Snoring Lucidity
Monday, January 12. 2009
I've had a fascination with lucid dreaming for quite some time. It has a very close relationship to speculative fiction, in that both represent ways to experience a fantasy world. The lucid dream is a more immediate means, but a far less predictable one.
The Wikipedia article referenced above covers the basics of lucid dreaming. I've personally engaged in the MILD technique, using reality testing, specifically the "clock" method. This procedure involves looking at a digital clock, noting the time, looking away, and then looking back to confirm that the time is the same (or at most one minute later). People interested in lucid dreaming train themselves to perform a technique like this one throughout the day, while (supposedly) awake. So I'll sit at my desk at work and "test reality" every once in awhile by doing the clock-double-take action. Performed often enough, the actions become ingrained, such that one will even do them while dreaming. The times then differ, the dreamer notices and realizes he is in a dream, and then he becomes so elated at the prospect that he wakes up.
Well, that's been my experience thus far, anyway. I've never worked hard enough at lucid dreaming to achieve any good results. Now would be a good time to revisit the phenomenon, since the short story I've started working on takes place within lucid dreams.
My favorite part of the whole lucid dreaming topic is the notion of "testing reality." The idea presupposes that the waking state will be internally consistent and follow established rules, while the non-waking state will not. It amuses me to consider that this assumption is quite likely not a valid one.
I've had a fascination with lucid dreaming for quite some time. It has a very close relationship to speculative fiction, in that both represent ways to experience a fantasy world. The lucid dream is a more immediate means, but a far less predictable one.
The Wikipedia article referenced above covers the basics of lucid dreaming. I've personally engaged in the MILD technique, using reality testing, specifically the "clock" method. This procedure involves looking at a digital clock, noting the time, looking away, and then looking back to confirm that the time is the same (or at most one minute later). People interested in lucid dreaming train themselves to perform a technique like this one throughout the day, while (supposedly) awake. So I'll sit at my desk at work and "test reality" every once in awhile by doing the clock-double-take action. Performed often enough, the actions become ingrained, such that one will even do them while dreaming. The times then differ, the dreamer notices and realizes he is in a dream, and then he becomes so elated at the prospect that he wakes up.
Well, that's been my experience thus far, anyway. I've never worked hard enough at lucid dreaming to achieve any good results. Now would be a good time to revisit the phenomenon, since the short story I've started working on takes place within lucid dreams.
My favorite part of the whole lucid dreaming topic is the notion of "testing reality." The idea presupposes that the waking state will be internally consistent and follow established rules, while the non-waking state will not. It amuses me to consider that this assumption is quite likely not a valid one.
The Wikipedia article referenced above covers the basics of lucid dreaming. I've personally engaged in the MILD technique, using reality testing, specifically the "clock" method. This procedure involves looking at a digital clock, noting the time, looking away, and then looking back to confirm that the time is the same (or at most one minute later). People interested in lucid dreaming train themselves to perform a technique like this one throughout the day, while (supposedly) awake. So I'll sit at my desk at work and "test reality" every once in awhile by doing the clock-double-take action. Performed often enough, the actions become ingrained, such that one will even do them while dreaming. The times then differ, the dreamer notices and realizes he is in a dream, and then he becomes so elated at the prospect that he wakes up.
Well, that's been my experience thus far, anyway. I've never worked hard enough at lucid dreaming to achieve any good results. Now would be a good time to revisit the phenomenon, since the short story I've started working on takes place within lucid dreams.
My favorite part of the whole lucid dreaming topic is the notion of "testing reality." The idea presupposes that the waking state will be internally consistent and follow established rules, while the non-waking state will not. It amuses me to consider that this assumption is quite likely not a valid one.
Unfashionable Influences?
Thursday, January 8. 2009
I've blogged before about my writing influences. I'm wondering now about their associated expiration dates.
Seen any polyester leisure suits lately? Wide lapels? How about Miami-Vice-style white jackets with pastel tank tops underneath? Fifties-vintage beehive hairdos? No, neither have I. Tastes change, the world moves on.
