I’ve been writing and rewriting “The Story,” scene after stochastic scene, for as long as I can remember. An idea will pop up while I’m riding the bus, talking to someone, or reading a book. I’ll see a couple on the bus and think about John [left] and Trishna [right]. Better than stressing about work! In these situations, memories, or maybe more, I wonder: how much of “The Story” will be based on real people?
My big goal is writing “The Story.” The flash-bang idea started in high school and just will not go away. I could do as many might: try, fail, and shelve the idea as a quaint notion. I can’t do that! I am only stopped by my writing ability, which I know cannot yet do justice to “The Story.” Here are 5 points I refined in my process while writing “Covered in Artificialities” that might help you!
How much can we understand of this world? We go through school to study as much exoteric content as we can and maybe specialize in certain esoteric topics. Some of us might push the boundaries of research and help the rest of us. Others reject all that. Their realities will never be fully understood. We’ll never really “know” fringe thought the same way we do popular thought. Is it because we just can’t understand everything?
In recent weeks I’ve celebrated solving organizational situations within my office, “Zeal,” so let’s brainstorm possible resolutions to a conflict actively prevented progress in my organizational process. I grew up with the impression that notes and the paper they were written on were sacred, as though looking at a scrap piece of paper with some inconsequential ideas would recall memories, which has resulted in stacks of papers. Is the solution to simply recycle them all?
In last week’s brainstorming update to “The Story,” I covered how main characters Trishna and John (left) would clash. Even the most connected people clash, after all, especially when both are fiercely independent. It’s about balance: if one is more comfortable jumping into the fray than thoroughly researching, let them perform their strengths to build a more cohesive team. Let’s see how they solve problems, and how teams solve problems, in this Applied Psychology crossover:
Spoiler Warning Scale: None! (just brainstorming)
WANNA READ MORE ANALOGIES FOR CONFLICT RESOLUTION? KEEP ON READING!
I have thousands of ideas per day, about one to six topics I want to pour the time into writing, and not enough time to block out to working on those ideas. While I like the idea of thousands of little ideas vying for the top slot, there’s more to it than that: there’s sacrificing the time to properly develop the idea.
I was unhappy. To reference Csikszentmihalyi‘s Flow Model, I’d fallen from flow at work and into constant anxiety with destructive apathy. The mental challenge was gone. My brain was rotting away. I know myself well enough to know that this leads to bad behavior. Friday morning exploded. The details of the catalytic moment could have one thousand variations. It was at this spot, before I took this photograph, that I realized something needed to change. The four-hour float tank session I’d scheduled for the next morning couldn’t have been better scheduled to help me figure out what I needed to do.