Q. What is Interactivity anyway?
A.
Interactivity is one of the most effective ways of engaging site visitors even into The Economies of Online Cooperation wherein:-All to often unripe and burdensome-
...and, given such blithely mediocre and shabby satisfice, resignation to making do with unaware incompetence, worse, as we shall discover, where lurk the deadly stumbling blocks to optimal learning and growth, the snares of TOTALITARIAN INTERACTIVITY, bogus alternatives, externally structured choices and protocols imposed so as to seem free and at one with the user's own thought process, impoverished of real decision or responsibility, are hardly exclusive to the Internet or even automation in general, but the sheer irrelevance of age old spectacle, illusions to be consumed.
And precisely such is one of the major problems even in sustaining serious conversation online at all! The helplessness beyond what has been so rightly decried as the bogus alternatives of TOTALITARIAN INTERACTIVITY, defined choices masquerading as the dubious freedom of one's own already somewhat uncritical thinking, and the demand only for the lowest hanging fruit of online interaction instead of savvy quality human remote collaboration.
chat?
A.
Chat or Instant Messaging usually refers to real time text communication, private one to one or often in groups, even though now a days real time voice communication Online is a common option, not to mention via telephone. And the wild popularity, vapidity and notorious moronic semi-literacy of text chat, surely qualifies as the least palatable or nutritious of low hanging fruit!Either the effort at communication is taxing or else the difficulty of both keeping pace and spewing forth anything even semi-intelligible typically reduces the exchange to a moron level. This is simply because, especially if one is no speed typist, the perfectly Orwellian dumb-down medium of real time text chat embodies the very worst of all possible worlds, with neither the spontaneity and and non verbal cues of face to face encounters, video conferencing or whatever ordinary real time voice communications, nor the time and facility to compose ones thoughts as in asynchronous text communication via email or electronic message posting boards. Text chat, Instant Messaging, is entirely unfit for any use beyond as originally intended, the quick reminder or brief interruption.
Unfortunately, real time text chat is often an integral component of many other Online interactions, particularly computer mediated RPG of one sort or another, and other thereby even further impoverished online role-play.
Q. What is the crucial importance of posting conventions?
A. Quality interactivity
online generally still depends upon asynchronous text communication, private or public response to previous private or public messages by others, often excerpted or quoted for context.The revolutionary quick turn around of electronic asynchronous text communication makes unprecedented actual conversation in typed correspondence possible!
But for any in depth exchange or Dialectic, a very important aspect of quoting never to be underestimated, is how the quotes should indicate what sections or points of a message that any given remark replies to. Often there may be certain response to some sections or points of a message, and distinct other responses to about other sections or points even of the same message. And it will be crucial to see, readily, which response pertains to which point, in order to make much sense of any of it.
And the best way to convey all contextual connections clearly and distinctly, is to quote a little bit, interject some comments, quote some more, and then interject some comments specifically to that as well, and so on. Each answer in turn, follows the same method, and an entire written conversation unfolds, point by point, iteration by iteration.
Quotes should be indicated, automatically, by your email software or service, by a character at the beginning of each line, usually a '>' (greater than) sign or chevron, the right angle bracket or right brocket, in bare plain text, or by a blue bar in html that supports colors, sizes and fonts, etc.. or on some forums, by a range of different indications such indentation of the text. Thus, with each iteration, another such indicator is added at the beginning of the line, so that chronological order as well as intended sequitur will always be clearly indicated as the conversation proceeds.
These principles of the quoting conventions handed down from Usenet, even back from the days of Arpanet, are still applicable in any mode of asynchronous text communication, electronic forums, message posting boards, list servers, egroups, and email, etc. and allow the end user to meaningfully participate in the structuring of interaction, rather than finding oneself thereby manipulated, enslaved or hamstrung.
PS
. Also please always be sure to include citation of the full URL web address, a clickable hyperlink to any discrete materials or resources on the Web as ever comes to be referenced in discussion.Q. What is an Online writing community?
A.
