End of originality?

I enjoy listening to the podcast Do I Dare to Eat a Peach with Dan and Rob Wells every Wednesday. Both have participated in podcasting before, they are both published authors of international renown, and they are brothers (Dan is older by less then two years). And like most siblings they enjoy similar things, but often disagree about them. I enjoy the banter and the information (they are both very intelligent and Rob is a total research nut) but I don't always agree with what they say. For instances in episode 21 they talk about the oddness of the poem that was originally written with Camille Saint-Saens "Dance Macabre" (the 1:09:35 mark in the episode) I was screaming, "It was written in French! Of course it's odd, it's a translation!" Anyway, I've been known to disagree with them, but I still enjoy myself.

 Episode 36 was on covers of songs and it got me musing. Why do we enjoy new versions of something? Covers of songs. Remakes of movies. Re-tellings of stories in novels. Let's take the story of Cinderella. That link will take you the the "adaptations" part of the Wikipedia article. As you look at the list, keep in mind that novels and short stories are not listed. My family has at least two re-tellings in novel form. How many times has that story been retold? I believe I would be accurate to say that it has been done over a hundred times.

In the Do I Dare to Eat a Peach episode, Dan and Rob specifically only look at covers of the songs, not mash-ups (mixing two or more songs), or adaptations and remixes (altering the lyrics). My comparison to Cinderella does include those additional elements. But regardless it begs the question: Why use the same old tired story again. And again. And again.

Dan's other podcast, Writing Excuses covered this question in Season 8, episode 6. Taken from the liner notes they address my question: "Familiar stories let us explore things in new ways, both because we know what’s coming, and because we don’t need to be brought up to speed on the story." They are applying this to written stories, but the same can be said of other media. Rob Wells mentions in an earlier Peach episode that movie adaptations of books are like making apple pie. It takes a whole food (apples), but turns it into  a different food (pie). This provides variation and can produce different perspectives.

For example, JRR Tolkin talks about the sacrifice of Boromir  in The Lord of the Rings: the Fellowship of the Ring. It takes about a two paragraphs (online text here p. 417). It is a stirring scene and you do feel a sense of loss at his death. This scene was taken by Peter Jackson in his movie adaptation and translated to a visual medium. The end product is very different from the original, but the power behind it is equal or arguably greater. NOTE - I am not advocating that movies are better than books, just that they are different and different is not inherently good or bad.

Now let's look at the title of this blog. Is our fascination with established stories ruining our creativity and preventing people from being original? Some may say that it is. I enjoy a variety of YouTube artists and many of them do covers, adaptations, remixes, and mash-ups of popular songs. The last two movies I watched were a Bond film (a book adaptation) and Wreck-it-Ralph a movie pulling from video game troupes. Even Pixar's two upcoming movies are pulling from works they've already established (Planes from the Cars world, and a Monsters Inc. College film). Where is the new stuff?! Well, believe it or not, it's in there. Let me explain.

I recently finished reading Cinder by Marissa Meyer. It is one of the many adaptations of Cinderella and one of the two that my family owns. Allow me to explain how it is original. First, it is a science fiction story that takes place so far in the future that people living on the moon have evolved to be more than human. Cinder, our lowly protagonist, is a cyborg. Oh, and did I mention it takes place in the Orient, or that there is a plague killing everybody, or that Cinder is a mechanic? Like Mary Robinette says in the Writing Excuses episode cited earlier, the story has the important elements that tell us it is a Cinderella story, but everything else is new a exciting. I highly recommend the book. So you know the series isn't done yet, but it's well worth reading.

Allow me one math example here. If you were to look at most advanced math concepts you would discover that, for the most part, they are extrapolations and adaptations of the four basic operations: addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. Heck, even multiplication could be seen as an advanced form of addition. And subtraction is just the opposite. So have there been any original science or maths done since the discovery of addition? Of course. Original thinking in math and science (including the social sciences) is often taking established ideas and applying them in new ways, or combining them to create something new. This is the basic idea of synthesis.

The argument could be used that humanity has been creating ideas for long enough that there is no such thing as an original idea - in any discipline. Joseph Campbell in Hero with a Thousand Faces basically says that despite existing thousands of miles apart all the different cultures in the world had, in essence  the same myths and legends. So was humanity ever really original? Yes. Our originality comes from taking the known and mixing it with the unknown. Taking the familiar and crossing it with the strange. Taking two seemingly opposite ideas and combining them and finding not only do they not cancel each other out, but blend in a new and exciting way. Think about the scene from Disney/Pixar's Ratatouille - where Remy tries to explain food to his brother. It's kind of like that. 

For your viewing (and listening pleasure) here is a playlist I put together of some of my current favorite covers from YouTube artists.

Muse on what your next original idea will be while listening to the music.

