Once more into the breach!

I just finished listening to Tarzan of the Apes by Edgar Rice Burroughs on Audible.com. It reminded me of King Soloman's Mines by Sir. H. Rider Haggard which my mother had recommended to me a could years ago, which is also on my list to read. These stories fit under what is commonly referred to as adventure fiction. Written in 1885 King Soloman's Mines is considered the first English adventure novel, but it was by far the last. Even today, our cinema has a rich tradition from The Thief of Baghdad (1924) to Indiana Jones(1981-2008), Prince of Persia (2010), and The Adventure of Tintin (2011). Most of these are based on works of literature, notably the first and last. The Thief of Baghdad was based on One Thousand and One Nights also known as the Arabian Nights Tales (published in English in 1706) while Tintin was originally published in French in 1929. So adventure stories have been going on for well over 100 years.

It occurs to me that there may be confusion about what constitutes an adventure story as opposed to a thriller, action, or other broad genre. While doing a search for "Adventure novels" I came across this list from  The Art of Manliness blog of "essential adventure novels." I've read 11 and am familiar with 19 others. I was grateful to see Kipling, Tolkien, Verne, Cussler, and Crichton which again shows the century long span of the genre. But does it answer our question about what constitutes adventure over other genres? Not really as Jurassic Park is considered a great work of science fiction and The Lord of the Rings is used as a common definition of fantasy. I googled "Adventure genre definition" and liked this particular one from Writer's Digest University:

Adventure Story: A genre of fiction in which action is the key element, overshadowing characters, theme and setting. ... The conflict in an adventure story is often man against nature. A secondary Plot that reinforces this kind of conflict is sometimes included. In Allistair MacLean's Night Without End, for example, the hero, while investigating a mysterious Arctic air crash, also finds himself dealing with espionage, sabotage and murder.

 Because adventure stories are based on action and adventure they are highly susceptible to genre blending. I think many people would not actually think of their being an adventure genre as much as they think of adventure stories within a genre. However, there are some stories out there that are best described by Adventure - Indiana Jones being at the top of the list. It's not a war story, it's not horror or even rally paranormal/supernatural. Mystery doesn't cover it either. There may be elements of those troupes but really it is all about the adventure with everything else being secondary. For instance, does the character of Indiana Jones ever really develop over the course of the movies? At the end of The Last Crusade is he really any different then at the beginning of Raiders of the Lost Ark? Not really. Yes, he has accomplished some things, reconciling himself with his father being one, but has he reached a higher level of self. Nope! He's still the same kick-butt, wicked smart, super awesome guy from when he ran away from the boulder and shot the guy with the big sword. It's all about the adventure!

This idea that the adventure reigns supreme and that character development is not as critical gives us our classic, iconic, heroes. These are the people who are good at what they do. If they fail it is because the circumstances, perhaps even the Gods, are against them. But despite failure, their competency and consistency helps them rise again and overcome whatever it was that denied them victory the first time. They may overcome flaws and weaknesses along the way, but their inherent nature is unchanged. They are heroic because that is who they are. I recently finished listening to Dodger by Terry Pratchett, one of my favorite authors. As I listened to the story (slight spoiler), I started to become surprised that everything Dodger did worked. Everything he put his mind to he was able to accomplish. He did develop in other ways and I believe that you could say there was some character arch, but everything worked out. It didn't make me care about his character any less, nor did it significantly diminish the tension, it simply made the story about the adventure and less about the character. I believe this is what is often called a plot-driven story. Many think that plot driven stories are not as good as character-driven stories, but I believe that's a matter of taste. The classic and popular  adventure stories seem to have done a good job of it though. So kick-back, get comfortable, and enjoy the ride.

Creatures of Habit

Stand with my back to the wall. Reach back and touch it with my left hand. Take a step forward with my left food and tap the ground with my racket. Say the score. Bounce the ball once and serve.

Position paper draft on right side of the screen. Open research notes, online sources, etc. on left side. Turn on music, low volume.

Wrap up daily activities by 10:00 pm. Dress for bed. Read or play computer until midnight.

I put on deodorant, comb my hair, then use three pieces of toilet paper placed on the bottom right corner of my sink counter to clean my razor every morning.