One of my earliest "favorite authors" was Isaac Asimov. Asimov is increasingly (and posthumously, which strikes me as unfair) labeled as sexist, wooden, hackneyed, and ineffectual in his writing, to the point of being dismissed as a "pulp author." Have readers' expectations changed so much that a man acknowledged during his lifetime as one of the "big three" SF writers (along with Heinlein and Clarke) is now so easily dismissed?
Yes, they have. Tastes change, and the world moves on.
So my task as I write is to temper my influences with an impression of my potential readership as it exists today. I don't want (nor, frankly, is it within my power) to blindly copy a Master's style in any way, because were that Master alive today...neither would he.
I've blogged before about my writing influences. I'm wondering now about their associated expiration dates.
Seen any polyester leisure suits lately? Wide lapels? How about Miami-Vice-style white jackets with pastel tank tops underneath? Fifties-vintage beehive hairdos? No, neither have I. Tastes change, the world moves on.
One of my earliest "favorite authors" was Isaac Asimov. Asimov is increasingly (and posthumously, which strikes me as unfair) labeled as sexist, wooden, hackneyed, and ineffectual in his writing, to the point of being dismissed as a "pulp author." Have readers' expectations changed so much that a man acknowledged during his lifetime as one of the "big three" SF writers (along with Heinlein and Clarke) is now so easily dismissed?
Yes, they have. Tastes change, and the world moves on.
So my task as I write is to temper my influences with an impression of my potential readership as it exists today. I don't want (nor, frankly, is it within my power) to blindly copy a Master's style in any way, because were that Master alive today...neither would he.
Seen any polyester leisure suits lately? Wide lapels? How about Miami-Vice-style white jackets with pastel tank tops underneath? Fifties-vintage beehive hairdos? No, neither have I. Tastes change, the world moves on.
One of my earliest "favorite authors" was Isaac Asimov. Asimov is increasingly (and posthumously, which strikes me as unfair) labeled as sexist, wooden, hackneyed, and ineffectual in his writing, to the point of being dismissed as a "pulp author." Have readers' expectations changed so much that a man acknowledged during his lifetime as one of the "big three" SF writers (along with Heinlein and Clarke) is now so easily dismissed?
Yes, they have. Tastes change, and the world moves on.
So my task as I write is to temper my influences with an impression of my potential readership as it exists today. I don't want (nor, frankly, is it within my power) to blindly copy a Master's style in any way, because were that Master alive today...neither would he.
Too Much Input, Not Enough Output
Wednesday, January 7. 2009
Ah, research is a wonderful thing. Until it becomes all-consuming.
I've often expressed my admiration for Wikipedia, and the easy access it provides to the sum of human knowledge (with a little idle conjecture and pure falsehood mixed in for color). Think of a subject, learn all about it in five minutes' time on Wikipedia. I can even make the case that time spent reading Wiki-articles is time well spent, giving me more material from which to draw as an author.
I'm now suffering from an overabundance of material, and a dearth of authoring.
Latest trap: reading about Adolf Hitler. Interesting stuff, full of ideas for alternate history fiction (all of which have probably been done before), but an interminably long article. All the hyperlinks to other World War II terms with which I'm unfamiliar help none at all in my attempts to extract myself and go get some real writing done. Wonderful input...but while I'm taking in input, I'm producing no output.
I've literally been reading the Hitler article for three days. (No, not straight through; I'm not that slow. I read a bit, then make myself go do something else, then come back to it, follow a hyperlink-rabbit chase, come back once again, and so on.) I'll probably be reading it for a couple days more.
Then I'll work hard to avoid wondering about any other topics I could dial up on Wikipedia and get on with trying to be an author...
Ah, research is a wonderful thing. Until it becomes all-consuming.
I've often expressed my admiration for Wikipedia, and the easy access it provides to the sum of human knowledge (with a little idle conjecture and pure falsehood mixed in for color). Think of a subject, learn all about it in five minutes' time on Wikipedia. I can even make the case that time spent reading Wiki-articles is time well spent, giving me more material from which to draw as an author.
I'm now suffering from an overabundance of material, and a dearth of authoring.
