Sunday, August 3, 2014

August 3 2014. What do you do when you can’t think of something to blog about?

“Blogging is to writing what extreme sports are to athletics: more free-form, more accident-prone, less formal, more alive. It is, in many ways, writing out loud.”

Andrew Sullivan

For most of human history, all published writing had been carefully inspected, edited, and approved.

In the last decade, blogging has turned the publishing world on its head. A blog allows you to write and publish anything, from anywhere, and have it be immediately available to billions of people all around the world.

This means that blogging is uniquely “alive”, as Andrew Sullivan points out in The Atlantic. I, for one, am happy to embrace the chaos and vitality.


The issue is not whether I can think of ideas. So much is happening in this fascinating world of ours that I can always think of something to write about.

The issue that concerns me is balance. I have a tendency to want to write about economic and social issues to excess—both because there is so much to write about and because I am so concerned—whereas  I think this blog is stronger and more entertaining if I vary the content, yet anchor it around writing and creativity in general. I throw in stuff on aviation, weaponry, technology, and the like because such subjects interest me—and I also cover them in my thrillers.

I don’t know that for sure. Essentially, I am flying on instinct.

Though it is not a journal, I still hope that this blog gives—over time—a real insight into a working author’s mind (including diverse interests). At times, the content may be too revealing—but I have reached an age where I am prepared to take that risk. I don’t have the ego I once had for a whole host of reasons called life—and I increasingly accept that risk is innate in communication. When you communicate you make yourself vulnerable, and thus open to be hurt—sometimes badly. A writer has to decide whether the game is worth the candle—and be prepared to display courage. Sometimes I am. Sometimes I don’t display enough. I’m working on it.

I am somewhat surprised that I comment as much about writing as I do. Historically, I haven’t been particularly analytical about it. In fact, even when I was planning to give up the rewards and security of a successful business career, I didn’t spend much time thinking about what writing really meant—let alone its attendant way of life. If I had, it wouldn’t have made any difference. I didn’t know enough then to know what I didn’t know—let alone what I needed to know.

Besides, my call to write was more an epiphany—an imperative that could not be refused. I don’t recall a blinding light and heavenly voices—but a nearby gas cylinder warehouse blew up and sent a chunk of shrapnel into my desk. If I had been there, I would have been decapitated. Fortunately, the explosion happened in the small hours. I took that as a hint to get started on writing before some arbitrary event took me out of the picture. To have been killed before writing a single book would have really pissed me off. If I get killed now at least I’ll be leaving behind a body of work—ten books and about 700 blogs—and, of course, my body. Strange the way we leave our bodies behind. You would think it would be more efficient if we just vanished when we died. Mind you, I’m not sure that Earth was constructed around the concept of efficiency.

However, blogging tends to foster introspection and I have become very aware of how much help prospective authors need. I don’t have one particular author in mind. Instead I have been strongly influenced by the numerous e-mails I have received from writers asking for help. Such communications make me flash back to when I was starting—and let me tell you, I empathize. It is very hard to keep going when you have sold nothing, published nothing. You feel you have no respect—and self-respect becomes an issue. In fact, my heart breaks at times—and I wish I could do more.

Soon I will be doing more. I’m featuring a major section on writing in my new website. It is a much revised version of one I featured on previous websites—which proved extraordinarily popular (which I now wish I had kept up).

When will that be up? Watch this space. It should be fairly soon now. It is already written. Now it is down to my technical competence (which is not what it might be). Fortunately, website construction has been made vastly easier over the last couple of years.

Wish me luck.


Saturday, August 2, 2014

The website challenge is making me trepidatious.

“If you think math is hard—try web design.”

Trish Parr

“Websites promote you 24/7: No employee will do that.”

Paul Cookson

“What separates design from art is that design is meant to be... functional.
Cameron Moll


A website is as necessary to an author today as breathing—nearly—yet  currently I don’t have one. I feel very bad about that. It is not an area where I have covered myself with glory. I won’t bore you with the reasons. Suffice to say, I took my eye off the ball. I could explain the reasons, but fundamentally the failure has been mine.

I am ashamed of that fact.

I am now about to attempt to build my new website myself. The text has been written. The graphics have been assembled. I have evolved a graphic look which is quite striking. In fact, I have even had a new photo taken. All that remains is to assemble the whole thing—not a minor task given the amount of material involved.

Will I be able to do it? On the one hand I have minimal computer skills. On the other hand, based upon what I read, DIY website build software has improved enormously over the last couple of years to the point where it is now possible to build a complete website without any coding whatsoever.

Well, that is what they say. I’ll believe it when I have done it.

