage this with the limited resources and network that I have.
For example, recently, I've altered my work schedule so that I write at the library instead of at home. This gives me shorter, but more focussed time writing. The result is that I can give myself permission to work on other things with the rest of my time, whereas previously I might have attempted to write at home and then got lost surfing the web or cleaning the house, not writing anything until 5:00 then feel bad and try some more to write while accomplishing nothing on any front.
Furthermore, last year I attempted to set up two projects per day, one in the morning and one in the afternoon. Usually writing in the morning, and something else, differing each day, later. You can guess how successful that was. So now I'm being more modest. I have my morning writing in the library and one project per week that I work on in the afternoons. This could be a website, researching the next story, or another of my copious projects. I have a feeling this will work much better.
Incidentally, while I'm not going to go into all my other projects here, I will say that, in some way, they will all come together in my novels. That's it. That's your only teaser.
Well, this is a bit of a heavy post for the first one of the year, so let's lighten things up a little.
One of my other goals this year is to increase my online network--followers, audience, readers, etc. One way will be to update and reorganize my websites somewhat *watch for some new shops and products! as well as the new version of Stellar Garden*, but that alone won't do anything. "Build it and they will come" simply doesn't work for the web. I mean, searching the net is like visiting a city that has one block with billions of houses all on top of each other. I also tried crowd-funding, but that suffers from the same problem as a blog. If no one knows you're there, they can't fund you. So, what to do?
Contests!
Yes, dear friends, contests. "Bribe them and they will come" tends to work better. I will use facebook and twitter to advertise one contest per month--a give-way open to everyone who follows this blog. The prizes will include such wonders as 1-3 Utility Fog Press books, mugs, laptop skins, pictures, T-shirts, all of my own creation. Well, except the other stories in the anthologies, of course. I will be officially announcing the contest details at the end of the month on my twitter feed and on facebook. And I look forward to seein' yo' faces here (thanks Phil!)
Insight and longevity!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)