An Online writing community is the electronic interaction of different people (some engaged in writing activity and discussion, and other spectators "lurking"), to keep visitors to the sight returning to participate in public and private asynchronous text communication, reading and respond to new contributions, story additions, revisions, and modifications, and electronic message bulletin board discussion posts.There are reading communities for the appreciation of various literature or Media. And there are also communities centered upon writing as an activity. Some writing communities simply exchange comment upon the work of individual participants, and others actually feature writing collaboration. While on yet other forums, writers, successful or aspiring, simply talk shop.
But all this is strictly definition from cultural interaction, with no mind to any particular goals ever put forth, priorities and motivations beyond that, all of which vary widely from person to person.
Indeed, more serious Online writer's groups are distinguished by the exchange of candid critique as the entire point of seeking useful comment in the first place, while, to the opposite extreme, in many other frankly phony Online writer's groups, all such is anathema, the expectation, one way or another, being of only the exchange of unconditional praise and encouragement, stroking, or unfocussed conversation listening, reverentially, to an authoritative speaker. And sometimes people post to various Online forums to advertise seeking out prospective writing partners according to their own needs as they best perceive them.
And this is why partnerships and communities, Online or Offline, for writing or anything else, like any other successful relationship or immediate social networks, may be best facilitated by personality profiling and matching for compatibility. Speaking of lofty Utopian visions from lowering ever more bountiful metaphorical branches such as bear more and better proverbial fruit, the function of the proposed
CASA - Computer Assisted Social Activity system.Because user satisfaction may very much depend not only upon the ease of use, flexibility, and structure of the website and tools, but also upon the flexibility and sophisticated transparency of hither to rigid and controlling computerized mediation, and then upon human factors including compatibility of interactivity partners, expectations in common, and good forum moderation. Or to put it another way, avoiding incompatible interactivity partners, cross purposes, and dispensing with heavy handed forum moderation.
Reading and writing communities may also subdivide for particular genres, interests and other preferences, which will also be subject of CASA profiling. Genres ranging from Historical Romance and Comedy to Action-Adventure, not to mention Science Fiction and fanfic, as in the demo collaborative writing communities here on this website.
Q. If the open ongoing common projects showcased here are only a partial demo, then how is the proposed webpromotion in it's entirety conceived?
A
. Click here to read the proposal.Q. What is the importance of honestly bad writing?
The Online writer's brainstorming community on this website is intended to challenge anyone even up to the most accomplished authors and also to accommodate any one down to the least developed beginner, even no matter how naively bad. But any such real progress towards relevance may be categorized as residing just above and beyond the easy seduction of the low hanging fruit or most minimal aspiration, instead demanding extended reach and effort, and even then, with something of a bite to the immature palate.
In short, one way or another, one must write badly to start with, in order to ever learn to write well.
More over, it will always be a measure of dissatisfaction that motivates and guides the ongoing further progress even of the most accomplished writing master, let alone the beginner or rankest armature. And what is required for just such enduring dissatisfaction is, first of all, the challenge of an at all difficult writing standard or motivated goals ever put forth, and a tolerance in order to actually harness insecurity productively as real life motivation to creativity that is sometimes called creative tension.
Thus, honestly bad writing is crucial, even indispensable, developmentally, as is any vision whatsoever, ambitious enough for the risk of failure.
All too often, one of the greatest sore points, but nevertheless most crucial of criticism remains the fundamentals of fiction writing.
It is no accident that a FAQ on fiction writing fundamentals, an How-To, accompanies a FAQ concerned with the importance of the free exchange of critical thinking in writing collaboration.
Q. What is the obstacle of obsessional self-indulgent writing?
A. First of all, "Writing comes more easily if you have something to say." to quote Sholem Asch. True self expression, not silly obsession, bogus validation by phony self definition. Indeed, true artistic integrity often means cleaving to the more difficult challenge, far from being being half-assed, lackadaisical or indifferent.