If necessary, I will bring in some help—I’m under time pressure here—but I have now reached the stage where I want to be able to design and build a complete website myself. It has become a necessary skill for an author who publishes outside traditional publishing—or even inside in many cases. Traditional publishers have shifted much of the marketing burden onto the author.

So what does a traditional publisher bring to the game? That’s another conversation.

I will report in this blog how all of this progresses. Though I don’t particularly want to air my inadequacies, such a case history may help some other struggling soul.

Challenge is a curious thing. I am both as nervous as hell—and looking forward to it. In fact, I’m quite excited. Am I confident? Not exactly. I’m too conscious of my lack of computer skills to feel that—but I am deeply motivated—and interested. This will be a game-changer as far as I am concerned. Practically all my plans involve websites—which I want to be able to produce at speed. I expect to build a number each year.

Damned if I expected to have to do this sort of thing when I started to write—but I love the idea of being able to communicate directly without an intermediary. Bliss!

I will regard success as being able to build and upload a complete website—even if I have to seek advice on some of the details. If I decide to use someone else’s design eventually, that will be fine too. I figure that being able to do the basic job will help me with communicating to a designer.

This is a huge deal as far as I am concerned. If I succeed, it will be awesome. If I fail, I’ll make myself succeed. Failure, short of a heart attack or some such, is not an option.


I heard Stan McChrystal on the radio the other night—and was impressed. Yes, he screwed up seriously—and Obama was virtually forced into making the decision he did—but I think the president would have made a better decision if he had put McChrystal back into the fight. Yes, it would have been an exceptionally difficult decision because McChrystal was in the wrong. Not the point. McChrystal was a fighter and a leader of enormous talent—and we don’t have enough of such people. That apart, it is important to allow people to fail.

StanleyMcChrystal.jpg

The issue of the quality of our generals interests me greatly.

I had a considerable amount to do with Army generals in the Nineties—and again after 9/11, and I formed the view that we didn’t have enough of caliber. I wasn’t the only person to have that opinion.

There was also serious concern about the quality of the generals promoted under the then Chief of Staff of the Army, General Shinseki.

The Army general officer promotional system is essentially geared to promoting clubbable soldiers who will go along to get along rather than the diverse range of thoughtful, intelligent, creative warriors it really needs. Innovators tend to be mavericks and the Army isn’t comfortable with such people. They can be difficult to the point of being demanding. They are intellectually restless. Innovators tend to question the status quo—and generals (both serving and retired) tend to be very comfortable with the existing system. After all, it made them generals.

True, a few outstanding officers do make it into the club—but the prevailing anti-intellectual culture makes them less than common. In fact, there isn’t any career path for military thinkers. The promotional system is based near exclusively on command. For instance if you don’t command a brigade (Brigade Combat Team today) first, you will never make general—even if your ideas have revolutionized the Army (Here I can think of a number of specific cases including those of Colonel Douglas Macgregor and Major Don Vandergriff—both now retired).

Does the promotional system have to be this way? Certainly not. Bureaucratic systems are man made and can be man changed.

The quality of Army generals is a serious problem which doesn’t get nearly enough attention. It’s hard to think who will raise the issue. The Army generals themselves won’t raise the issue for obvious reasons; the Secretary of Defense has weightier issues on his mind; and the Secretary of the Army tends to be too dependent on the generals to want to rock the boat.

Yet the consequences of picking the generals tend to be severe. We had the wrong man in charge of the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and the wrong men in charge afterwards for some time. We will be paying for those errors for decades.

Yes, on balance, I would have left McChrystal in charge.

I just felt you should know.


On the one hand we have rampant corporatism—a very distant relative of free market capitalism. On the other hand, we have Elon Musk—a one man tribute to the virtues of entrepreneurship. I have no doubt the man can write too.

“Elon Musk] is very much the person who, when someone says it’s impossible, shrugs and says, ‘I think I can do it.”

Max Levchin, PayPal Co-Founder

“Failure is an option here. If things are not failing, you are not innovating enough.”

Elon Musk

“I always had an existential crisis, trying to figure out ‘what does it all mean?’ I came to the conclusion that if we can advance the knowledge of the world, if we can expand the scope and scale of consciousness, then, we’re better able to ask the right questions and become more enlightened. That’s the only way to move forward.”

Elon Musk


tesla happiest customer

falcon 1 launch (USAKA)

As I have mentioned before. I met so many celebrities when I was growing up—mainly thanks to my unusual mother—that I have little time for our celebrity culture. When you have seen enough celebs close up and personal, they become no more than people—some good and some decidedly less so.

Some deserve respect in their own right—both because of their achievements and because of their qualities as people. They do not deserve respect merely for being celebrities.