Latest trap: reading about Adolf Hitler. Interesting stuff, full of ideas for alternate history fiction (all of which have probably been done before), but an interminably long article. All the hyperlinks to other World War II terms with which I'm unfamiliar help none at all in my attempts to extract myself and go get some real writing done. Wonderful input...but while I'm taking in input, I'm producing no output.
I've literally been reading the Hitler article for three days. (No, not straight through; I'm not that slow. I read a bit, then make myself go do something else, then come back to it, follow a hyperlink-rabbit chase, come back once again, and so on.) I'll probably be reading it for a couple days more.
Then I'll work hard to avoid wondering about any other topics I could dial up on Wikipedia and get on with trying to be an author...
I've often expressed my admiration for Wikipedia, and the easy access it provides to the sum of human knowledge (with a little idle conjecture and pure falsehood mixed in for color). Think of a subject, learn all about it in five minutes' time on Wikipedia. I can even make the case that time spent reading Wiki-articles is time well spent, giving me more material from which to draw as an author.
I'm now suffering from an overabundance of material, and a dearth of authoring.
Latest trap: reading about Adolf Hitler. Interesting stuff, full of ideas for alternate history fiction (all of which have probably been done before), but an interminably long article. All the hyperlinks to other World War II terms with which I'm unfamiliar help none at all in my attempts to extract myself and go get some real writing done. Wonderful input...but while I'm taking in input, I'm producing no output.
I've literally been reading the Hitler article for three days. (No, not straight through; I'm not that slow. I read a bit, then make myself go do something else, then come back to it, follow a hyperlink-rabbit chase, come back once again, and so on.) I'll probably be reading it for a couple days more.
Then I'll work hard to avoid wondering about any other topics I could dial up on Wikipedia and get on with trying to be an author...
What? Why?
Tuesday, January 6. 2009
Right, what's the point of this blog?- I'm not trying to "teach" anyone anything about how to write. Lord knows, I'm a neophyte in that area myself.
- I'm not trying to declaim any philosophy or convince anyone I'm "right" about anything.
- I'm not trying to be vain. The number of people who read these electronic words might actually have dipped into the negative and/or imaginary.
- I'm not trying to find an agent or a publisher or an editor or any other traditional literary outlet. That'll happen if it happens, blog notwithstanding.
So really, all I'm doing is opening my writing diary.
Here, I'm recording my thoughts, struggles, discoveries, challenges, triumphs, frustrations, and perhaps someday, successes. This is admittedly mostly for my own benefit. I could type all these words in a file on my computer rather than posting them for all to see. But I cling to some shred of hope that someone will find what I have to say interesting, in a kinship sort of way. I know there are other budding writers out there running into the same roadblocks as I am. I hope something I record here will be meaningful.
Plus, it helps to get it out. The frustration level dips somewhat. And maybe eventually this space will devolve into a useful resource.
But not just yet. For now, my "why" is essentially this: Because I write, and this is an aspect of the process for me.
Right, what's the point of this blog?
Here, I'm recording my thoughts, struggles, discoveries, challenges, triumphs, frustrations, and perhaps someday, successes. This is admittedly mostly for my own benefit. I could type all these words in a file on my computer rather than posting them for all to see. But I cling to some shred of hope that someone will find what I have to say interesting, in a kinship sort of way. I know there are other budding writers out there running into the same roadblocks as I am. I hope something I record here will be meaningful.
Plus, it helps to get it out. The frustration level dips somewhat. And maybe eventually this space will devolve into a useful resource.
But not just yet. For now, my "why" is essentially this: Because I write, and this is an aspect of the process for me.
- I'm not trying to "teach" anyone anything about how to write. Lord knows, I'm a neophyte in that area myself.
- I'm not trying to declaim any philosophy or convince anyone I'm "right" about anything.
- I'm not trying to be vain. The number of people who read these electronic words might actually have dipped into the negative and/or imaginary.
- I'm not trying to find an agent or a publisher or an editor or any other traditional literary outlet. That'll happen if it happens, blog notwithstanding.