Naively bad fiction tends to be utterly childish, bereft of plausibility, specificity,
theme, coherence and especially of characterization even remotely convincing or motivated despite superficial details, if any, however extraneous, nor concept whatsoever of pacing or direction; daydreaming faithfully transcribed, driven by the desire of imagination to transcend experience but falling into the trap of self indulgent failure of evocation from inner life, exemplifying the classic Zen mischief, the irrelevance of repetition, partaking not of lost bygone inspiration: Alas, you had to be there. And, as will be seen, the same principle may readily apply in shared experience including imaginative exchange no less than private inner life, hence to collective authorial ineptitude no less than individual.Creativity, however inspired, is well known actually to benefit optimally from the limitation, definition and focus provided by pertinent
relevant knowledge and skill to whatever purpose in mind. But entrenched ignorance engenders arbitrarily stifled creativity together with a deadly lack of productive focus.Any genuine,
relevant and abiding interest, talent or proficiency entails the desire and expectation of improvement over time. But Narcissistic wanna-be writers inexpert in anything except whatever their own personal or shared assumptions and idiosyncrasies, and who are not merely naively bad, but who have culturally absorbed or simply confabulated actual techniques of atrocious writing, can be tenacious in their insipid mimesis of entrenched irrelevance, and actively hostile to improvement.Such is the peril of a stagnant reactionary normative closed system of thinking such as is characterized by the dishonesty of immersion and fixation in doubtless inner conflicted superficial triviality, focus shifted from the external results to be achieved or produced, to a rut of inner life, accruing naught but status quo bereft of relevant purpose, increasingly fixated if anything, only with the refinement of inner forms and procedures.
And a few such over all categories of travesty, as well as some better alternatives, are catalogued here in this very
FAQ concerning the various known collaborative writing formats.Such is the self satisfied sheer fantasy of writing, the entrenched denial in the empty mimesis of writing, rather than actually doing it or even merely pretending, harmlessly. Because genuine authorship must certainly be concerned with the end product without endlessly lying to oneself and then co-validating.
Growth emerging from the most ingeniously bad writing must focus, first of all, upon ongoing improvement of that output, however initially execrable.Anything worth doing is worth the learning curve of doing it badly, first, requiring any dawning awareness and concern with what one creates, not merely enamor with the act, or worse, false enactment, mimesis of creation and the dead end fantasy of only going endlessly through the motions of solemn and empty pompous pretense, the motivation for which and obstacle to creativity being introversion, insecurity and entrenched denial, often reinforced by group validation, insularity and hostility to change.
Of course, by all means, it should be acknowledged, most emphatically, that there are also many who at least are honest about writing as an activity for it's own recreation, and well entertained, even with little regard what so ever for the output at all, much less it's readable quality.
Thus, nor can such take criticism badly, having little false expectation to begin with. For such is to seek out a care free pass time, not a self absorbed and cult-like co-validating delusion.
Indeed, the notably successful Prosebush Collaborative Fiction Community was created by cheerfully inept and openly half-assed writing dilatants, overbooked Yuppies without the spare time and drive required for any actual growth in fiction writing proficiency, for the express purpose of facilitating the sheer diversion of hurried and indifferently unskilled and uninspired fiction writing, Online.
With so wide a range of writing temperament and purpose, online writing communities must vary to meet the range very different needs. One shudders to think that even pompous obsessional self-indulgent writing can be, is, and, from a marketing and compatibility standpoint, even perhaps should be, frequently pandered to.
But the demo forums on this site, of unfinished fiction, by contrast, does seek to encourage writers to care at all about the fiction writing fundamentals, and to brainstorm collaboratively, which is a powerful tool of creative flow that is ultimately perhaps the most entertaining way to socialize with one's pants on.
Q. What are the common dangers of poorly defined and unquestioned agenda, or malagenda?
A.
The substance beyond mere form, the dynamic and flexible social engineering principles, personal autonomy, good sportsmanship and responsible values of rational democratic progress are systematic doubt, hope in the honest embrace of fallibility and tolerance for uncertainty, substantive discourse, debate of disputes, criticism without punishment and no insult taken, free inquiry into problems openly and publicly without fear of punishment, indeed, imagination, open unfounded speculation about different case scenarios pursuant to any number of varied and different proposed measures, without need of conforming or in any way limiting said speculations to any accepted quasi-official position.The very
values and aptitudes ever fostered in brainstorming fiction!And all pursuant to experiment, trial and error, the vital opportunity for all manner of ongoing reevaluation and revision, open ended correction of mistakes and improvement at all levels, piecemeal, without bloodshed, violence or even strife as such.
