Bill Conrad's Blog, page 24

A Dear Friend Is Sick

Last Thursday morning, I was in the middle of answering an email and my computer made a pop sound. It turned off and when I turned it on, nothing happened. After some investigation, I think the motherboard has failed. I have ordered a replacement on eBay, (for the second time) but the seller has not shipped it.
Fortunately, the prior week, I backed everything up. In addition, the hard drive should work fine. In the meantime, my older computer works fine. So life should be great. Right?
This has been a stressful week and working on another computer has proved challenging. However, that is not the real issue. I miss my computer because it made my life productive and entertaining. Every file was where I wanted it, every program I needed was properly installed, every website bookmarked in the order I wanted and all settings were perfect. Together, we could accomplish any computer related task.
Until this week, I never realized how large a part of my life my computer had become. Using another computer did not fill the void. For example, the simple act of sending and receiving email was difficult. On my computer, Outlook was perfectly configured with all my contacts and old emails properly sorted. When I needed to check my mail, I tried for three days to set it up on my I phone. However, the server address changed and the new server did not go through. I managed to receive email online and send from a different account. I cannot even do a spell check.
With some luck, a new motherboard will fix my issues and my life will be back to normal soon. And perhaps this little adventure will allow me to understand how important my friend is.

A Minor Win

I don't particularly appreciate gloating, but I would like to share a minor victory. My four regular readers may recall my prediction for future writing:
https://interviewingimmortality.com/b...
In that blog, I made the bold prediction that choose your own adventure books would make a comeback. This blog generated a few comments, and most people disagreed with my optimistic prediction. This reaction suited me fine because predicting the future is tricky and often incorrect. However, I recently came across a new book genre that is rapidly gaining popularity:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B091JHYLQS?...
Choose your own romance books have exploded onto the market! Do I feel good about having a correct future prediction? Hmm. The word "good" is not appropriate. My reaction was, “Wow, I predicted correctly? That was unexpected.”
Will I ever write a choose your own adventure romance novel? I choose to…

You Know You

If we ask somebody's opinion, they will answer based on their specific life experiences, observations, and knowledge. Yet, if we ask ten people, the answers will not be the same. What is the correct answer?
The world is full of information, people, history, and mistakes. How is one supposed to get anything done? I have learned to take a stand with my opinions. I begin by listening to others, gather my own data and form my own opinion. The result is a path forward I can follow. There will be experiments, changed decisions, hurt feelings, and mistakes all based on my opinions along this path.
Yet, we understand that is no accepted correct opinion. Who is the best painter? Does that question have a "correct" answer? Let's all vote and come up with one. While this is possible, this solution does not help even if the results agree with your personal preferences.
This is the point where a person has to take a stand on their opinions. "Bill, answer the question: Who is the best artist and why?" "American 80s artist Patrick Nagel because his art looks cool." From my perspective, this is the "correct answer." What about Vermeer, Michelangelo, or Van Gogh? Clearly, they are superior artists to Patrick Nagel. "I can choose whoever I want and like Patrick Nagel! Discussion closed." Am I proud of this opinion? Yes.
The point of this blog is to point out that you are an expert about you. This means you can pick your own favorite artist and feel confident about the decision. I see this as a source of strength. Even at our worst moments, knowing ourselves better than anybody can brighten even the dullest day.

1+1+1 = 10

Three weeks ago, I had an awful day. It started with an unexpected $10 bill from the city, an unimportant work project got canceled, and a telemarketer called me while I was taking an evening nap. These minor issues should have had no effect, but they did.
My entire day felt like I could not catch a break. Taking a step back, it’s clear these minor issues built on themselves and resulted in enormous disappointment.
We deal with all kinds of crazy occurrences every day, and we must rise above them. Commercials pound us with body shaming, financial shaming, fuel our need to eat, and the desire for products. People put us down for no reason, and parts of our endless technology must fail. Our social interaction is verbally aggressive, complex, and unforgiving. Even our entertainment contains extreme competition where there must be a looser. IE sports.
The only way we get through our day is to put on a brave face and ignore the noise. However, that effort occasionally fails.
I find it interesting that everybody understands this concept, but writers cannot use this topic. Readers/viewers need to see the logic behind a character’s mood. Of course, it is safe to write, “A bunch of minor problems upset Bill.” The reader/viewer can fill in the blanks because they have experienced their own bad days. Yet, if the writer described a bunch of minor issues, readers would think, “Those problems do not seem too bad. Wow, Bill is a wimp.” We say this because our protective layers typically deal with a lot worse.
I enjoy exploring topics that cannot be written about, such as conspiracy theories:
https://interviewingimmortality.com/b...
It is always interesting to see the fragility in our society. This particular fault probably has several origins. The main issue is that our stories must make sense. Meaning, a character needs to have a clear motivation, and many minor issues do not make up a bad day. Society forces political correctness, which limits our topics. This means we have to all act properly and not get caught up in the little things. Readers/viewers are more knowledgeable and tougher than we used to be. So, a weak character will not persuade us. Yet, some issues get unnecessarily magnified and then vilified on social media. IE a person who throws a temper tantrum about awful coffee. 1+1+1 = 10,000!!!! Can we write a character like that? Book critics, media monsters, and readers would eat the author alive.
Should writers be able to describe a bad day resulting from minor issues and have readers/viewers accept this outcome? I suppose it would be nice, but that might mean our stories would not be as edgy and entertaining. Sadly, we have become so conditioned to accept so much bad news that we must maintain a rugged appearance. And yet, this lower boundary opens up a vast entertainment spectrum. Hmm. I might have uncovered the dynamic range of writing.

