‘block’ of writers

my wife gave me a MasterClass subscription as a gift. the ‘writing categories’ sparked my interest. so much so, i’ve taken classes from Malcolm Gladwell. Aaron Sorkin, Neil Gaiman, Salman Rushdie, James Patterson, Amy Tan, and Shonda Rhimes. i’m currently taking Margaret Atwood’s offering. and while they are all ‘different’, there seem to be ‘common threads’:

• practice regularly and rewrite outputs. write everyday to develop your skill. you usually won’t get it right initially (and most of the time you will have to settle for ‘good enough’ – remember the expression: “perfect is the enemy of good”). revise what you have, but you’ve got to ‘finish’ to make this exercise ‘more robust.’ in the beginning, it’ only natural to keep drafts to yourself until ‘sufficient iterations of quality assurance (one technique is to read it out loud)’ grants you enough confidence to share. but to move it forward, you’l need someone (or a ‘small group’) you trust and ask what isn’t understood – it’s about getting ‘what’ feedback and not ‘how to fix it’: most ‘problem-solving’ originates from the writer and not from the reader based on past occurrences. note that rejection is part of the process: it can be about finding the ‘right publisher (or production company as the case may be) at the right time’,’
• research broadly. reading (watching, listening, or browsing as the case may be) widely doesn’t only expose you to different ‘use-cases/patterns’ or to ‘best practices’, but affords you ‘connection’ (or what Gaiman refers to as confluence) of separate (and largely considered ‘unrelated’) disciplines and can provide ‘unexplored’ points of view. and while ‘purposeful’ domain/subject matter expertise gives your work the requisite credence, it is also sometimes about ‘random/’opportunistic’ learnings unassigned to a specific use but ‘filed away’ just in case – this, sometimes, includes ‘darlings’ you’ve edited out you consider ‘good’, but ‘incongruous’ with your present task’ ,
• finding your voice. seek what they sought and refrain from imitations or impressions. they talk about what has worked for them but they aren’t ‘prescriptive’ and instead encourage you to try then pick and choose what seems right for you given your own experience. at the start, you can look at and ’emulate what other writers have done so you might get a ‘sense of how things are done’ but only do this as a ‘stepping stone’ in your own ‘evolution’. learn the rules so you can intentionally break them to advance the story and
• perform thought experiments. do exercises like ‘interrupting what’s expected, changing the narration (e.g. character, person voice, etc.). Anything that ‘disrupts the pattern: it’s not just sometimes about ‘pushing the envelope’ ,but ‘colouring outside the lines.’ it can be about taking the ‘mundane’, and viewing it through an ‘unexpected’ lens.

this is by no means a comprehensive list: as these are an attempt at a synthesis of take-aways’ – if you think there are things i’ve inadvertently overlooked or could’ve expressed clearer, kindly share these.

“transmogrification”: on (data) type conversion and Python

transmogrify is my favourite word i learned from the comic strip Calvin & Hobbes. i like it because there are sometimes muliple “layers”.

Python has some built-in functions to do some “basic” type conversion. however, i’ve learned “recently” that sometimes additional conversion is required to “prove mastery” (aside from logic) so my next discussions should involve these to be more pragmatic.

Star Wars episode IX : reactions to The Rise of Skywalker

SPOILER ALERT ; if you plan to watch the film, don’t read the rest of the entry as some aspects of my discussion may ruin the experience for you.

i apologise for chiming in late as i saw it awhile back but out of respect for my brother i held up posting as he was “stuck” on Holidays and when he came back it was the Manila Film Festival (showcasing Filipino films). he was only able to watch it last night because of his “tight” schedule,.

IMHO, it was just alright. that said, ending a “beloved” franchise can be tricky – one only needs to consider the “disincongruous” reactions to the GoT (strangely, i never got into it given my proclivity for fantasy fiction) finale. i can understand why the “fan boys” thought it was good and why the critics panned it – it doesn’t really matter what other people think. i’ve learned being in Australia that if you like something then you like it and you shouldn’t feel “guilty” about it.

IMHO, it wasn’t the best one but it was far from being the worst one. for my money, Episode V is still the best followed by Rogue One: A Star Wars Story but that’s neither here nor there since i’m not an “influencer”. i was still going to watch regardless of what critics said: i have this “annoying” thing of thinking for myself – maybe if i wasn’t such a fan or on-the-fence about watching it, i’d seriously consider what others had to say. case in point, Frozen 2 (i’m not really their core demographic although i do occasionally “enjoy” their films – i prefer Pixar) was a “smash” in the cinemas in spite of their negative reviews – i don’t think their “market” truly cared. as an aside, i think Disney is really clever to also own “properties” such as Star Wars and Marvel (i have to comment as i can’t help myself: i’m a huge fan of the MCU and Infinity War but not so much of Endgame – i have this thing about using time travel to solve things but i digress…) which have lucrative franchises that gross well at the box office.

i didn’t mind that Emperor Palpatine was back – i just wanted a more plausible rationale for it and not simply glossed over like i felt the film did . i’m a fan, as well as a critic (i don’t think they’re mutually exclusive, i just don’t appreciate “lazy” writing). moreover, i found Poe’s final speech to the Rebellion “baduy“, “cheesey”, and trite.

like The Force Awakens reminded me of Episode IV , this made me think of Episode VI. there seemed to me a congruence between Rei’s and Luke’s offer to join from the Emperor (thwarted by a final “redemptive” act by Kylo Ren and Darth Vader respectively) and the “ruse” which was actually an ambush. there is nothing wrong with paying homage and parallels to the original trilogy but, for my taste, it was a little to close to home which made them predictable – i’m guessing that’s what some fans wanted.

but, all-in-all, i thought it was a valiant effort as ending something “gracefully” is always hard.

revengers

sorry, I couldn’t help myself.

Saw Thor: Ragnarok yesterday with my family and my son’s friend.  I liked it.   This wasn’t surprising given I’m such a fanboy of comic books (growing up I read a lot of Marvel and DC) and I enjoy the films of the New Zealand director, Taika Waititi.  Had to ask my wife given my bias if it was really good. Thankfully she agreed.

Like any superhero flick there was action and single-line quips but I found the humour quite refreshing.  Seeing as I found the movie franchise disappointing before this latest instalment, I didn’t have high hopes for this one.  It was inspired, if unexpected, to have the Kiwi direct it.

While the first feature was an amalgam with a love story and the second one tried desperately to be serious, I think the fusion with comedy really worked.  I knew that Chris Hemsworth was funny (maybe it’s the Aussie larikinism) but didn’t realise he had great comedic timing.  But for me, what I really enjoyed was the character of Korg voiced by the director – it was cue to not take the movie so seriously.  Sure it wasn’t the best film I ever saw (but it wasn’t trying to be) and it may not ‘pass’ certain tests or criteria.  It was simply and purely a popcorn film – a damn good one in my opinion.  When you watch  a film, it goes down to intent – sometimes you just want to entertained or distracted. It is what it is – one shouldn’t have to serious all the time.