But the
aimless lack of any genuine agenda, agenda always meaning by necessity an agenda always open to question and scrutiny, undermines many a professed motivating goals ever put forth, individual or collective. With foresight and due diligence, there can be management by agenda, with not only clear objectives identified, but also the required actions to reach those objectives then carried out, indeed, foreseeable problems and opportunities anticipated and the means to respond prepared and standing by well in advance. All far more efficient and less stressful than management by crisis, the examination and response to problems only after they arise insistently and can no longer be ignored, nevertheless perhaps better than no management at all.But even no management at all is still far better than Malagenda outright:
Such is the peril of a stagnant reactionary normative closed system, focus shifted from the external results to be achieved or produced, to the processes created within; status quo bereft of relevant purpose, increasingly fixated if anything, only with the refinement of internal forms and procedures, concentrating on whatever pointless technical matters rather than any real strategic concerns, much less whatever crucial logistics.
And the true agenda for fiction writing is generally
defined in the elements of stories, the
fundamentals of the
fiction writing craft, or not at all. Because whatever projects envisaged and
undertaken, in print or media of whatever sort, will first hinge on the
worthiness of the writing.
In the alternative, setting one decision or task and then simply moving on to
the next without so much as a backward glance, gives some groups of
people the predictability and false satisfaction of getting pointless make work done, feigning
unity by speaking and doing everything homogeneously. But such flagrant abrogation of
responsibility rules out responsibility and interest, namely,
critical,
autonomous, active engagement in interesting problems, from which derives all
flexibility, cogent
criticism,
error checking, inspiration, competency and creativity. Or there are more overt
do-nothings, pandering to collective paralysis by the sugar coated sham of bogus
emotional support.
Indeed, originality, creativity, competence and quality are often proportional
to ongoing revision, both the radical overhaul and in attention to detail,
polish. Especially as regards fiction writing collaboration in particular, the
more linear the process, the more soullessly hack or just mindlessly incompetent
and the less inspired, creative and proficient the result, *even though, the end
product, a story with beginning, middle and end, usually does need to be linear
in that respect just of coherence*. Such is the prevailing malaise of control
freaks, helpless
toadyism, co-validation, over self-estimation, unaware relative incompetence,
inflexibility, tendency towards fixation, denial and the fear of individual
dissent and unsettling instability, even in any sheer creative discourse for
art's sake, such as fiction writing, let alone actual practical decision making
and planning action. All far too serious, yet not serious enough.
And there are worse things, such as Instant Messenger culture and the growing
impatient rejection of literacy and any effort at depth and coherence whatsoever
and, even worse still, the sheer unrestrained
irrelevant hostility of the
deplorable practice of
flaming, all malicious noise and no signal, often vented
by Sadistic bullies at
any vulnerable targets of opportunity, but also no less often directed against
any attempt whatsoever at responsible
criticism
and creativity. Hence, the identification of
conflict on
any
level, even
controversy with
strife tends to be self-fulfillingly hostile. Likewise, any passive hostile
refusal to cooperate at all with dissenters renders self-fulfilling the notion
that dissent undermines cooperation completely.
Often the problem stemming from any misconceived need for any declared firm
foundation whatsoever, begins with the autocratic unveiling and hyping of a
weak, hack, arbitrary ultra-derivative, formulaic and clichéd series
premise
that must be adhered to dictatorially, rather than first being properly
developed into anything more interesting and compelling. Alas, such an initial
concept in it's relative simplicity, might even be helpful only first presented
as an unfounded provisional starting point open to extensive and radical ongoing
revision. In short, the flaw already by Act One, unaddressed, is "Act Zero".
And, anyhow, under such conditions, the individual stories will tend to be no
less prosaic at best, or much more competent. But even if they are, that will be
despite, not because, of whatever initial
premise or concept, not to mention the
working environment.
All these are faults common to so many of the variant procedures of
collaboration, all so vastly inferior to free-wheeling
brainstorming
and related creativity techniques, because the constraints of Conformism aimed
only at social cohesion arbitrarily as top priority, tend to be so vastly
inferior to those of informed Critical Preference including the
fundamentals, the
discipline of the fiction writing craft.