Solid, Liquid, Gas, or Plasma?

Most week days  I drive my two kids to day care and I try to be educational in the car. What can I say - its a professional interest. One morning we got on to states of matter and it got me musing. What are the definitions of the different states? How do you test for the state of matter?

NASA has the most concise and simplest explanation I've seen, even if it was written in 2006. It is not the most extensive but it answers my question on how to test for states of matter. It also addresses the issue of plasma - the "fourth state" of matter. There is plenty to read on plasma including this "Plasma Cannon Safety Activity Book" by the makers of Schlock Mercenary (there is a link on the right). But the thing I liked most about the article was NASA's comment, "NASA is currently doing research into the use of plasmas for an ION propulsion system." Do you know what uses twin ion engines to fly? I'll give you a hint - Twin Ion Engine is an acronym. Turns out that NASA is already implementing the NEXT generation of ion engines to meet our propulsion needs. Now to develop an X-wing.

I kind of touched on the states of matter when I talked about setting fire to the snow back in January. I used to think that the states were steps to progress through, but I was clearly mistaken. Snow is when water goes from gas to solid without mucking about in the shifty liquid phase. Also, I always wondered why you never saw liquid carbon dioxide. You ether have what you breathe out of your lungs or what you use to make ice cream. It turns out that in order to see liquid carbon dioxide you need a very large, very think, very clear sapphire. So movement between the phases may be triggered by a variety of things (not just temperature) and does not need to happen in a liner process.

It occurred to me that the states of matter are also represented in the classic elements of Earth, Water, Wind, and Fire. Apparently that is a common thought - or at least common enough to end up on Wikipedia (first paragraph). But I wonder how many came to that thought from Avatar: the Last Airbender. I'm not talking about the movie which had one of the highest CinemaSin scores ever, but the cartoon which is well worth watching.

So here is the question - Why should we care about the phases of matter? Why do I try to teach them to my children? Why is it considered basic science knowledge that people should know? Probably because it is - basic science knowledge that is. A basic understanding of the sciences is important to have as science dictates how the world works. Perhaps that was a bit strong - science describes how the world works. The more you know about something the more you can use that information. For instance, before people understood gravity (the force that holds us down) they couldn't fly.

Now isn't that interesting?

One last thought - Water is the only composition that is not only found naturally in the three main states, but that are consumed in all three. Particularly in hospitals. Heck, they even use plasma - both kinds. Just make sure they use the right one in you.

March 26 / 2013 Update - Web comic KXCD in it's weekly What if blog makes mention of ION engines in the retrieval of the Voyager I probe. Of course NASA is not going to retrieve Voyager I, but it's cool to hear about ION engines.

Our dependence on technology

Before I start I need to say - Happy Pi day. Go check out the Pi videos on Numberphile's YouTube Channel.

My wife's iPad broke, or at least the screen did. Cracked is more like it. But we are already looking at how to replace it. and since she's thinking of one with more memory, that will mean an upgrade. While I believe we will be able to hold out for while it is still something that got moved up the priorities list. Also, After backing up her iPad, I figured I better back up my iPod touch - you know, just in case. One thing led to another and here I am staying up late to install new software on the thing. It wasn't supposed to take this long.

Four years ago I said that I didn't need an iPod. I didn't have enough music to fill one. But then my  work had a spring training conference. Three days of sessions, outings and speakers. It was a lot of fun. But then the big finisher. A dutch over cook-off and the drawing for the grand prize, an iPod touch. Guess who won? Me obviously. It was my official introduction to the world of mobile technology.

When I worn out that iPod touch I realized that I needed a new one. I would like to say that this need was not due to a feverish, addicted senses of the word, but rather a "I used it to organize my life" mentality. There may have been some withdrawal influencing my decision or the fact that the first was a 2nd gen and now they had 4th gen that fueled the desire to replace it. When all was said and done though, it was an honest evaluation that in order to remain organized of everything from my E-mail, calendar and even my finances I would need to replace it.

When did I get so dependent on technology? At first the iPod was a luxury, but what turned it into a necessity? Perhaps the bigger question is, at what point did society become so dependent on technology?

Perhaps even that is the wrong question. If you look up "the history of technology" on Wikipedia it starts with a picture of the wheel. Technology is what some people argue sets us apart from other lifeforms. Our ability to mold our surroundings to our purposes is unique. There are animals that use tools however, how many animals have used those tools to change their surroundings. Even from a religious point of view, Adam and Eve were sent "to till the ground from whence [they were] taken" (Genesis 3:23). Without technology they could not have tilled the ground. So using technology is an integral aspect of our species. Even the Amish, known for their desire to live simply have some pretty impressive stuff. One line I found interesting in the Amish story is "the more technology they add, the more technology they need."

