This topic continues the discussion that main crew had going about heros/protagonists/main characters and quite obviously was recorded at the same session.
The humor played into that fact. And with how easily they were referring to an episode from “weeks” ago. It’s not like the podcasters make any big secret about doing multiple shows in a session, but this episode it seemed especially noticable.
And I like that – I like moments when the wizard is a bit visible behind the curtain. It reminds me that people who I admire and respect aren’t perfect and let’s me be a little more gracious with myself when I don’t pull something off as smoothly as I might want to.
Self compassion aside, I loved this episode for the topic it covered.
In my reaction to the heros episode, I mentioned that I have a dislike for using that term to describe my main character. But I will admit that this episode might be changing my mind. I really like the definitions they came up with for the three “opposite” roles and it’s changed how I think of the roles of hero, protagonist, and main character.
Here are my particular paraphrases of those definitions:
obstacle: a person, situation, or event that blocks or opposes the desire of the hero/protagonists/main character
antagonist: a character who actively works against the hero/protagonist/main character and/or competes with them for their desire.
villain: antagonist who is actively evil
It’s the villain one that impacts me the most on my thinking about heros. I have no issues with how a villain is described in the episode, even though “evil” isn’t a hard and fast trait. We feel like we know it when we see it, but it is a difficult metric to quantify. But in my subconscious, it makes sense: that’s what a villain is.
Combine that with the hero episode where the podcasters posit the question of when should you (in storytelling) have the hero, the protagonist, and the main character all be the same, and when are they different.
Per that episode, the hero is the one who takes heroic action. Again, heroic action isn’t hard and fast – but just like I grok “evil” within the context of villain, stated this way I understand what heroic action would mean within the course of any particular story that I tell.
The other thing that I like is that I can have multiple characters take heroic action for different things, in different scenes, and in different amounts.
I’m not limited to one hero, one villain. And that may be why I have a hard time with referring to the main character as the hero. That concept just doesn’t fit for the kinds of stories I like to tell.
Let’s break out Star Wars: A New Hope just because.
During the course of the film, no less than 4 characters take heroic action and could be considered heros in that light.
Leia never breaks under torture or duress, but maintains her secret knowledge of the rebel base in spite of pending death.
Obi-Wan sacrifices himself to ensure that Vader and company are distracted enough to let the Falcon escape.
Han returns to a suicide fight in an undermanned freighter, risking getting blown out of the sky to help a friend.
Luke stays in the trench and risks his life after all previous pilots doing the same have been killed.
Only one of these heros was also the main character of the film.
So with this same idea in play, I think it really does come down to what type of story is being told to figure out who the protagonist is and who the antagonist is and if these roles even make sense in the course of storytelling.
For me, I like my heros less iconic and I like my antagonists less villainous, but I definitely have a better feel for using these ideas in my fiction.
Incidentally, that brings me to my final thought. I think the main antagonist of Star Wars: A New Hope was Han Solo. Granted, the villains of the film are Tarkin and Vader. But I think Han is closer to the true role of antagonist.
He actively opposes the protagonist’s (Luke) desire on most every front – he mocks Luke’s desire to buy a ship, he refuses to give into Luke’s desire to rescue anybody, he doesn’t let Luke grieve (Come on, kid). He competes with Luke for Leia’s perceived affections. He confronts Luke and tries to dissuade him from going to battle against the Empire. It is only at the end that Luke overcomes Han by attacking his cowardice and convinces Han to return to the fight.
To me, that all says antagonist.
Please – argue it out in the comments below. I’d like to see what you come with.
I was shocked last week when I started doing the calculations and realized that very soon, my 1 month post was going to be due for the Ergodox EZ report-out.
I’m actually starting this draft on my standard board at home because the hassle of carrying the Ergodox EZ to and from work got a bit much. Moreover, if I brought it home, I used it EXCLUSIVELY which kinda flew in the face of my plans to use it at work and maintain some semblance of proficiency with a standard board at night and on the weekends.
Let that in no way be considered a sign that my enjoyment of my newest ergonomic treat has lessened. On the contrary, the longer I go, the more I miss not having it when I have to write anything. I prefer it everywhere and everywhen.