Creativity, however inspired, is well known actually to benefit optimally from the limitation, definition and focus provided by pertinent relevant knowledge and skill to whatever purpose in mind. But entrenched ignorance engenders arbitrarily stifled creativity together with a deadly lack of constructive focus.
"History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely
once they have exhausted all other alternatives."
- Abba Eban
malagenda currently most threatens Science Fiction Fandom?
A.
Science Fiction is by very nature expansive and broad in it's scope of exploration. Indeed, by comparison, Asimov hilariously denounced the mainstream as "quaint!" But is the proverbial shoe now somehow migrated onto the other metaphorical foot?Many people tend to define themselves by their habits and affiliations. And Science Fiction Fandom is a fan subculture and community of interest in Science Fiction and related fields, existing in support of such affiliation of common preference and concern, with a history and tradition. Fandom expresses itself socially by Fanac (amateur creative activity), but principally by communication, fanzine publication and gathering, fan clubs and particularly regular Cons, conventions.
Now, when it comes, for example, to the plays of Shakespeare, there never been any great divide between letters and media. Shakespeare's famous plays where always intended for performance, and so, in the modern era, fine movie adaptations have proceeded as a matter of common sense. The organic connection has remained too obvious to bear mention!
Alas, as an example of badly defined malagenda indeed! in every other context, there has always been a tendency, however silly, towards cultural tension between letters and folk and later pop culture, between literature and whatever popular media. And this very monist mentality at it's most hostile, has long and catastrophically misguided the campaign for Science Fiction literacy.
Never mind that great authors are myth and media savvy, or that notable TV and film makers and are highly literate. And, while there is certainly also by far nastier discord as well in Fandom, it is readily apparent as the "book Nazis" grow ever more snobbish, successive generations of Science Fiction media aficionados will only grow ever more blithely illiterate. Even the Worldcon, the once massive annual World Science Fiction convention, is consciously downsizing while Animecon, a major Science Fiction media convention, attendance swells and throngs, the Animecon convention committee facing the challenge and making their own bone-headed mistakes, reinventing the wheel, simply because they didn't even know about the old hands, as at Worldcon, to consult for long expertise in running conventions! Thus, by their very insularity and cavalier divisiveness, those most accomplished and respected abrogate their seniority in the community, needlessly and foolishly.
Another sad truth is that paperback books, kept in steady supply and quick rotation on the wire racks at retail outlets, are thereby pressed into as vast a wasteland of sheer pabulum as ever was TV Land. And so, beyond the great classics of Science Fiction, exactly what sort of living culture do the literary snobs defend? Why, one should hope, likewise, the diamonds amid the effluence, in accordance with Sturgeons Law. (That, not by any means just pulp Science Fiction, but 95% of everything is utter shit!) Indeed, as snobbish convention downsizing, infighting and outfighting ensue, the much vaunted literary programming, rather than becoming in any way somehow rarified or elevated by any vaunted purge from whatever media fringe distraction, actually declines sharply in intellect, quality and vitality, instead fawning on the best seller list and headlining cheap shot star authors. How, then, shall the best of the realm of letters ever be promoted out from obscurity and brought to light even for whatever tightest "truefan" core group, much less for any well deserved wider Fandom or general audience?
Never mind inane SMOFs (the so called Secret Masters of Fandom, deeply involved and entrenched in running the major established conventions) patting themselves on the back for having discovered Buffy ('Buffy the Vampire Slayer', Joss Whedon's highly popular and successful television offering of unusual subtly and invention). Leave us not overlook the significance of Anime (or Japanimation, a broad range of animated fare from Japan), the output of a foreign modern culture that has succeeded where we have failed here in the West, in cultivating channels to market colorful Science Fiction and Fantasy more diversely.