Here, I'm recording my thoughts, struggles, discoveries, challenges, triumphs, frustrations, and perhaps someday, successes. This is admittedly mostly for my own benefit. I could type all these words in a file on my computer rather than posting them for all to see. But I cling to some shred of hope that someone will find what I have to say interesting, in a kinship sort of way. I know there are other budding writers out there running into the same roadblocks as I am. I hope something I record here will be meaningful.
Plus, it helps to get it out. The frustration level dips somewhat. And maybe eventually this space will devolve into a useful resource.
But not just yet. For now, my "why" is essentially this: Because I write, and this is an aspect of the process for me.
Warning: May Not Be Habit-Forming
Monday, January 5. 2009
The main thing I wanted to acquire from NaNoWriMo 2008 was a habit. Sadly, it didn't take.
The hardest thing for me to do as a writer is to force myself to set aside time to write. Because I don't have a regular schedule in my life, I can't, say, decide to always write from 6 PM to 8 PM, though I would dearly love to do so. I have to write as the time becomes available, and too often, it just doesn't happen. I need to find ways to make it happen.
I need to have the same relationship to writing that smokers have to nicotine or, dare I say it, addicts have to heroin. I need to reach the point where I cannot avoid writing, where it is a craving I must fulfill. And I am more than a little worried that I'm talking about needing to develop this attribute, because I've read in the past that this characteristic is a defining one for writers. If writing doesn't naturally compel me like a drug, should I even be writing? Can I succeed as a writer?
Well, it seems to me that every addiction is an acquired one. I just need to work a little harder on making the writing addiction stick. That will be the goal for the rest of January: to write every day. Not necessarily 1,667 words, as for NaNoWriMo, but something. Then, at the end of January, I'll see whether the process will continue of its own accord.
This is a fundamental test of my ability to become a true author. In February, I'll pass judgment on myself.
The main thing I wanted to acquire from NaNoWriMo 2008 was a habit. Sadly, it didn't take.
The hardest thing for me to do as a writer is to force myself to set aside time to write. Because I don't have a regular schedule in my life, I can't, say, decide to always write from 6 PM to 8 PM, though I would dearly love to do so. I have to write as the time becomes available, and too often, it just doesn't happen. I need to find ways to make it happen.
I need to have the same relationship to writing that smokers have to nicotine or, dare I say it, addicts have to heroin. I need to reach the point where I cannot avoid writing, where it is a craving I must fulfill. And I am more than a little worried that I'm talking about needing to develop this attribute, because I've read in the past that this characteristic is a defining one for writers. If writing doesn't naturally compel me like a drug, should I even be writing? Can I succeed as a writer?
Well, it seems to me that every addiction is an acquired one. I just need to work a little harder on making the writing addiction stick. That will be the goal for the rest of January: to write every day. Not necessarily 1,667 words, as for NaNoWriMo, but something. Then, at the end of January, I'll see whether the process will continue of its own accord.
This is a fundamental test of my ability to become a true author. In February, I'll pass judgment on myself.
The hardest thing for me to do as a writer is to force myself to set aside time to write. Because I don't have a regular schedule in my life, I can't, say, decide to always write from 6 PM to 8 PM, though I would dearly love to do so. I have to write as the time becomes available, and too often, it just doesn't happen. I need to find ways to make it happen.
I need to have the same relationship to writing that smokers have to nicotine or, dare I say it, addicts have to heroin. I need to reach the point where I cannot avoid writing, where it is a craving I must fulfill. And I am more than a little worried that I'm talking about needing to develop this attribute, because I've read in the past that this characteristic is a defining one for writers. If writing doesn't naturally compel me like a drug, should I even be writing? Can I succeed as a writer?
Well, it seems to me that every addiction is an acquired one. I just need to work a little harder on making the writing addiction stick. That will be the goal for the rest of January: to write every day. Not necessarily 1,667 words, as for NaNoWriMo, but something. Then, at the end of January, I'll see whether the process will continue of its own accord.
This is a fundamental test of my ability to become a true author. In February, I'll pass judgment on myself.
(Page 1 of 2, totaling 10 entries)
» next page