So at what point did society become so dependent on technology? The answer seems clear - when we started adding to it. Perhaps the only was to avoid a dependence on technology is to keep from adding to it. Compare these two clips from The Gods Must Be Crazy comparing the Bushman of the Kalahari and the modernized (1980s) world. (Or just watch the whole show - it's delightful). In many ways the Bushman live like the chimp do in the "animals that use tools" clip. They don't change their environment but have simply adapted to it.

We have made our world with technology whether it be the plow to till the earth or the space shuttle to explore new Earths. Am I an advocate for returning to the state of the bushman? No. I love modern technology am pretty sure that My survival skills in a primitive environment would only last me so long. Eagle Scout award included. It's interesting that I should happen upon an article from the Chronicle of Higher Education's The Chronicle Review today as I write this. The title - "Misguided Nostalgia for Our Paleo Past" I won't try to sum up everything there in, but the subheading is "We weren't well adapted then, we aren't maladapted now." I'll end with the final paragraph from Marlene Zuk's article

But in a larger sense, we all sometimes feel like fish out of water, out of sync with the environment we were meant to live in. If gnawing on that rib or jogging barefoot through the mud is therapeutic, enjoy. But know that should you wish to join us, the scientific evidence will gladly welcome you to the 21st century, in all its inevitable anxious uncertainty.

 I've got to go. My computer is telling me to clean up its hard drive.

The power of language

I heard this story on the news this week and was reminded of the power of words. While the article is about the gun control - sorry, correction - the gun violence prevention debate the arguments that some words have "baggage" is nothing new. Any person who has put together a survey has had to make sure that their language is neutral to the topic or be accused of being biased. Lawyers choose their words carefully both to explain as well as to expose people actions. You can even look into the mind games of dating and relationships to find that there are many ways to say the same thing, but they all mean something different.

So, how powerful is language?

The playground chant of, "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me" taunts language, saying that they it is harmless and weak.

However, according to Wikipedia the idea that, "the pen is mightier than the sword" has been around since the 6th century BC (see "Predecessors" in the article) and has been widely accepted as a valid statement in most situations.

Granted, Mark Twain said in A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court, "Words are only painted fire. The look is the fire itself."

So perhaps it is not language, but the place, time, and way that it is used. That would certainly support the argument in the article - the way something is said is as important as what is being said. We have only to look towards the great convention known as Sarcasm to validate that. It is a way to say words that makes them mean the exact opposite to what the actual words say.

And let's not forget the power of lying. This was used to great effect in WWII to mislead Nazi Germany about the location of the D-Day invasion. It is the backbone of the intelligence community (CIA, MI6, FSB, etc.) And don't forget about the word prevaricate. You are not telling an actual lie, but the intent is to mislead. My favorite was a headline from the Soviet Union. "USSR places second in international competition. US finishes second to last." Their were only two participants. We could also look at: rumor, gossip, and calumny. And don't forget propaganda, marketing, and censorship. All of these are language based attacks or controls that are used everyday by people all over the world produce a desired effect within or to someone or a group of people. Words can be very powerful.

So this leads me to a word that I've been musing over for a couple of years. It's a word I use very carefully and I think about it a lot before saying it. The word is "but". What is the significance of this word, I hear you ask. Look at how it is used both in literature and in your own language. In almost every example of the word "but" the main focus of the thought is what is said after it. That is because "but" basically said, "every thing I've said before now is insignificant." Think about it. If some said, "I love you, but..." It doesn't make a difference how much they love you, it is clearly not sufficient to overcome whatever doubt they have. Another - "You deserved to win, but...." Even the phrase, "There was no action but to run." could be said without the but simply by dropping the first phrase and saying, "I had to run." or even "I ran."

Now I am not advocating removing "but" from your language all together. Nor am I saying it does not have it's uses in the examples I've given. What I do want to point out is what it means to the person hearing it. In meeting with students for my job, I occasionally have to give someone bad news. Their grades are too low and they are being suspended. Because they failed a class they will lose their scholarship. Those kinds of things. Often times they students have gone through a very challenging time and were simply stretched too far in too many directions by events beyond their control. I have had students in tears in my office as they lay out their struggles, efforts, and failures. If I were to say, "You gave it everything you had, but the policy states..." It doesn't matter what the policy states - I am dismissing their efforts as insignificant. They weren't good enough. Whenever I find myself in these situations I always try to separate my words about their efforts from the negative consequences. "You gave it everything you had. The policy states..." Now it does matter what the policy states because I have acknowledged their past efforts, now they are prepared to move into the future.

There are plenty of times I use "but" when talking with people. It sets up contrast. It takes old known information and updates it with new relevant information. Continue to use it, but be aware of what it can mean. Like I've heard in every sexual harassment prevention training - it's not the intent of the language but the impact that is important. "But" is one of those words that can have an unknown impact.