I Don't Understand Cliché

I wrote that blog on November 14, 2018, and I still do not understand that term. However, I now understand why my mind cannot accept the definition of that word. I feel it is an improper description, like calling a horse an apple. “This is quite an existential situation.” No, it is a person talking about their problems. We call this activity complaining, and in my mind, it is not existential. For this reason, I cannot wrap my head around the word’s meaning.
Another word I do not understand is cliché. The word should describe an overused plot device or expression. A good example is the love triangle, where two people are in love with the third. The phrase, “You are the weakest link” is cliché because it is an overused phrase. The idea behind this is that by calling something cliché, we are voicing our dislike.
Humans have been writing, talking, and making up stories for thousands of years. We have explored the most basic plot devices and phrases which means they will be reused. Let’s examine the love triangle plot. How many types of romance can there be? I can think of five. In my meager dating experience, I have been in a love triangle three times. Therefore, (in my mind) this kind of plot device is fair game because I know it is real. (Side note. No, two women have not desired me. At least to my knowledge:)
Why not spice the story up? One lover is from “the bad part of town.” This dating adventure occurred once. How about a kidnapped lover? Fortunately, that tragic dating experience has not happened to me. So, this plot device is not cliché. Right? That plot is so cliché that it spans romance, adventure, action, and sci-fi plots. There have been thousands of stories with this plot, although it rarely occurs.
I argue a writer must make fundamental choices. If they choose to write a romance, a love triangle is valid. However, critics would say, “That plot has been done to death. How cliché! Bad writer! Shame on you!”
This reaction is why I do not use or understand or use this word. Cliché is a sarcastic putdown because it identifies the obvious negatively. “The sky is blue. How cliché.” Of course, the sky is blue! What other color can it be?
Should I take a step back and embrace the word? I just read a book where the principal character loses his memory and is in a spy ring. Clearly, this plot is cliché. However, I am hesitant to use this word.
Should I ignore the word when I encounter it? Should I make people stop using the word? Hmm. Sounds interesting. I will start with my four blog readers. Hey! Please stop using cliché.
Wow, what a cliché blog ending!

Is This Real?

From 1940 to 1958, MGM studios made Tom and Jerry cartoons. They placed these short films in front of movies, and in the '60-80s, MGM made cartoons for Saturday morning shows. A full-length movie is about to be released. Recently, I happened across the following YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNGQm...
In the YouTube video, we see two kittens watching a Tom and Jerry video (film) Cue Ball Cat from 1950. As I watched the kittens being thoroughly riveted, I realized the kittens 100% thought the action was real. The cat Tom and the mouse Jerry were actual animals.
Humans also get fooled by optical illusions. For example, a magician making a rabbit disappear. The audience knows the action is a trick, but we are at a loss to explain what occurred. On rare occasions, we get convinced an optical illusion is real. In a previous blog, I confessed to believing a car disappeared:
https://interviewingimmortality.com/b...
A child watching the same magic show might truly believe the rabbit disappeared because the child does not have adult experience to guide them. But what about an adult who is unaware of magic? Let's rewind the clock to 0 AD. Society was learning how to write words, and film/video technology did not exist. Let's present the same disappearing rabbit trick to a crowd of adults who do not know magic. I would venture that many of them would agree the rabbit truly disappeared. Yet, some would be skeptical.
Now, let's show the same 0 AD crowd that Tom and Jerry video. The video would amaze the crowd, but if you asked them to pay closer attention, they would understand the characters are drawn (cartoons.) The cartoon would only convince a few people that it is real.
It is impossible to ask kittens their opinion, but I can guess they fully believe the characters are real. This concept made me wonder how much of my life is an illusion. Am I in the Matrix or on the Star Trek Holodeck? Clearly, I am not, but that cartoon gave me a lot to think about. Take another look at that video and focus on the cat’s expression. They believe and there is a lot more to life than meets the eye.