What I have described above are three things that I do under certain circumstances. The first is how I serve when playing racquetball. The next is how I write research papers and blog posts. Next is my general evening routine and has been for the last fifteen years. And lastly my morning routine of getting ready for the day.

As I was doing research on this, I was looking for information on "why" we form habits. It turns out that "why" and "habits" don't go together. I wasn't able to find anything addressing the "why" of habit forming, it's all of the fact that forming habits is something we just do.

Habits form when we repeatedly do something. That's it. If you do the same thing the same way, you will eventually form a habit. Now, MIT demonstrated that as we do the same thing over and over, we eventually fine-tune it so that it becomes more efficient. Ultimately thought, we find ourselves slipping into autopilot as we preform these tasks. This can happen for both good behaviors as we all know. But this address the reason that we do not discuss why we form habits. We form habits because we do things, and many of those things are the same thing, over, and over, and over, and over......

So, back to how habits form. Terry Gross from Fresh Air on NPR, did an interview with Charles Duhigg, author of the book The Power of Habit: Why we do what we do in life and business. There it mentions that habits consist of three parts: cue or trigger, behavior, and reward.

The cue or trigger is the switch that moves us to automatic mode, and can be hard to identify with all of the "noise" associated with our behavior. From the appendix of his book, Charles Duhigg points out that "experiments have shown that almost all habitual cues fit into one of five categories: location, time, emotional state, other people, or immediately preceding action." This means that if you are trying to figure out what triggers your habit you can look to only those five areas. So, just keep track of where you are, what time it is, how you feel, who you are with, and what you were doing before you slipped into automatic. A pattern will eventually appear and you can narrow down the cue.

The behavior can also be called the routine. This is what becomes automatic. It may be my serving routine as described above, or my evening routine. It may be someone reaching for a handful of M&Ms at "that time" in the afternoon. This is usually the most identifiable aspect of the habit and usually what you want to stop.

The reward is what reinforces the habit. For instance, people usually don't develop a habit of putting their hands on a stove. This is simply because it hurts like the devil when you do. There is no reward to that, only pain. So every habit has a reward associated with it, something we feel that we are getting out of our routine. Perhaps it is the feeling that you aren't missing anything, like putting on deodorant or shaving. Or perhaps it feels easier on the eyes to look to the right side of the screen to type and the left to read. Whatever it is, it can be identified. Duhiggs points out that in trying to break a habit you should experiment with rewards so you can narrow down what it is you're craving when you enact the behavior. Once you know what you are craving from the behavior you can find more appropriate behaviors to achieve the same reward.

I should point out that I've presented Duhigg's ideas in almost reverse order. Check out the link to the appendix of his book above. There really is some fascinating stuff there. I was going to get into the neurological aspects of habit building, but I'll have to save that for another post.

I do want to make one thing clear. Many people associate an unusually pervasive habit, such as keeping their desk clean, or a particular action at a particular time EVERY DAY with having Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD). While I am no expert on OCD, but I have learned a thing or two from conference panels by mental health professionals and following Robison Wells, an author who has "a heavy dose of panic disorder, a moderate case of depression, and a growing, angry case of OCD." I love Rob's books and enjoy reading and listening to his blog and podcasts. In a blog last October, Rob made it clear:

"When my OCD literally makes me punch myself in the face, or smash my hand in hopes of breaking it, there's nothing I find more annoying than picky people who like to keep their desk tidy cheerfully declaring "I'm totally OCD!" Words have meaning."

Please be considerate of those that struggle with the most prevalent mental disorder out there, the disorder that I have heard referred to as "the King of Mental Illness." If you have a strong habit to do something, that is not an indication of OCD. When you habit impacts everything else you do so you cannot live a normal life - seek professional help. If it isn't OCD, it's probably an addiction. And those come with their own problems as well.

Shambling their way into our hearts (but they prefer our brains)

According to Wikipedia's list of zombie films there 240 zombie movies made between 1920 and 2002. Between 2003 and the upcoming World War Z (scheduled for later this month) there is a whopping 400. Again this is all according to Wikipedia which we all know posts a "no guarantee of validity", but since I have cited them before for more important things, we'll stick with them for this. These numbers come to 2.93 zombie movies a year for an 82 year period and 40 movies a year for a 10 year period. Do know what I get from this? Our modern society really likes zombies.