This holiday season, as a reward to our kids for being excellent students, we purchased a Nintendo Switch as our family gaming console.
If you aren’t familiar with the Switch, it uses a pair of controllers called Joy-Cons to control the on-screen action. These can be slid into the sides of the device for mobile play, slipped into a grip to impersonate a regular game controller, or used with one in each hand – my favorite way to use them.
You can sit however you like and put your hand however they are comfortable. Playing racing games with one hand next to my leg and the other cradling my head is delightful – it reminds me all of all the time I’ve spent imagining what driving an actual car with a joystick might be like. I’m sure it would be better.
What does that have to do with keyboarding?
Typing on the Ergodox EZ is basically the same idea.
As I’ve gotten more adept with a split board, I find that my brain relaxes just a bit more when my hands are apart then together. This is likely placebo, but it elicits a different kind of mental state when I’m focused than when using a regular keyboard.
I love it.
It keeps my shoulders loose, my head more upright, and my hands happy. Pretty much all pain, discomfort, and stress have disappeared, especially during marathon typing sessions.
Hands apart takes a little bit to get used to, and even now I’ll get a moment’s hesitation where my brain has to remember that even though my hands aren’t right next to each other, they are still doing the same task – typing.
The first bit, when you spread things apart, it’s like my brain interpreted that as my hands doing two different things. But just like using a mouse in one hand and WASD on the other eventually turns into “gaming – shooter”, having the hands split becomes just “typing.”
I love that I do all these micro adjustments throughout the day.
Forearm feeling a bit strained? Lets increase the tenting angle (i.e. how far tipped up the center of each side is). Right thumb stretched – whoops, the angle of my chair isn’t quite right, lets move that right board over a smidge and add a twist – bingo. Hmm – that key stroke for getting in layer 2 feels off – lets swap it with the key next to it.
Every little thing helps and makes it more personal and more, me. And as an engineer and writer, I accept that there is nothing “perfect”. I don’t agonize and waste time deciding if the layout is perfect or the ergonomics of my desk are exact. Instead, iteration is the key. Small adjustments, sustained over time. It’s basically the same idea as Toyota’s lean principles.
As for layers and layout, I’ve officially declared version 1.0 of my setup. The configurator just makes it so easy to play and swap whenever I want, so expect this to continue to evolve.
I’ve spent a lot of time in this and the other posts talking about how the Ergodox works and what I like, but not a lot on what it’s done for my writing.
So far, the effect is muted. My current project is doing a cut edit to try to remove 10% of my existing word count. That means a lot of scrolling, clicking, and deleting.
Having the delete and backspace keys under single digit (thumb) is glorious. And having Ctrl-Z (undo) right there with them means that a lot of the process looks like me gaming or doing graphics work – hand on mouse and keyboard.
I am rather looking forward to my next project where I’ll get to start drafting again and see how long I can type without fatigue. I imagine the board will help, but I haven’t had much chance to test it yet.
The one big negative I can say is that I have plateaued in my progress with speed and accuracy, and I freely admit, it’s me.
My daily use is fine and I don’t have any issues with the board. But I’m at that stage now where familiarity only takes me so far. If I want to get REALLY good at it, deliberate practice is the only thing that’s going to work.
And I’m not surprised by this. Switching to Colemak was exactly the same thing – eventually, I could only be so good without buckling down and forcing myself to do the hard stuff – accuracy drills, speed tests, transcription practice, etc.
Where the Ergodox is going to be different and more challenging is in how the other powers mesh with it.
The first thing I’m going to start deliberately practicing (and indeed, started already) is using the mouse control via the keyboard (see layer 1 of my map). There is a very clear connection with my right hand stress and mouse use now that I’ve gotten this board, which is surprising because I’d already thought I’d eliminated that as a source.
But, lo and behold, I can feel it when I do lots of mouse swapping. I think the Ergodox lowered my overall threshold and now that the stress of typing isn’t there, the mouse use shows. So, in an effort to limit it, I’m going to work the keyboard more.