House Keeping

I've decided to move to a regular update time. I will have a regular post that will appear Thursday morning. I will also post as time allows during the week as well. This will provide some structure to the updates so those of you who follow it know when you can be sure to find something. I will also post as I find time throughout the week. So you can anticipate at least one post a week at a regular time and anything extra will be "pure gravy."

Critical thinking is better than caffeine

As I work full time and am taking Master's classes the only time I have to do homework is in the evenings. My family is all in bed and asleep by 10:00. My wife can even tell what time it is based on how tired he is. It is seriously creepy. Some nights I exercise my 15-5 rule. I developed this as an undergrad. Read for 15 minutes and when my eyes start to droop, sleep for 5 minutes. Repeat. Other nights I am able to plug through articles, chapters, posts, papers, assignments, or projects for two to three hours straight and not feel at all tired and without needing any breaks. There have been nights I've been up to 1:00 am working on homework and then went to bed and read twitter messages for half an hour because I still didn't feel tired.

That got me musing about what causes sleeplessness. Pulling up insomnia in Web MD gets you good information about acute and chronic insomnia, what causes it and how to treat it. I couldn't find anything to what my situation was, but perhaps I didn't know exactly what was going on in my brain.

I'm not a new comer to insomnia or other sleep oddities. Lemons and decongestants too close to bed will keep me up with no relief. I've also had my share of normal sleepless nights due to my sleeping situation (on someone's couch, floor, camping, etc.) I had a very healthy case of jet lag after spending two years in Russia and then returning home to Utah. The really fun sleep problem I have is caused by high stress or high emotion. I hallucination whatever activity the emotion or stress revolved around.

 My first occurrence with it was in junior high when I spent too much time playing Warcraft, the original. I went to bed to awake a few hours later. My eyes were open, I could see everything in my room, but there floating in my field of view was a game of Warcraft that i could not avoid. Closing my eyes didn't help, my mind was so focused on the game that even though I wanted to quiet I could not. I knew I was awake, but I could not fall asleep while that game was on - and it wouldn't shut off.

The week of the high school musical was horrible as well. I was the props master, making sure all of the actors had what they needed and helping to push sets on stage. Every night of a performance I would awake and a vision of backstage would superimpose itself on my bedroom. I would think, "I've got to get the set on stage" and then climb out of bed and try to push my bed "on stage." Luckily I was just pushing it against the wall so it didn't actually move, but I would continue to push even after I collapsed from exhaustion. The only thing that would snap me out it was looking at my digital alarm clock. For some reason, seeing the time would pull me back into reality and I would crawl into bed and fall asleep. Only to have it happen again an hour later.

In addition to these very intense sleep disturbances, I occasionally will reach a semi-awake state where I will feel that I am in the middle of a conversation. This causes me to talk in my sleep, and while I can't remember what I say every time, I am often aware of what I am saying. That does not mean that what I say makes any sense what-so-ever, but I know that I'm saying it. I've even barked in my sleep, and no, I have no idea why.

I couldn't find anything online that sounded like this and I think I've only met one or two other people who experience the same kind of thing. I have noticed that if my brain is kicked into critical thinking gear sleep is banished and I am able to perform very well mentally. While this is handy for homework, I suspect it is the reason for not being able to fall asleep many nights.

One last anecdote. There is a wonderful strategy game called Steel Panthers that I've played on and off for several years now. It kicks my brain in to ultra high gear and keeps it there. I've always been fascinated with tactics and strategy and this feeds that interest like no tomorrow. One night I had played in on my lap top in bed (something I don't do anymore) and then managed to fall asleep. My daughter, who was an infant at the time woke up a couple of hours later and my wife elbowed me to tell me it was my turn to check on her. I got up and wandered into her room, knowing that my wife would want to know why she started crying. When I got there, the answer was clear. She had kicked her blankets off and was exposed to the elements. I could see this. I could see what was right in front of my face. But what my sleep deprived, game addled brain made my eyes see was the hexagon board from Steel Panthers, a stand of trees and three squads of infantry to the north west of my daughter's position. I could see how they had fired on her, and as her moral fell she retreated out of her cover. It all made sense now! I tucked her in and went back to bed.

As I crawled into my own covers my wife asked, "What was wrong?" I knew that what I had seen was ridiculous. I knew that what I had seen was false. But unable to stop myself I said, "Infantry scared her out of her cover." My wife sat bolt upright, turned to me and said, "They WHAT?!" Again, knowing that I spoke complete and utter nonsense, I grunted and replied, "Infantry. Scared her our of her cover." My wife looked at me, blinked a few times, and slowly lay back down.

The next morning, my wife asked, "Do you know what you told me last night?"

Yes, Angel. I knew it when I said it. It seemed like the thing to say at the time.