And what's not to like about zombies! They're cuddly, cute, and...... flesh-eating, mindless, animated corpses. Ok! So there is a lot to not like about them. However they have stumbled their way into our media and our minds over the last ten years with a relentlessness which they are known for. It's amazing how far it's spread. I was not surprised when the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a statement saying "CDC does not know of a virus or condition that would reanimate the dead (or one that would present zombie-like symptoms)." However, about a year before the statement came out the Public Health Matters Blog at the CDC posted the following: Preparedness 101: Zombie Apocalypse. They have since posted other material that teaches preparedness using a zombie theme including the graphic novel Preparedness 101: Zombie Pandemic. So, about a year behind the CDC I figured I should get on the bandwagon and play a tune to please the masses.

First, let me say that I am not a fan of zombie related film or other cultural motifs. I will say that this topic was rather entertaining to look into. In my research I found different references which say that zombies in general came from Haitian folklore, particularly around voodoo. However, these references also point out the the flesh-eating kind were the spawn of film and popular culture - the first film cited being "Night of the Living Dead" by George A. Romero. The original zombies were like bound servants to the voodoo master, spirits forced to remain on earth which the shadow man could ensnare. I will say that the original story is sufficiently macabre to raise the heckles on anyone (except perhaps your hard core voodoo witch doctor), but then the horror industry got a hold of the idea. I heard Dan Wells talk on his podcast Writing Excuses that zombies were not just terrifying because they are all of the things I've mentioned above, but also that they can be anyone. Zombies means having your loved ones come after you. Zombies mean that those you loved ones are not just lost, but now are the monster. That can be a truly terrifying thought. The webcomic Looking for Group illustrates this well  in this mildly graphic strip - you cannot trust even those that look innocent.

It's amazing thought how much the genre has permeated many elements of culture. I just finished reading The Beyonders series by Brandon Mull and in book two they cross a land that was ravaged by worms which turned corpses into puppets that longed for human blood. Brandon Sanderson summarized his first book ever published, Elantris, as "zombies in prison." I didn't hear that until after I read the book and realized that while he never called them zombies, that is exactly what they were. Larry Corriea, includes zombies in both of his major series: in Monster Hunter you first hear about them when a voodoo witch creates them to get back at some kids, and in the Grimnoir Chronicles (an alternate history) they were the last ditch effort of the Kaiser to win the Great War (WWI).

Interestingly enough, along with using zombies as a horror troupe, it appears that there are some that look at life (or unlife) from the zombies' point of view. Both Beyonders, and Elantris use zombies that retain some form of intelligence, treating their condition as almost a form of dementia which degenerates after a period of time. Also, there is the fairly new film Warm Bodies which puts a fun twist on not just zombie stories but also Romeo and Juliet. As I said, I am not a zombie movie kind of person, but that one is one that I would watch. I'm sure there are others out there, but those are just the ones I'm familiar with.

So what has gotten society on the zombie bandwagon? I'm not sure if I know. It could be looking for a new way to scare up some trills. Or perhaps, it has always been used as a way to address bigger social/world problems - such as disease, genetic mutation/experimentation, terrorism, religion - you name it I'm sure you could work it into a zombie story. I have to agree with Doc and Rodger from The Whiteboard though.

Perhaps it's the age of terror we live in, where horrific violence is almost an every day occurrence. People want to be able to strike back at the evil in this world and zombies are the perfect target. Think about it, they are clearly evil, easily identified, and often move slowly. It takes a lot to drop a zombie, so people can really work out their frustrations while knowing that they are doing something good. This my explain the rise in, books, movies, and video games, Besides the media outlets, there are even physical activities like zombie walks, zombie runs, and even Humans vs Zombies - a huge group of "schools, camps, neighborhoods, military bases, and conventions" which allow people to "fend off" a zombie Apocalypses. My brother and his wife took part in a number of these games. Also, my wife will regularly "run from zombies" for exercise using the Zombies, Run! app, an interactive story line featuring you as a runner for an enclosed based trying to survive the hordes of zombies. So, not only are zombies therapeutic, they are healthy.