I know it will never replace a dedicated point device, but for 80% of my mouse use, better navigation through keyboard and keyboard mouse control will be sufficient, so that’s what I’m going to start on first.
Only the First…or Fourth…whatever
The Ergodox will definitely NOT be my last mechanical keyboard. Which I think is dead-at-odds with what I had stated when this whole thing began. Granted, a new purchase will not be soon – next year at the earliest – but I love the split keyboard so much I want something smaller and more portable to take with me on trips and to use at home. I find myself leering at pictures of them, trying decide which I will eventually get.
I know this also flies in the face of my stated goal with keeping up on regular standard boards. I think I’ll just work those moments in throughout the day instead of dedicating my evenings and weekends to them. Right now, I can go for nearly a week on the Ergodox full time, and 2 minutes on a regular keyboard is all I need to get back into the groove. If I just spend that responding to an email or journaling at lunch, I’ll be fine.
And I know that getting one of these boards will require that I learn how to deal with firmware and setting up a configuration compiler and computer stuff I said I wasn’t going to deal with, and QMK and custom maps and ordering keycaps and soldering. Just ignore that for now – that’s all in the future.
I mean, it’s not like buying mechanical keyboards is at all compulsive.
I can stop any time I like. They’re just tools. They’re useful, that’s all. I don’t have a problem – you have a problem.
So, there is always the possibility of stumbling when you’re trying something new and for me this is the episode where things just didn’t work. I’m not sure exactly why it didn’t – perhaps for the same reason books sometimes don’t work: I’m not the target audience.
Episode Rating: 🌟 🌟
Humor: 🌟 🌟
Usefulness to me right now: 🌟
The discussion was lively and the new guest host Valynne Maetani was fine. But it’s possible the subject matter just wasn’t for me. Perhaps it’s because I haven’t yet tried to write, or even felt the desire to write, an unsympathetic protag. In fact, I’ve have hard time writing an antagonist or villain that isn’t sympathetic in some facet.
So, my reactions are going to focus more on what I could take away from the episode rather than riffing on anything in particular the episode itself said.
Brandon spoke again about his “sliders” or “knobs” analogy with regards to protagonists – you can make them likable, competent, and/or active, with levels of each varying from character to character. So, I’ve been trying to think of different protags that I like and seeing what levels their various sliders were set to.
In Person of Interest, John Reese starts out very much as hyper-competent, but not active (has to be pressured into doing the work) and not terribly likable. We find out his past is checkered with darkness and not nice things. As the series goes, those levels change. In the media I consume, he would be the closest to being an unsympathetic character that I personally enjoy. And in reality, he’s only partially the protag – it’s definitely a team protagonist and John is balanced by Harold who is competent in a different realm, likable, and active. If you haven’t seen the show, none of that likely makes sense, but oh well.
In the Discworld books by Terry Pratchett, perhaps Sam Vimes is – to an extent – unsympathetic in his first appearance in Guards! Guards! A world-weary drunkard, Sam though is inherently honorable, as the book shows him to be – he isn’t unsympathetic through any real fault of his own except his drinking. Everything else is somewhat circumstantial – his life isn’t one of ease, so he’s had to grow hard enough to deal with it, but isn’t in himself hard. In fact, the whole point of his growth throughout the series centers on the fact that he doesn’t let his honor or basic character be compromised through eventual marriage, money, prestige, or rank. So again, not what I’d call unsympathetic.
Where have I seen unsympathetic characters work well? In making a very unlikable antagonist.
Steve (Edward Norton’s character) in the remake of The Italian Job is wonderfully awful. He manages to be unlikable, relatively un-active – it’s even a plot point as they make him re-active – and he’s not overwhelmingly competent. And every time I watch that film, I enjoy seeing him get it in the end. Ed Norton did spectacular in that role and it’s part of why I like watching him in other roles.
I think the big take-away for me would be similar to any advice about writing something new – consume it first to make sure you know how it works. If you’re going to write unsympathetic protagonists, be reading and consuming media that use them. Learn how those feel before trying to go down that path as a writer.