In fact, I regard our obsession with celebrities as as extraordinarily destructive. It distracts, it distorts, it deludes, it debases—and it certainly dumbs us down. It is a key component of the barrage of commercial and political propaganda which keeps us from focusing on the very real issues and opportunities which confront us.

For instance, if faced with two speakers, we have been conditioned to pay more attention to (and, by implication, give more credence to) the celebrity rather than reach a conclusion based upon the issues.

This is bizarre, when you think about it. It means that celebritization (Is there such a word?) has been turned into a classic reality distortion tool. More fool us for succumbing.

Having declared my prejudices, I will now confess that I do have my heroes—though I hope my regard for them is rooted in their achievements rather than name recognition. Some are well known to the general public. The economists and authors I admire mostly have scant national recognition—subject to some exceptions—though most have their own followers in their specialized fields (as I do too, now I think about it).

Elon Musk is pretty much in a league of his own. To me he is the epitome of what the U.S. could, and should, be (visionary, innovative, competitive, customer oriented, trustworthy, inclusive, socially concerned)—whereas Comcast is a perfect example of where much of U.S. business culture is (politically connected to the average voter’s disadvantage, monopolistic, overpriced, inefficient, untrustworthy, customer hostile, socially hostile—and giving bad service).

The following are some extracts from an article on Musk in incomediary.com The whole piece is worth reading.

Musk only starts companies in emerging fields

In 1998, that emerging field was the Internet. Zip2 (and later PayPal) both succeeded thanks in large part to getting in on the ground floor of Internet boom.

Next, Musk identified three more emerging industries and got in on the ground floor on all three. SpaceX (space transportation), Tesla Motors (electric cars), and SolarCity (solar power) have all benefited from the high growth potential and low-competition that comes with being a pioneer.

To pivot in business is to change direction while keeping one foot grounded where you started.

That’s exactly what Elon Musk did when he turned X.com (online bank) into PayPal (a global payment transfer provider). The change rendered X.com totally unrecognizable, but Musk was able to use much of its resources. Those resources included an innovative method of securely transferring money online through the recipients email address, which Musk had developed himself.

The pivot was a gargantuan success:  once PayPal became featured on Ebay, its use exploded.

Can you imagine if Musk had stayed running PayPal? He’d still be rich and successful – but there would be no electric sports cars or rocket ships to his name. Thankfully, Musk long ago learned how to extricate himself from his own startups.

In 1995, Musk founded Zip2 (an online city guide) and in 1998 he sold it to Compaq for $307 million. Musk’s portion was $22 million. He was 28-years-old and free to do whatever he wanted.

That meant founding X.com. Again, Musk jumped ship after a couple of years, selling PayPal for to Ebay in 2002 for a cool $1.5 billion. For his trouble, Musk got $165 million in Ebay stock. Now Musk had enough personal capital to start the pair of truly extraordinary businesses that he still runs today.

Both times Musk cashed in a company for millions of dollars, he invested at least 45% of his earnings back into a brand new business within the calendar year.

  • $10 million of the $22 million Musk made from the sale of Zip2 went to founding X.com (later PayPal).
  • $100 million of the $165 million made from the sale of PayPal went to founding SpaceX.

Musk also invested heavily in Tesla Motors (33,076,212 shares) and SolarCity (20,724,991 shares). It’s the ownership of these three companies that constitutes the vast majority of Musk’s $6.7 billion estimated wealth.


August 2014: Is work slavery? But is what you love work?

"Success consists of going from failure to failure without loss of enthusiasm."

Winston Churchill


It’s rare I don’t find something provocative on Barry Ritholtz’s eclectic blog, The Big Picture. Today, there is a thoroughly entertaining piece by Kent Thune, a name I’m going to have to remember. His blog is The Financial Philosopher Good title.

“By setting oneself totally free of constraints, free of thoughts, free of this debilitating activity called work, free of efforts, elements hidden in the texture of reality start staring at you; then mysteries that you never thought existed emerge in front of your eyes.” ~ Nassim Nicholas Taleb

Readers of this blog are likely aware of Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s first two books, his 2001 debut, Fooled by Randomness, and his 2007 work, The Black Swan, which are based upon Taleb’s central idea: “our blindness with respect to randomness, particularly large deviations,” which speaks directly to the common follies of investors.

I recently read (and enjoyed) his 2010 book of aphorisms, Bed of Procrustes. In Greek mythology, Procrustes was the cruel owner of an estate where he would entertain traveling guests for dinner then offer them a place to rest. To make them fit his special bed, he would chop off their limbs or stretch them if they were too small. This works well as a metaphor for the modern world, where social conventions shape us into whatever fits its demands. And as individuals we resolve our tensions, as Taleb describes, “by squeezing life and the world into crisp commoditized ideas…” (Note: Barry has a similar and interesting take on investing with what he calls the danger of narratives.)