So, what does it take to survive a zombie Apocalypse? That has been the discussion for quite a number of years. I personally like the information given in this short video posted by the singing banana himself - Dr. James Grime and featuring Thomas Woolley. It turns out, mathematically, the best thing you can do to survive an outbreak is run. If you goal is to preserve society, the modelers suggest "hit hard and hit often." I guess it's time for me to get in shape and keep my blunt instruments handy. 

Explosive tendencies

Kablammers!

During my undergrad a classmate of mine said that he tried to convince his brother-in-law to start his Master's Thesis with that word. Sadly, he was unsuccessful.

I think it's interesting the kinds of things that will explode as well as the ways they will do so. It's important to note the difference between detonation and deflagration. As Destin from Smarter Every Day demonstrates, it is the difference between shotgun shells and gas cans. Both are considered explosions, but simply differ in the speed of the blast.

Most people with then think of explosives think of dynamite and TNT. The US military has also used Comp-B and still uses C-4 for it's purposes. In high school a group of my friends and I had a conversation with a member of the Army Core of Engineers (I later heard him speak on his experiences in Iraq as part of the 2nd wave of troops). As part of the conversation he described how to remove a freeway overpass using C-4. When he mentioned that he would set a 10 minute fuse, someone said, "Wow, it takes you that long to get away?" The engineer looked at him and said, "You don't want to have to run." This dispelled many of the images I had in my head from popular media of explosives experts sprinting away from their target and throwing themselves on the ground just in time. Granted, they still sell "Bomb Squad" shirts and don't forget Schlock Mercenary's Maxim 3. Needless to say, you don't want to have to run, but if you're working with explosives you should be prepared to.

Granted, chemical explosives are not the only option available. Destin pulled a first when he analyzed the Prince Rupert's Drop with a high speed camera. As he explains, when broken it explodes, but rather than releasing chemical potential energy it releases mechanical strain energy (4:42 mark). The speed of this explosion is approximately 1658 meters per second. Seeing that the speed of sound at sea level is 340.29 meters per second, it would mean that we have the equivalent of a detonation, but with glass. Make sure you wear eye protection.

Of course, glass isn't the only thing that might be seen as an unlikely explosive. As a youth, I helped several others clean at a grain mill. They explained that we could not use electrical appliances (like vacuums) because of the danger of explosion from the flour dust. One of the guys collected some and was planning on burning it in the parking lot later. I told him it wouldn't work, but that was only because my father had explained it to me. If you think about it, it makes sense. When something burns its heat radiates out around it. You don't have to touch the flame to feel the heat. If you have lots of little particles, like bits of flour dust, and they are in a cloud, evenly spaced where if you light one the ones around it will also ignite then depending on the size of the cloud you could have a pretty big fire ball. Kind of like this sawdust cannon or Mythbuster's creamer cannon that they built to test this principle. I think this would be classified as a deflagation.

But don't forget the some of the most powerful kinds of explosive. No, it's not nuclear - it's all natural. Volcanoes, meteors, even trees, can all go under the right conditions. I've even seen a dumpster spontaneously combust. I was walking by and heard a "FWOOM!" and where there was once a dumpster full of trash there was a dumpster full of fifteen foot tall flames. Nature has a way of surprising us with it's violence. One of particular violence was the Tunguska event in Russia. Scott Westerfeld, author of Leviathan,  Behemoth, and Goliath, a trilogy of steam-punk alternate history novels, has fun with the event, but how it happened in his universe - you'll have to read the books to find out.

All in all, it's amazing what can go kablammers in this world. Even people. Spontaneous combustion aside, just try telling your significant other that those pants really do make them look fat.

What can you see?

I can see you! Granted I was looking at the back of my iPod or rather my mirror when I took this. You can actually see the bathroom lamps and my iPod (the black box below the lights) in the reflection from my eye.

That is not the reason I took this picture, nor the item of interest I thought of. As you can see, my eye is red. If you pulled up "causes for bloodshot eyes" in Google you would get a lot of sources that all say pretty much the same thing. That red eyes are caused by a number of reasons that you may or may not want to be worried about.