I’m quite convinced I would muck it up as I don’t consume media that uses unsympathetic protagonists, so I don’t know why they work. They aren’t something I particularly like and so don’t particularly care to understand.
Which is why I enjoy Writing Excuses so much – they give plenty of opportunities for writers of all stripes to find something useful for them. So, while I may not be in the target audience, perhaps you would be.
What unsympathetic protagonists have you enjoyed? Perhaps I’m just missing out on them. Share below in the comments.
Also, if you’re listening along and want to share you own reactions to the episode, feel free to drop them in!
This week’s episode introduced a new type of episode for the podcast and I’m anxiously awaiting its return next month. The What Writers Get Wrong series is exactly the kind of leveling up material that I’ve been needing and didn’t ever know it.
Episode Rating: 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟
Humor: 🌟 🌟 🌟
Usefulness to me right now: 🌟 🌟 🌟
The concept for the series is to use these episodes as individual looks at the ways that writers fail – perhaps with writing the other or common traps that people fall into.
The approach is to use the podcast as a way of SHOWING rather than telling about craft and if it goes anything like this first venture, it will be great.
I’m loving the new host, Aliette de Bodard. I really enjoyed how quickly she seemed to fall into place with the existing crew. I think this series will be one of the most useful to me going forward.
While the exact topic of motherhood and pregnancy is not one that is currently needed for the stuff I’m writing, it did get me thinking about where I could make some changes to my research process.
Factual vs Subjective Subjects
One of the big changes I will need to make in my approach to research and beta readers is coming to a better grasp of subjective topics.
Some things that bug my in my reading are when writers get things that are factually provable wrong.
Giving external safeties to guns that don’t have them. Using the wrong type of engine on a get-away car. Having a setting of tall, rickety structures in an area of the US with 70mph straightline winds (regularly) and tornados. One or two target readers who are even reasonably familiar with the weapon/car/area would have fixed these problems. in stories that I’ve read.
But with something like the topic of the podcast, there are a multitude of ways to screw that up.
One of the items I remember from Brandon’s YouTube series on worldbuilding was the concept of the iceberg – that you have to do enough worldbuilding to show the top of the iceberg that you can convince your readers that there’s so much more under the surface – even if you haven’t actually thought of those things that are beneath the surface. Because as writers we can’t always spend the time (years – decades) creating things that intense.
With these kinds of subjective experiences, I think you’d have to do the same. You need to show enough clear, concrete details that your readers believe you’ve looked at all of it.
And as a writer I need to be cogniscent of where my personal experience with a topic won’t suffice. I have at least some experience pregnancy and motherhood as I’m married and we’ve had kids. But there is NO WAY I would try to write pregnancy and motherhood based on my VERY LIMITED experience as an outside observer. It’s just not something I would be competent to write at this time, and I know it.
And there are myriad topics that are the same way. Being willing to acknowledge that I don’t know is where that first step starts. Feedback from readers can clue you in if you’re getting enough of it.
So what things have you seen as readers that you had to just sit back and laugh because the writer got them so wrong?
Thanks to some great questions by reader Chloros, I thought I’d compile a post on some of the things that might not be readily apparent about the Ergodox EZ (at least as far as I’m able) and to point out a couple of cons I’ve noticed. I think my posts so far may have been too glowing in their praise. So I’ll try to be a bit clearer here. Sorry this took so long to get ready.
Does the programming stay with the board? If it gets unplugged or power goes out or I switch computers does anything happen? Can I use it with someone else’s computer?
The programming is part of the keyboard, not a application running on the computer.
It’s fully within the firmware – flashing a new layout means reflashing directly to the board. Power goes out or board gets unplugged? No issue, everything is there still there, nothing erased. All the layers and key assignments stay put and I can switch from my work computer to my home unit with no down time at all. Plug and play. New computer I’ve never used the keyboard with? So long as the standard USB keyboard drivers are up-to-date, I don’t think there’s anything that would affect it. Swapping units has no effect at all on the Dox – unless I specifically flash using the tool, nothing affects the layouts I have and nothing from the keyboard changes the computer I’m using.
Gaming with a programmable keyboard, will layers or stuff screw up my game?