Forced Fiction

In the mid-'80s, I briefly got into Amateur Radio. This hobby has many areas to explore, including building equipment, contests, distant communication, travel, and social interaction. My interest faded went I learned about computers, but I still go into the local Amateur Radio store once a year.
In one aisle, they have technical books and a surprisingly large number of Amateur Radio fiction books. A common theme is being stranded somewhere and building a radio to get rescued. There is even Amateur Radio romance. Who knew? A few weeks ago, I glanced at a few pages and read the book descriptions. To put it mildly, the material was dreadful. Why? The plots, characters, and circumstances were incredibly unrealistic because the author shoehorned in the topic of Amateur Radio.
I call this entertainment category "forced fiction." This is where a story element gets jammed into the plot as opposed to being integrated. We often see forced fiction in stories involving animals, cars, sports, religion, politics, and fan fiction. Essentially, the author "is in love with X and wrote a book with X in every chapter."
The classic example is a forced animal adventure. A person comes across a horse, and they instantly bond. A wild drama or adventure then unfolds where the two do everything together, strengthening their bond. This type of story is different from a western where the horse is a supporting character. Can the horse be a key figure? Of course, but their presence must be explainable. Using the same example, the cowboy had been riding horses for years and got a new horse. The new horse turns out to be excellent, and they form a lifelong partnership. The critical difference is the story is plausible.
Television is a sea of forced fiction. For example, the KITT car program in Night Rider. Were the plots remotely realistic? Not by a long shot. The only goal for the writer was to have the car appear at least once every ten minutes. This way, kids would buy KITT car toys. In a non-forced television environment, characters get into vehicles and drive them from point A to B. Sometimes the cars crash or get stolen, but the writers do not propel the vehicle into the center of attention for unrealistic reasons.
What if I wanted to read an Amateur Radio story? That's easy. I can search for books with great Amateur Radio scenes. The book Never Cry Wolf has a great one. Most importantly, the setting is appropriate, realistic, and supported by the rest of the book. Amateur Radio is not the focus, but it can be an essential story element.
I have many passions in my life, but I would never force them into a book. Electronics, for example. Having a fictional character solve problems with electronics would be fun to write but dreadful to read.
Should readers abandon this book category? I suppose people will buy/watch what they want. However, I caution writers. Readers and viewers are getting more sophisticated. Hmm. I probably have to get my act together.

The Con

A homeless person walks up to you, holding a coin mounted in a nice paper wrapper with a receipt. They mumble something about finding the two on the street. You are skeptical, but you glance at the receipt against your internal safety shield, and it looks legitimate. The homeless person does not want to call the owner listed on the receipt to return the coin and suggests the owner might offer a reward.
You call the buyer (their number is conveniently on the receipt), and they offer you $1,000 to return the coin. The receipt has a $15,000 purchase price, which makes the reward seem reasonable. However, you are not convinced and call the coin dealer (their number is also conveniently on the receipt.) They say the sale is legitimate, and the buyer is a regular customer. This "evidence" convinces you to "do the right thing" and return the coin to the buyer. The homeless person then asks for part of the reward, and you hand them $200. It seems fair because you have to drive across town.
When you get to the address, the people do not know what you are talking about. You also learn the coin dealer is nonexistent and the "valuable coin" is worthless. They conned you.
Why do we fall for scams like this? My four blog readers are honest people, which is our blind spot. We expect everybody else to be honest. However, we sometimes let greed take the driver's seat.
Fiction writers are skilled con artists. Their goal is to convince viewers and readers that the fantasy they invented is real. Instead of depending on our greed, they exploit our desire to be entertained. Yet, the same underhanded tricks apply.
The first step in a con is to overcome the natural desire to be skeptical. Writers take a less drastic approach. Movies, for example, start with music, credits, the title, and then introduce the characters. Later, the plot develops, and the drama plays out. Move makers lure viewers into the story and accept fiction.
Books follow the same pattern. They start with a light introduction, gradually introduce characters and then get into the plot. Just like a con artist, authors take great care to entice the reader.
Like a bad con, writers can make mistakes. Like introducing a character too soon or confusing the reader. For example, the first sentence in a book: "Bobby arrived on Athos." What the heck is Athos? Did the author misspell something? Is this book set in another world, or does it have a town that no longer exists? How about a more basic question? Is the character male or female? Bobby is a unisex name.
Where is the underhanded aspect? We see an obvious example in the movie Shrek. Everybody knows donkeys cannot talk, yet a talking donkey is a principal character. They conned us into ignoring our common sense. Is this ethical? No, it is not because they led us to believe a falsehood. We were intentionally decieved.
My four blog readers might ask, "But there is a difference. The con artist knows they are doing something wrong. The author is only trying to entertain." I would argue that authors are "conning for good reasons." The beneficial aspect is to entertain successfully. They also made money. I would call that a pleasant side effect. Now all I have to do is con some people into buying my books…