The future outlook of Fandom is decidedly bleak in the hands of chronically profligate and snobbish conservatives who typically spurn any meaningful conservation. Because living culture is known and understood to depend upon population. Hence, rather than splintering ever further, if a bridge will not be quickly reforged, if not to bring the masses and young back from whatever specialized fringes into a broader range of interests of some sort of center in Fandom and well informed appreciation of Science Fiction, in al of it's breadth, scope and manifestation, even by bringing the mountain to Mohamed, by such a stunning reversal of decades of practice, as to actually establish broad, strong and dynamically appealing Science Fiction literary programming even and especially at Animecon and the like, then Fandom is committing a cozy suicide, busy SMOFs bureaucratically erecting institutions to be as reviled, forgotten and neglected as public school, likewise dooming the transmission of education and undermining any hope of the preservation of culture.
Just in case anyone still cares.
A. "Rounders" and Cyberfiction tend to be less about working closely in tandem than about simply taking turns.
A
Writer's Round Table Round Robin, or "add-on story," had better be light and simple enough for inspired off-the-cuff response.Indeed, some variants limit the length of a post, even to a single line or word, and the frequency of posts, within a given interval of time, typically, a day. Just to keep the the interaction simple, brisk and challenging.
Because any complexity will require overbearing editorial foresight that will tend to kill spontaneity. -And without actually making the work any more coherent, just anally retentive yet without purposeful direction. Not unless criticality is embraced, story editing and revision actually permitted and facilitated. Otherwise, Rounders/add-on stories are the epitome of mindless tradition, each word once writ, forever cast in stone. Or else, at the other extreme, some online peer groups actually seem to treat Rounders/add-on stories much as chat rooms, dropping and entirely forgetting all plot logic and continuity as they go! Either way, meaning, motivation and characterization are typically spurned by the wayside.
By distinction, Cyberfictions, in any range and variety of genres and interests, are interactive stories, such that readers, Online, can freely choose their own path through the narrative, and can also add their own passages, either freely choosing or creating alternative plot directions or sellecting which character to follow or author through the same continuity.
Also consider The Mahoney Project and peruse the listing of interactive story CGI scripts.
Cyberfiction branching story's can make for an entertaining Online community writing pass time. But for any sort of quality output, likewise, they also can't get too deep, and, even so, the best ones, such as Curt Siffert's
Storysprawl, facilitate extensive consultation and rewriting of the chapters and even modifying their interconnection for the sake of continuity revision and plot development. The software has also been adapted for use by one of the majors,
.
The medium of the wiki, traditionally employed for continually evolving, refined and updated publicly shared information resources online, also encourages collective rewriting, even for add-on fanfic. The wiki has even given rise to the open source novel. And without version and change tracking, just the opposite to slapdash add-on chapters immutably writ forever in stone, the open source novel, may be said to be writ in sand, subject to whim of one and all. Indeed, "the medium is the message!"
And formal education is ever in search of "foundation," so called, to put a stop to just that!
A scholastic variant of the add-on story is
iAdventure, wherein an online team literary and background research process is emphasized, aimed at problem solving and decision making within the context of the story to overcome obstacles and mitigate plot complication, precedes the authorship of branching chapters. While giving lip service to creativity and self directed study, iAdventure offers educators the opportunity to contrive even somewhat RPG like puzzles to lead and completely plan to death any learning experience, and help crush individual initiative for yet another generation.The salient lesson is that even though a finished plot must generally be linear, in the activity of fiction writing the process of plotting probably should not be.
Rather, it is best to arrange and rearrange the story components one has, in order to then understand the implications and fill in the blanks, perhaps by brainstorming.
Editing is everything! And any effective impediment thereto, is, indeed, procedurally deadly to any prose, let alone fiction. Nor, indeed, has anyone truly vested heart and soul that never struggled with continual rewrites, regardless how unduly touchy as the most half-baked and trifling dilettantes can get, at once too serious and yet not serious enough.
As with any whatever mode of collaboration, to whatever extent that participation is allowed or encouraged to the public at large, especially Online, Cyberfiction optionally be practiced as copylefted Open Source Fiction unless all rights of participants are simply surrendered to the forum host for legal convenience. But Rounders/add-on stories on posting forums, however, are seldom so mindful, one way or the other.
Q. What is "writing by committee"?
A.