I don’t think so, and to be honest, I’m not the best source to ask. The only PC game I play with any regularity is Stardew Valley using WASD/mouse.
But, from what I’ve read, gaming might be one of the big reasons people go with a programmable kb. Since all the key assignments sit in the firmware, you can just program a layer to have all your shortcuts and key assignments right at your fingertips. So long as you don’t accidentally switch to another layer in the midst of play (and that requires you to hit a key that you have specifically set to be a layer changing key), there’s nothing the board would do to mess your game up.
Similar example – in writing, basic formatting and copy/paste functions get used all the time, so I set the interior column of both halves to have those shortcuts. To invoke bold I don’t have to hold the Ctrl key and hit “b”, I just tap the left-half inner column bottom key and the board sends “Ctrl-b” for me. I use one key stroke to send two.
That said, using the web-based configuration tool, things like macros aren’t possible.
The subreddits for the Ergodox and the Ergordox EZ are a good community resource. They’ve been very helpful to me.
Online EZ Configuration Tool – what happens if it goes away or the company closes shop? Are there other ways to program the board and change key assignments?
The online configuration tool is just a web-based compile tool for QMK, the firmware used on the original Ergodox, Ergodox Infinity, and a ton of other boards. It’s just far easier to use a web-based tool than setting up the compiler on your own computer.
For a new user and for someone not a developer (for example, me) its great. But it’s not as powerful and there are some quirks. So if the EZ company decides to pull the plug, there is always the QMK firmware, which is open source and has a decidedly enthusiastic community supporting it.
One quirk which I was not aware of (and this goes to one of the cons) – when you make a new layer using the configurator, the new layer is essentially transparent back down to the base layer.
For example, if I make a new layer, say layer 4, and don’t assign anything to it, when I switch to layer 4, it behaves just as though I’m on layer 0, the base layer.
If you want a new layer to be truly blank, turns out in keyboard-speak, you have to assign the keys the “blank” character. In the configurator that’s the “None” assignment. I think the reason this happens is because when you press a key on the keyboard, that completes a circuit and sends a signal. The computer HAS to know what the signal is, or you risk crashing something. So, the default approach is to just send what is already in that position on the base layer.
I think I understand the reasons for this and I’ve started to use this to my benefit, but the visual presentation of the configurator makes you think these blank keys send “nothing” or the blank character. I was annoyed by that and would like some better documentation to that effect on the configurator page.
If there more questions, feel free to post them below, and I’ll update here as time permits.
Things are going to be a little different this week. Between the holiday, some bad sleep, more stress at work, and bad timing, I haven’t gotten all the writing work done I wanted to. I have gotten the book work done I needed to, but not the blogging. So, you get one this week. Maybe two if I’m able to finish up some stuff.
I’m 25% complete with the current revision of my novel Betrayed. That is the part of writing that has been going well. I also got back a response from a beta reader which pumped up my enthusiasm a lot. So, I’m quite hopeful that the book will be in the right shape for querying agents when I’m all through with it this round.
Once I get to 50%, I’ll start really working on the pre-writing for my next novel. Which means between now and then, I need to do some research on pets and AIs. Fun stuff.
In physical tool updates, I ADORE my new keyboard. I’ll be trying to get some questions addressed that folks have asked, so please be patient. But my hand pain is completely gone, and I’ve been pushing pretty hard the last few days. So, it was expensive, but so far, worth it.
Last, today marks the start of a new habit forming session which I’m doing with my youth at church and with my writing group. My young men wanted to learn about how habits work and so last night was a chance to explore habits, and the result was me realizing that my recent writing approach has been killing my sleep pattern. I needed to make a change.
So the new goal is sleep early, up early, with my writing spread throughout the day, rather than all writing done in a rush at night. Day 1 feels pretty good so far.
My Reflections on Writing Excuses 13.02 – Writing Active Characters
This week, the hosts looked at writing active characters and first reaction out of the box for me: “Holy cow! New Chicago team!”