Although Taleb covers several topics in Procrustes, the one that struck me the most was his blunt comparisons of employment to slavery, a theme that finds itself often in my own philosophical observations (and rants).

Here are a few select aphorisms from the book, followed by a few of my own notes (I’d also love to hear any of your thoughts in comments that the quotes or notes may provoke):

Work destroys your soul by stealthily invading your brain during the hours not officially spent working; be selective about professions.

The three most harmful addictions are heroin, carbohydrates, and a monthly salary.

If you know, in the morning, what your day looks like with any precision, you are a little bit dead—the more precision, the more dead you are.

Those who do not think that employment is systemic slavery are either blind or employed.

The difference between technology and slavery is that slaves are fully aware that they are not free.

You have a real life if and only if you do not compete with anyone in any of your pursuits.

My perspective is similar to that of Aristotle’s: You’re not working if you love what you do; therefore, in this case, one’s profession is not slavery. But how many are fortunate enough to love what they do? It is normal to either dislike (or, at a minimum, tolerate) one’s work. But normal is not healthy.

The tension arising from “fitting ourselves” into the Procustean bed of engaging in work that we do not love is, at the root, and in my humble opinion, the reason people invest their money and it is the creator of the modern idea of retirement.

We give up our freedom now for freedom later, a freedom we believe can only be purchased with money.


August 2 2014: You know it’s a strange thing but—as best I can tell—my mood, at the time of writing—doesn’t show in my blogs. I’m not quite sure whether this is a good thing, or not. I’m also not entirely sure it is true. Perhaps people who know me really well can read between the lines. Or perhaps they only think they can. All writing should contain an element of mystique—and perhaps a red herring or two..

“Yes sir, the fish was left in place of the crystal ball. It's been bagged and tagged for analysis.”
Great. Now we have another red herring on our hands.”

A.F. Stewart, Fairy Tale Fusion


An alternative—and correct—viewpoint is actually that my mood does show—and what it shows is that the mere act of writing tends to remove any negative feelings I may have been experiencing just prior to writing—and  to make me feel energized, positive, quizzical, humorous, curious, and generally upbeat.

I sound drugged but I’m not into drugs. In fact, I don’t either eat or drink—except tea—while I’m writing. I get as hungry as hell, of course, but somehow it seems to help. Damned if I understand it.

Well, that is true—but one could argue that the effect, albeit unintentionally, is deceptive because I am not conveying my real feelings about life in general. Instead, I am masking my real feelings by writing. The writing process is an escape.

The reality lies somewhere in the middle—because the truth is that writing is the primary focus of my life, and the very act of writing (far from sure I think of writing as an act) virtually always improves my mood—or if I’m in terrific form when I start—maintains it. It’s a tough-as-nails feel-good thing.

Secondly, this blog is not a journal—so I don’t feel an obligation to convey my trials, tribulations, doubts, many imperfections, and mood swings.

Do I have them? Of course I do—though rarely when I am actually writing. Anyway, I prefer not to meditate upon them/wallow in them. Mostly, I don’t have to—because all I have to do to escape—is to write.

As I have written so often before, though writing is innately uplifting—you live with failure because you never write as well as you aspire to (and if you do, you raise the bar).

Yet writing is the nearest thing to magic that I have encountered so far in this life—and its effect is near instantaneous, and lasts.

To write is to feel absolute despair—yet hope.

Instead, I’m more concerned to write about the matters which really interest me in the belief that they will both entertain you—and give you some idea of the thought processes which lead to books. I rarely give details, but I sprinkle clues fairly liberally.

I also throw in a fair amount about my upbringing because it was pretty bizarre, and yet many people find it interesting. I write often about cognition, creativity, and writing because these subjects fascinate me—and I live in hopes they will resonate with any other creative people who happen to stumble across this blog. I know I have benefited greatly from reading the thoughts of other writers, and still seek them out. I also write about military matters and economics because I have some expertise in both areas and like to communicate my thoughts. I write about matters of social concern because—to be blunt—I am concerned.

I don’t try and justify what I do because I have learned that it is pointless—and that it is better for my work to speak for itself. If people don’t understand blogging—and this blog in particular—all I can say is that, like many writers, I spent years developing an inner voice—and when that inner voice tells me I’m on the right track, I listen and follow it. It is my creative guide, editor, and conscience. In the fine tradition of my family, it seems to have to have no practical skills whatsoever. I trust it absolutely nonetheless. It understands the creative heart—and writing.