As Eve Tushnet points out in Eros and Education, even sexual passion is but an expression of Eros, more than the quest for completion and transformation, the oft frustrated desire for connection, for union with alien difference that must inevitably come into conflict on every level, with any Xenophobic dread of the vulnerability entailed.But "A union in which one partner [or unloved idea] is not vulnerable is an invasion; if neither partner submits, it is an armed truce. [And] Neither of these experiences frees us from the tyranny [and intrinsic loneliness of self involved banality and cliché]."
"Writing by committee" is a derision applied to bureaucratic domineering phobic and stifling consensus procedures
(another stagnant reactionary normative closed system, focus shifted from the external results to be achieved or produced, to the processes created within; status quo bereft of relevant purpose, increasingly fixated if anything, only with the refinement of internal forms and procedures), particularly in script writing, by jaded hack pros or vapid adulating fanboy wanna-bees alike. The most inept of which may also include or incorporate standard autocratic editorial selection processes or even routine sweatshop piece work of one kind or another! The end result of which may be the blandest and silliest common denominator rather the most improved and spiciest mix. A frustrating experience for creative people, also shortchanging any audience or readership. -Much as all this may perversely appeal to entirely different social needs and priorities, for which creative autonomy is so eagerly sacrificed.In fairness, it only makes sense to emulate the practices of the successful. But successfulat what? Tasteless and callow imitation of sweatshops grinding out pabulum only generates imitation pabulum! And a defective substandard imitation at that, unless even the minimal prerequisite skill sets of professionalism are at all considered, much less literary quality. On the contrary, far better to inspire the novice writer is to know and recognize sheer crap for what it is and to hope, surely, that I can author better than such sheer crap!
And to that end, the open and ongoing Online workshops at this site are not on any schedule, nor committed to any marketing target, only to the glorious freedom and dedication of writing for it's own sake, practicing, improving and learning our craft. We should ever be so lucky to meet with such professional opportunity as may entail ever confronting "real world" demands, target demographics, schedules and deadlines! In the meantime, why (either blithe suppositionally or in excruciatingly researched detail!) simulate or reinvent the proverbial "rat race"?
Surely, such is magical thinking to motivate that sort of mindless imitation, bringing to mind the Cargo Cults and Voguing! Or why else put the cart so far before the horse? First be a writer! Otherwise, what is the point?
Frankly, real professional writers, to begin with, may become tiresome enough talking shop all the time about selling manuscripts. nevertheless, they certainly know the difference between the creative process and the biz! Let alone the realities and fantasies either thereof.
However, it may be added that in such collaboration that proceeds out of brainstorming, the authors need only kick a document back and forth until it steadily becomes more finished. For writing, especially fiction, that well suffices. And needless structure only becomes stifling.
By contrast, even proposal writing for such more complicated undertakings as entrepreneurial early stage business start-ups and initiatives of political activism do very badly need operational structure. And ignoring or denying that need dooms even bold inspiration into pipe dream. For even great visions may remain still born for want of crucial logistical expertise.
Creativity, however inspired, is well known actually to benefit optimally from the limitation, definition and focus provided by pertinent relevant knowledge and skill to whatever purpose in mind. But entrenched ignorance engenders arbitrarily stifled creativity together with a deadly lack of constructive focus.
All in all, grandiose organizational structure is easiest when least needful. Meanwhile the only freedom of imagination that comes to such megalomania is just wishful thinking and denial, rather than creativity and problem solving.
For such are closed systems, status quo bereft of relevant purpose, increasingly concerned if anything, only with the refinement of their own internal forms and processes, concentrating on whatever pointless technical matters rather than any real strategic concerns, much less whatever crucial logistics.Although, certainly, any concrete planning and action must pass beyond the scope of
brainstorming alone, in an integrative open system, continually reinventing it's own form and processes in the pursuit of it's purpose relevant to the outside world.Q. What is so wrong with simply taking polls to make collective decisions in fiction writing?
A.