Yes, it looks like the crew changed up this season. I’m sure if I followed the podcasters on anything more than just the podcast I would have seen this coming, but it was surprising to me. It makes a lot of sense. What a great way to keep things fresh. It’s too bad in one regard, because I really liked the old Chicago crew. Looking forward to getting to know the new folks!
Episode Rating: 🌟 🌟 🌟
Usefulness to me right now: 🌟 🌟 🌟
So, perhaps it’s because I’m in the middle of revisions rather than drafting, but this doesn’t feel quite as useful to me at the moment. For a passive character, Brandon gave the example of having someone who always stands around and watches important events rather than being in them.
Current project – not an issue.
Book I just finished in November ? Might be an issue. So, not as useful at the moment, but it may be something I’ll need to address in future stories. I might have that tendency.
Overall, though, a good episode, though because of the new team who haven’t answered this question previously, the answers seemed at surface level. I hope they find their legs as the season goes and give good, meaty advice. Good enough for the very early writer, but I think they can all dig a bit deeper.
Something that didn’t get covered during the episode: my personal belief is that inactive characters are a warning sign/diagnosis criteria of plot problems. If your character isn’t interacting well with the events of the story, you might be telling the wrong story.
And I don’t necessarily mean redoing the story so your main character is at the center of events.
Maybe you have a seemingly passive character observing an action/adventure story, but rather than re-plot the action story, you need to be telling the coming of age story inside that adventure, of someone wistfully longing to be bigger or better than they are.
Or you have a relationship story where the a seemingly passive character can’t talk to the object of their affections. So maybe try telling the growth story inside of that problem.
In reality, this is just another variation on Mary’s favorite tool, the MICE quotient, with a story nested inside another story. It’s great because it allows you to have layers that might not come up in a straightforward tale. And it can let you keep what you’ve already worked and tweak it rather than starting over from scratch.
So, if you do find your characters being too passive, take a look at how to fix. It may be just a change of paradigm.
K, I think I’m going to call it there for the week.
I really enjoy the comments that I’ve been getting. Many thanks to those who have been reaching out. And with how busy the week has been, I’ll be responding to a couple of previous questions later this week, so hang in there.
Update: I wanted to add my week long impressions before the daily recap, so edited to add that in at the beginning of the post; GMG
Week 1 Impressions
I am shocked at how quickly I have acclimated to the Ergodox EZ in my daily work. Granted, I’m using it nearly 6 hours a day between work and novel writing, but I really am surprised at how much I enjoy using it. I don’t think that much computer work is common for people. I also think I have a distinct difference over a lot of Ergodox adopters: I am NOT a developer or programmer. For me, that means I have fewer keys that I have to relearn.
For me, I needed to adapt to:
having the board split and hands farther apart
arrow keys on a layer
few shortcuts (bold, italics, cut, copy, paste, etc) at special positions on layer 0
I think developers and programmers have more that they would have to adapt to – symbols, IDE shortcuts, window movement keys, maybe integrating vim/Emacs.
The other big impression: people will absolutely judge you for buying one, but on the inside, probably find it pretty cool. My boss calls my cube the “cockpit” now and asks if I like piloting the shuttle. But he was also very eager to give the Ergodox a shot and was amazed at how hard it was to master, giving me props for getting good at it as fast as I have. My co-workers all tried it as well and everyone came away saying it was cool, impressed I would be willing to make this drastic change to my work place. One of them is even starting to learn about mechanical keyboards, perhaps moving towards one for himself one day.
Below, I’ve listed out my thoughts day by day, if that interests you. If you’ve got questions, feel free to drop them below and drift around to any of my other posts.
Day 0 – End of the day
I give in, my brain hurts. I went all day with Ergodox and could feel things kicking in slowly – left thumb is actually a useful digit now, arrows keys are right under my fingers, layers are starting to make sense.
But holy crap, I’m worn out. Very reminiscent of learning Colemak, where it isn’t a headache, but actually feeling like I can’t think anymore. I know gray matter in the brain has no nerve endings to feel, but this feels like a brainache.
Also, it’s weird to have my hands on separate boards. Wonder if that’s going to every feel normal.
But for the rest of the day, I’m switching back to my regular board just so that I can get this last email out.