Back to the Basics

In any professional field, there are experts. These talented people solve challenging problems, and the less knowledgeable learn from their wisdom. I have met many experts in my field and find that they all have one thing in common: their fundamental understanding. A person who has collected facts does not have the same foundation, and I will explain the difference. Let's think about a professional auto mechanic and a person who "knows about cars."
The mechanic went to automotive school, spent years repairing cars, and keeps up with the latest technology. Their education includes automotive history, a comprehensive series of classes on the topic, and seeing the result of their repairs. This long-term view is essential because they have learned from their mistakes and use this insight to avoid future problems.
The person who tinkers with cars made a few repairs, read a few articles, watched YouTube repair videos, successfully guessed, and had limited success. Their foundation is incomplete because they do not understand the car as a system. However, intelligence and enthusiasm are not contributing differences between these individuals.
We see the value of a solid foundation when both individuals encounter a non-starting car. The car tinker makes a great first step by checking the fuel gauge to see if the vehicle has enough fuel to run. This approach sounds excellent. The seasoned mechanic’s first step is to open the fuel cap, push the car, and listen for fuel sloshing. While this approach appears to be similar, there is a significant difference. The seasoned mechanic knows fuel gauges can fail. This subtle difference exemplifies their foundation, experience, and solid logic.
A true professional's mark is they apply the precise amount of effort to achieve a specific result. Their efforts rarely result in surprise, and they have confidence in their knowledge. An example of this skill can be easily observed by watching an expert Karate fighter. They deliver one punch at the exact right moment. They often use their opponent’s momentum to amplify injury instead of the armature who applies many unguided punches.
I have been on one side, the middle, and the other side of this foundation. In computer programming, I have a modest understanding of the fundamentals. I can read programs to get a good feel for what is going on. I have some program writing talent but often work myself into gigantic problems. When this occurs, any talented programmer can see my mistake and rapidly determine a solution. This knowledge base falls into the amateur category.
I know how to house paint, and the results are usually good. An extensive project does not scare me, and I have enough knowledge to get myself out of a jam. Yet, I see professional painters, and their results are much better. I consider my paint foundation to be middle ground.
In electronics, I "know my stuff." This phrase is how Electrical Engineers brag to each other. Yet, I know that electronics span a vast technology region, and my experience and education only cover a percentage of the total foundation.
Frequently, I have solved complex problems that stumped experts. How? Like the auto mechanic in the above example, I took a step back, looked at the essential elements, and eliminated potential problems. My approach was ruthlessly systematic, logical, and fueled by my understanding of how electronics must operate. It feels incredible to have this foundation and contribute. (Yes, I have had many humbling experiences which balance out my brilliant solutions.)
I knew this foundation concept applied to writing, but I naively thought that "book knowledge" centered on good grammar and spelling. "Good stories are good stories. The characters and foundation naturally work themselves out." Yeah … It turns out expert authors have a vast foundation of story structure, plot, flow, history, dialog, grammar, spelling, and other areas I have yet to blunder across.
As my writing knowledge base improved, I discovered the edges of this foundation. My biggest revelation is that every writing project begins with a well-explored outline.
A talented author (middle ground) can read a book (or part of one) and instantly see the issues. An expert author knows how to avoid and fix problems. An inexperienced author or light reader might miss a significant issue, or more likely, they know there is a problem but not the type.
The ultimate defining aspect of an expert author is that they can write something great the first time. All the elements come together without the need for editing by a third party. For me, the editing process takes at least ten times longer.
I know my writing foundation of knowledge and skill has holes. For example, character motivation continues to be an issue. However, understanding my limitation is the first step in becoming an expert because only then can I overcome my weaknesses.
I suppose that brings us back to the beginning. The first draft of this blog took about 30, and I have been editing it every evening for just under three weeks. Clearly, I have a long way to go before considering myself a writing expert.