However, out of all the reasons you can find, this site was the first to mention the particular reason my eyes are red in this picture - tiredness. If I am up too late, my eyes go red. Sometimes it's bad enough that my vision becomes very blurry and my eyes hurt. Most of the time they just go red. If I'm doing things with family or friends, I'll sometimes ask how my eyes look as an indicator of when I should turn in. If they start to look bad, it's time for bed.

I've worn glasses since I was in 6th grade. My younger sister is the only other sibling that wears them (that is out of 4 siblings), but that is just for driving and computer use. I've always found my family's vision interesting. My father wore glasses from the time he was 8 or so, but neither one of his brothers did until they were older. Now my father is the oldest of 3 boys and I'm the 2nd oldest (but oldest boy) of 5. So from what I can see, it is likely that my son will need glasses, but not my daughter. While nearsightedness (or Myopia) has been shown to be hereditary, I don't know if it will effect my family as I've predicted here.

We'll have to see what happens.

I'm not going to tell you how late I was up last night, but I will say that it is really hard to put down a good book. As I have been plugging authors, I'll mention Megan Whalen Turner, author of The Thief, The Queen of Attolia, the King of Attolia, and A Conspiracy of Kings. She was the guest of honor at this years LTUE symposium. We bought her books and my family (who was able to stay later than we were) got them signed for us. I've read the first three before and am rereading them so I can enjoy the 4th. They are wonderful on many levels and are prone to keep you up reading when you probably should call it a night.

Remember: when your eyes turn red, it's time for bed.

The Serial Story

I will gladly say that I do not have television. Not that I don't have A television set, but I do not have an antenna or cable signal. And I really don't care. This is because of a number of factors: my family's love of reading, habit - I grew up with little to no television viewing, and also because of technology - the internet provides a lot of substitutes to television. I'm really don't have anything against television itself as a medium or even against many of the programs. Although there are some that portray things I think are better left alone.

The reason I bring this up is to accent that I enjoy stories in long form, like a lot of what television is doing, but I do not have that source for myself. Consequently I read a lot of books with sequels and series. Just thinking off the top of my head, there are at least 5 series that I have started that I'm currently waiting on books. This is also visible in my selection of web comics.

For this post, I wanted to return to some musing about serials and their origins. A serial of course is when a story is published / produced in segments or parts. This is the definition of television dramas. Often once the story is complete they are complied into one volume for future consumers (think DVD box set). The same is true of books. I understand that Charles Dickens wrote many of his stories in serial format, and the original Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy was produced as a weekly radio drama. Even Larry Correia, one of my favorite authors, wrote a serial story online before selling his first bound novel. So even going beyond a series of books, many books were produced a little at a time.

There are many reasons to do a serial. It might be the form of your medium. Television and radio have always had to work with limited time. If you notice, production requires lots of time and money. So if a TV studio is going to poor millions of dollars into a story, they like to release it a bit at a time so if it's going to go south they can stop it before they become too invested. Serial also supports how we consume media. I don't know anybody who has the time to sit and read a book over a 45 hour and 37 min period in one go. Even if you are like me who will dedicate a couple of hours to reading a book (usually between 10:00 pm and 2:00 am) there are few books I have read in one sitting. (I can only think of three, and they were all less then 300 pages).

I think one result of writing (or at least releasing) material in a serial is that it builds suspense. It leaves the audience thinking and dwelling on it. I understand the show Lost had a huge online following while it was on. I know that when I watched the first season of 24 back in college I would talk about and research it between episodes. The same is true with books. Lemony Snicket used online games and puzzles to allow readers of his Series of Unfortunate Events to see extra content and as precursors to the books coming out. Granted, many of the things done "between installments" is for the purpose of reminding consumers to keep with the story. But when the story is good, consumers need very little encouraging to keep consuming.

I wanted to blog about this for two reasons. First, the serial format is nothing new to television as it started long before broadcast media and second, my sister, EA Younker, is currently releasing one of her unpublished works on Wattpad a couple of chapters at a time. This is not the first time she has done this with alpha and beta readers. My older sister got one of EA's books chapter by chapter as she edited it and I got another. Bragging point - EA's first published novel is coming out this year by TM publishing. I got to read one draft and I liked it. I'm looking forward to getting it to see the finished product. To return to Game Over, She is doing this so people can see how she writes as well as to get feedback from potential readers of her other stories. Check it out and the next time you sit down to watch (or read) your latest favorite drama, think about how long we as a society have been consuming stories that we have to wait for.