I did however make all of my colleagues try it out on my QWERTY layer. I was hilarious to watch them try to process the changes introduced. None of them realized that the keys aren’t staggered until I pointed it out. They kept getting annoyed that they’d hit M and , at the same time.
Day 1 – Saturday half day
I did use it for doing revisions to my novel and I really like using is sorta one handed. Left hand on board with backspace and delete available and right hand on mouse. I could easily see doing gaming this way.
Still really struggling with bottom row not being staggered. This might be the thing which breaks me. If I can’t get this down, I can’t type and there’s not point continuing.
I CAN FINALLY TYPE “C” WITHOUT ERRORS!! Still struggling with X, V, and B though, but I think my brain is finally accepting the new positions.
And I made a lot of iterations to my layout today.
Also, I realized that I had put too much under my right thumb cluster. The pain moved from ring/pinky of my right hand to my right thumb, so the last item on that list, v0.6, was to move my layer 1 key elsewhere and change it’s type. Things feel better already.
I actually feel like I got work done today. I wasn’t thinking so intently on how to use the keyboard, I just used it and got stuff done. Suddenly bottom row stuff wo
DCA profile keycaps now feel mostly normal. I like that I don’t have to raise up much to move from row to row. I still wonder how DCS profile might feel for more sculpting.
Tenting also feels like it has lessened hand pain and I’m really liking having my hands apart.
Hmm, I’m using the built-in keyboard on my laptop during a meeting and I can’t type. My hands consistently are too far apart so I’m off the keys, I’m actually using my left thumb, though I keep hitting spacebar instead of backspacing. Ugh! Why don’t my fingers work?
Wait, there it is. After 20 seconds, my brain kicked in and I could suddenly type again just fine.
Who would have though that 5 days would be all that was needed to get that comfortable with a new system that my old one would feel foreign?
I think I need to make certain to use regular layout keyboards at least daily for a few minutes so that I don’t lose the ability to type on them at all.
Only struggles now are using number row and remembering to use layer 1 for navigation (arrows, end, home) instead of reaching for the mouse. I’m surprised at how fast I can navigate if I just can remember where to hit.
Error rate is down significantly and hesitation when doing regular typing is nearly none. Password entry is slow since much of that is muscle memory that hasn’t yet adapted to the new layout. Using my text expansion software (TyperTask) is also slow for similar reasons.
I LOVE that I can independently move each half. Little bit of rotation in or out, move in or out. Just tweak things a little for that hand to reduce stress and discomfort just a little bit more. Every little bit is helping. Shoulders are more relaxed and hand pain is down. Now both hands feel like they are getting used, but not in pain. And the adjustments in tenting are helping. I’m actually finding that too much tenting can contribute to stress as well.
Ah, the humble checkbox. How ticking you fills me with joy, a sense of completion, a small bit of the chaos locked away.
Or at least, that’s how I’ve heard some people describe them.
No, I’m not really going to wax poetic on the nature of notetaking apps, but I am going to talk about one of the easiest tools to use to get started on improving personal productivity if you’ve never used anything in the past: the checkbox or list.
How to Use
To me, list making seems a nearly universal approach to remembering to do something, a way to have a plan (albiet a very simple one) to deal with something we must do. We use lists for grocery trips, chores, errannds, packing, and just about anything we want to quickly jot down to do later. But lists on paper and checkboxes within digital notetaking apps (like Evernot, Google Keep, and OneNote) can be extremely powerful. I find I use them all the time, even within other productivity systems because of how useful they can be.
At the simplest, grab a sheet of paper and list out all the things you want to do. You don’t even have to separate them into categories. Put your oil change right after your character motivation you just realized you needed to add to your current scene.
Using them within a dedicated environment can be even more powereful. Some entire systems are built around them – Bullet Journals, HipsterPDA, Todoist, TickTick, Wunderlist, AnyDo. Even the prioritized daily task list that was part of the Franklin Day Planner system I mentioned in the first article of this series is just a list of things to be checked off during the day.