Adrenalin

Three weeks ago, on a fine Sunday morning, I was taking my daily 45-minute walk. Along the way, I thought about life, resolved issues, organized my day, and pondered writing. Forty minutes in, I spotted two men walking. One was traveling backward while holding a baseball bat while the other yelled incoherent remarks. The man with the baseball bat saw me and told me to be a witness. This episode was very far out of place for my neighborhood and certainly not how I expected my morning to go.
They continued to argue, and then a car drove up. The driver moved his vehicle to allow the dash camera to record the incident. The argument became heated, and the one man threw a rock at the man with the bat. This gesture tipped the fragile truce, and the two began trading blows. As the fight raged, the man with the car took away the bat. The fight ended with the man with the bat in a chokehold.
I called the police (several people had also phoned them) and asked for an ambulance. The police came, arrested the incoherent man, and questioned everybody. (Side note: The ambulance never arrived.)
Because I was a witness, I waited to give my statement. In the interim, I spoke with the man with the bat and car driver. The incident began with the incoherent man (who was probably homeless and on drugs) attacking a female jogger and scaring three boys. A jogger called her husband, who grabbed a bat to go after the guy. The car driver was the father of the three boys. The event concluded with the police arresting the homeless man, but I was unsure if they arrested the man with the bat.
I thought about this experience for a while before blogging about it. We all made many bad decisions. The question is: Why were the four of us not thinking clearly? It occurred to me we were all under the influence of adrenalin. Our adrenal glands release this hormone when our body senses a threat or the need to achieve extraordinary physical effort. Besides giving us strength, adrenalin clouds our judgment and forces us to make quick decisions.
Let's examine the players starting with incoherent man. He probably took too many drugs and had preexisting mental issues. The guy saw a jogger and, in his drug-induced delusion, tried to get a date with her. When she refused, he became upset and went after her. Because his efforts were unsuccessful, he verbally took out his stress on some boys.
When the incoherent man got confronted by a guy with a bat, his adrenalin kicked in, and then the grave decisions started. His biggest mistake was attacking a person with a bat. The adrenalin clouded his judgment into thinking he could withstand the blow from a bat. (This was true, but luck could have favored the other man, and he received a fatal blow.) The correct course of action should have been to enjoy being high and leave the jogger alone.
The man with the bat was having a relaxed breakfast and then got a call from his wife. She was under attack. This information sent him into a rage, and the adrenalin flowed like a river. From that moment on, his mind was in a different place. He grabbed a bat and jumped into his car. This adrenalin-fueled decision was a life-altering event. The correct course of action should have been to protect his wife from further attack while calling the police. Confronting a person who was not a danger was a colossal mistake.
The car driver thought defensively and logically. Adrenalin forced him to protect himself and record the incident. The correct course of action should have been to put more effort into defusing the situation.
I forced myself to stay at a distance and monitor my surroundings. I did not protect the man with the bat, defuse the situation, or record the incident on my phone. I was heavily under the influence of adrenalin and made four poor decisions.
My blogs have had a common theme, and this is the point where I ask myself, "what does this have to do with writing?" Yes, there is a tie-in. This situation was far from what we see in the news, movies, or writing. Overall, the event was messy, illogical, scary, and chaotic. I could even describe the violence as comical. My summary would be, "There was no reason for this crazy fight."
Everybody is used to organized incidents in print and media. Bruce Lee makes a quick jab with “expert timing.” Indiana Jones fights his way out of captivity. Both superstars use calm intelligence and make brilliant decisions. Their mistakes contain comedic value, and viewers clearly understood the action. The only place for adrenalin is to create a more powerful punch.
What about the bad guy? He goes down on the first punch because adrenalin is not present to convince him to stand back up and fight.
Should I have expected an epic battle scene? Did somebody expect me to carry my six-shooter and deal out some western justice? Yes! Because that is how epic stores and movies play out. However, we know films and books are positive reflections of reality, and adrenalin has no place.
This incident gave me a lot to think about, and I will incorporate more chaos into my stories. However, I will have to keep in mind that readers are not expecting adrenalin-fueled rages that make little sense. Therefore, I will have to explain to readers that the character’s bodies released a massive amount of adrenalin. Would my readers understand, or is that the adrenalin talking?