Writing is the answer not 42.

Douglas Adams asked in his book The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, "What is the meaning to life, the universe, and everything?" The great computer Deep Thought gave the answer, "42." There are many that think this is still fundamental correct, but when it comes to Life, the Universe, and Everything in Provo, UT the answer is "writing" (and by extension reading).

This year my wife and I were finally able to attend one of the greatest writing symposiums in the inter-mountain west: Life, the Universe, and Everything. My mother wrote in her weekly E-mail that this was the fifth year they have attended. The biggest draw for us this year was that my younger sister and father were presenting a research paper they had written entitled, "Reactors built in the 20th  century blow up in the 21st." It was a discussion of the shift in science fiction from space opera to dystopian and apocalyptic. It was fascinating to hear both the origins and the progress of sci-fi, particularly as I tend to be picky about what sci-fi I read.

We enjoyed the few other panels we were able to attend. Although, I was reminded that just because people are on a panel doesn't mean that they are the most knowledgeable on the topic. It reminded me of this Schlock Mercenary comic. There was some good discussion, but it was also entertaining to watch one of the panelists do everything possible not to roll her eyes on a number of occasions as people said things she disagreed with. I was also able to attend a discussion on how to write action done by one of my favorite authors, Larry Correia. Larry is one of the authors I wanted to go all "fanboy" on. He is very good at writing action that keeps you engaged and I don't think there has been a book he's written that I didn't stay up late (or early i.e. past 2:00 am) to finish. Several of his 400+ page books I've read in less than a 48 hour period.

As we drove home, my wife commented that I should consider taking up writing again. That is, I have considered taking up writing and my wife was recommending that I consider it again. I have not written anything of particular note, but I have some ideas bouncing around my head that have been marinating for a while. I do enjoy learning about the writing process and how to improve writing, but I've come to see myself as an informed consumer. With that said, I do enjoy putting ideas on a page and I think that was one the the catalysts of keeping a blog. Writing gives me a way to think or should I say muse.

Not that kind of post

I received this wonderful magnet in the mail this weekend. It was enclosed in a letter from my mother. She only lives about 50 minutes away, but felt that was still far enough away to receive a letter.

What is this all about? The Month of Letters was started by Mary Robinette Kowal (note, Robinette is her middle name, not maiden) back in 2010. I became aware of it last year when I started following her on Twitter (@maryrobinette) and heard about her preparations. The challenge: write a letter everyday that the mail goes out, and then make sure that it is posted. You can read the full challenge by clicking on the Month of Letters link above. This year I was glad to be a recipient, even if it was from my own mother.

I received this letter the same weekend that I heard about the USPS cutting Saturday deliveries because of budget reasons. Just about everyone I know will acknowledge that I love technology and the things it can accomplish. With that said, I love receiving stuff in the mail. I love the convenience of being able to download content directly to my computer, but I got absolutely batty when I am expecting something in the mail. It drives my wife nuts. I was disappointed to hear about the cut in service. There is something nice about going to the mail box and not just finding the usual stack of bills and credit care / insurance offers, but something from a friend or family member.

I am not participating in Month of Letters this year, but I am planning on doing it next year. Hopefully that will be before the US government decide to cut the USPS and simply privatize the who shebang. But before that happens, think about what it feels like to get that letter (handwritten or otherwise) and take advantage of what the Postal Service can do over posting on the internet. I'll just mention this one: E-mails have "attach," letters can "enclose."

(Just to put a plug in for Mary Robinette Kowal (not that she needs it) - she is a fantastic author of short and long fiction, a member of the Writing Excuses podcast panel, a professional puppeteer, a voice actress, and a collector of typewriters. She wrote two of my favorite books, Shades of Milk and Honey and Glamour in Glass. I'm going to start keeping track of authors in my "Mentioned in my Blog" and I'm glad to list her as the first.)