Of course, things might start to get a little jumbled after a while so a strategy is useful in applying this to your fiction writing. And that’s the big problem with them – lists can spiral out of control. Often, when you start listing out everything you need to do, you get overwhelmed by actually seeing HOW MUCH you have to do. And then you can’t find the item you need or it doesn’t remind you to do it at the appropriate time.
So, how do I use them?
My Usage in Writing Fiction
Lists and checkboxes are a tool within the much larger system I have developed for myself (and that is the topic I’ll be talking through next time). I use them sparingly.
Inside my project management system, I will create lists of thing associated with that project and only that project. And I try to limit that to only specific tasks.
“Revise draft” is not an appropriate checklist item – too broad and too encompassing. “Revise scene for redundant emotional beats as part of 10% cut” is a lot more useful. It reminds me what specific task I should be doing in enough detail and focus to make sure I get that ONE thing done.
I use them for research to create a list of exact sources I want to review. My next book about rogue AIs and teenage girls getting caught up in a crime syndicate’s plans has a lot to do with pets, so I have a list of movies and books that feature the important relationship between owner and pet, alongside requirements to research neural networks and machine learning.
I have a list of exact topics for this blog post series.
I have a list of buisness and personal branding changes I need to make with my website.
For me, the biggest asset in list making is knowing the context of where that list would be useful and making sure that the list surfaces when I need to work on that topic. I make sure I am checking my system for these things on a weekly basis to ensure I’m getting things back into my head that need my focus now.
Applications and Apps
I already listed out several applications and apps above, but without giving any opinion on them. Mostly that’s because each of the apps has a devout following and I have found they all have things that make them good fits and bad fits for me. Most of them become their own systems if you use them long enough. Also, fair warning, I don’t use a MacOS or iOS device, so there’s likely a whole bunch of appse out there that I’m not aware of, so take the below with that in mind.
If you prefer living in a paper and pen world, give Bullet Journaling a look. It doesn’t work for me, but the flexibility is very good.
Digitally, I think Evernote is the most useful notetaking tool and it has some decent list making and reminder resources, though it can be overkill.
For a simpler digital note system, Google Keep is very clean and ties in nicely with the Google environment if you are already a Gmail lover.
And if you just want a digital checklist, I recommend TickTick as a starting point as it has all the features that you’d likely want in the free version.
How do you use lists in your current work? Do they help you or do you find them superfluous?
A new year, a new season of Writing Excuses. And this week’s episode got my soap box nerves tingling. Hero, protagonist, and main character – which is which and how to know which to use.
Episode Rating: 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟
Humor: 🌟🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟
Usefulness to me right now: 🌟🌟 🌟 🌟 🌟
What a great episode! And it hit on one of my personal pet peeves when it comes to craft books for fiction writing – a determination to fit all main characters into a particular label.
One of my preferred craft books on structure is John Truby’s The Anatomy of Story, which I love for its many insights and approaches to developing the bones of a story. But I HATE his use of the label “hero” when talking about the the character of the story. Perhaps I should explain.
I don’t write stories about heroes, at least, that’s not how I think of them. I’m much more interested in the stories of everyday people thrust into extraordinary situations. Sometimes that lets a person’s heroic side show. And often, it doesn’t. So as Truby used the word “hero” to describe how the story theme gets built and all of the way that the structure ties back to desire and need and ghosts and all these things that tie into the character driving the story, I felt put off, like his words weren’t for my story.
Until I changed my brain to substitute protagonist every time he used hero. Then it all started to gel for me.
For the pod-casters, there is a difference between a hero, a protagonist, and a main character, and Mary described them as being in sets that overlap. Hearing it that way made me change my thinking on this a little bit. For them, the main character was the person through whose eyes we see the story unfold, the protagonist is the one making choices and actions that drive the story forward and changes through story, and the hero is the one that makes the heroic action or who we admire. Sometimes those are all one character and sometimes they are three different characters and sometimes any mix in between.
And that’s where things really made sense for me. I’m currently working through a cut revision of my first novel and my main character is my protagonist, but he isn’t the hero. That role goes to another, and in my story, that ends up being a trope subversion, which I really like. But being able to better separate the roles lets me see just how I can mix and match them to make very different kinds of stories.