One ubiquitous misapplication of Online forum technology to blithely inept writing by consensus committee has been the practice of electoral process in polls on options in the creation of new series concepts. And this offers a distressing civics lesson well illustrating the very failures of politics among the uneducated and uninformed politicians and voters such as continually refuel frustrated and disgusted perennial antidemocratic sentiment.Because, usually the very questions are arbitrary and pointless, and the suggestions unimaginative. But even, however rarely, when dealing with decisions of any importance, or in fiction writing, questions of dramatic moment, and, wonder of wonder, in any sensible plot or premise context, nevertheless discussion to the point still tends to be pointless expression of position and preference without reason or explanation, that remain genially arbitrary for wont of critical thinking grasping whatever principles to formulate any
relevant or meaningful agenda, as, for example in the context of writing, those of drama in fiction. In other words, another example of how pro forma democracy will so often be rendered meaningless, sans any focus upon whatever real issues, and meaningful debate in terms of whatever such issues, in this case any question of what might be more dramatic and why, so crucial to informing any more meaningful discourse. Of a system eclipsing it's own purpose, the rise of internal agenda instead of any motivating external goals ever put forth.Indeed, that is exactly why an able chairperson or facilitator, or in fiction some manner of appropriate supporting character, actually works to help keep minority views alive. -Exactly in order to forestall just such premature consensus. Controversies dramatize change meaningfully, often making a critical difference even in life–altering decisions in reality no less than in mere creative difference or in drama.
But the unperturbed geniality often yearned for by lamentably so many is simply antithetical to the vigor, clash and fire of inspiration so crucial to any sort of creative proficiency, not to mention true democracy.
Because the substance beyond mere form, the dynamic and flexible social engineering principles, personal autonomy, good sportsmanship and responsible values of rational democratic progress are systematic doubt, hope in the honest embrace of fallibility and tolerance for uncertainty, substantive discourse, debate of disputes, criticism without punishment and no insult taken, free inquiry into problems openly and publicly without fear of punishment, indeed, imagination, open unfounded speculation about different case scenarios pursuant to any number of varied and different proposed measures, without need of conforming or in any way limiting said speculations to any accepted quasi-official position.
The very
values and aptitudes ever fostered in brainstorming fiction!And all pursuant to experiment, trial and error, the vital opportunity for all manner of ongoing reevaluation and revision, open ended correction of mistakes and improvement at all levels, piecemeal, without bloodshed, violence or even strife as such.
Such is the peril of a stagnant reactionary normative closed system, focus shifted from the external results to be achieved or produced, to the processes created within; status quo bereft of relevant purpose, increasingly fixated if anything, only with the refinement of internal forms and procedures, concentrating on whatever pointless technical matters rather than any real strategic concerns, much less whatever crucial logistics.
There is also the pitfall of putting the proverbial cart far before the metaphorical horse! Indeed, is every detail, premise unfolding? No, not at all. Rather it will more often be better to fill the details as the needs of the plot become clear. Writing is rewriting, ongoing revision. and never a waste of time!
Alas, quality output and taste cannot be a priority in simply pandering to such a market of social expectation in blithely pointless rejection of
relevance, in any context, let alone writing communities, particularly. In the alternative, however, there may also be implementation strategies to facilitate challenge and learning for the improvement of attitudes and awareness in a range of interactions.To that application, personal growth and improved judgment is a hoped for benefit of usage of the proposed Computer Assisted Social Activity system that may even prove more competitive than currently feasible compromises and trade-offs and
CASA questionnaires and advice, from the CASA longitudinal knowledge base, may prove the more useful, in fiction writing as with other topics, when the cutting edge and democratizing social technology will become available.are the pitfalls in basing fanfic writing upon 'Star Trek' technical manuals and such the like?
A.
If even the coolest FX are no substitute for capable fiction writing, then neither are novelty blue prints! See what I mean, fan-boy?Real Science is of more substance and should be of concern in the writing Science Fiction than silly bogus picayune Treknology. They make that stuff up as ever needed, at Paramount, and so can we for ‘Star Trek: The Ship of Fools’. Just so long as the central points remain plausibly consistent. Real science, on the other hand, is generally far more worthy of actually cleaving to.
So, just what is it that differentiates timeless themes from deadly clichés?
A
. Browse: Star Trek Stinkers and Fear of Commitment
Q.
What
Misguided simulation and the need for refocus. Application and misapplication of