It is also clear to me that this blog has improved my facility to write beyond recognition. That’s not why I do it, but it is a wonderful side effect. The benefits of writing about so many disparate subjects at such speed are considerable. Being unable to plan—in any classic sense—induces a certain flexibility of mind. I am pushed, pulled, wrenched, and dragged into doing more than I think I’m capable of. The process is exhausting and inspiring.

My general sense is that I’m on a journey—an extremely difficult journey—and though it is taking longer than I would like, and I have experienced many setbacks—there is a purpose to much of this.

For instance, along the way I seem to be  resolving a number of issues which have dogged me in the past—and I’m also developing capabilities which—to my shame—I have lacked to date (such as being able to blog daily—or produce a website from start to finish).

Such transitions are not minor. Some are gut-wrenching. All take months of work. These are useful and necessary disciplines—but they are alien.  Such expertise is hard won.

Realistically, I am a twentieth century writer in education, upbringing, style and outlook, and I am being dragged, kicking in and screaming, into the twenty-first. This is not a comfortable process. Social media does not feel natural to me—or it didn’t. I’m naturally a fairly private person—though I seem to be adjusting

Yet, somewhat to my surprise, I feel I’m getting to where I want to be, need to be, have to be. Hard to explain this imperative..

Of course, in many ways, I’m already there—since all I really want to do is write. I crave the challenge, the daily discipline, the struggle. It is so damn hard—yet so fulfilling.

It’s also such a pleasure—and it can, at times, accomplish amazing things. In fact, reaching out and touching millions of lives though one’s books is pretty amazing it itself—even if all I do is entertain, help people escape.

I have received thousands of fan e-mails covering every conceivable human situation to the point where people have told me that that their loved ones have been eased by reading my works as they have been dying. I have been much affected by such accounts, but have had no idea how to comment. I have felt both honored and sad.

If I can move, inform, and stimulate—is that a whole new dimension? And perhaps I can actually change a few things.

Is changing a few details  an adequate justification for one’s life?

It’s a fragile goal—but you know, it just might be. I’m as sure as I can be that it is all I have to give.

Yes, I am painfully aware that it isn’t much. I cling to that goal  nonetheless. It feels right—a goal to commit to..

Perhaps somewhat better than that.


 

Friday, August 1, 2014

August 1 2014: Whether you like Hemingway or not, the man was remarkably quotable on the subject of writing (and I happen to love A MOVABLE FEAST—though certainly not all his other books—only some)..

“But writers and their woes: they couldn't be parted. Not for anything.”

Naomi Wood, Mrs. Hemingway

“But even now, a full century after he wrote his first school poem, scratched out in startlingly plain words on onion skin paper with a number two pencil, his heart and soul remain as fresh and brave as ever. Hemingway lives.”

Clancy Sigal, Hemingway Lives!


1. I learned never to empty the well of my writing, but always to stop when there was still something there in the deep part of the well, and let it refill at night from the springs that fed it.

2. If a writer knows enough about what he is writing about, he may omit things that he knows. The dignity of movement of an iceberg is due to only one ninth of it being above water.

3. For a long time now I have tried simply to write the best I can. Sometimes I have good luck and write better than I can.

4.That is what we are supposed to do when we are at our best – make it all up – but make it up so truly that later it will happen that way.

5. Writing and travel broaden your ass if not your mind and I like to write standing up.

6. My aim is to put down on paper what I see and what I feel in the best and simplest way.

7. When writing a novel a writer should create living people; people not characters. A character is a caricature.

8. Prose is architecture, not interior decoration, and the Baroque is over.

9. All you have to do is write one true sentence. Write the truest sentence that you know.

10. There is no rule on how to write. Sometimes it comes easily and perfectly; sometimes it’s like drilling rock and then blasting it out with charges.

11. To F. Scott Fitzgerald: “Write the best story that you can and write it as straight as you can.”

12. Do not worry. You have always written before and you will write now.

13. All stories, if continued far enough, end in death, and he is no true-story teller who would keep that from you.

14. A serious writer is not to be confounded with a solemn writer. A serious writer may be a hawk or a buzzard or even a popinjay, but a solemn writer is always a bloody owl.

15. It’s none of their business that you have to learn how to write. Let them think you were born that way.

16. To an aspiring writer: “You shouldn’t write if you can’t write.”

17. After writing a story I was always empty and both sad and happy, as though I had made love, and I was sure this was a very good story although I would not know truly how good until I read it over the next day.

18. My training was never to drink after dinner nor before I wrote nor while I was writing.