Have I taken enough risks? Three authors weigh in

I attended at a series of talks yesterday at the World Trade Center on How to Write a Book. Each of the three speakers — Samantha Lucas, Kat Olana, and Anthony Shieh — talked about how they jumpstarted their writing careers through self-publishing. They offered insights on the opportunities and pitfalls, and encouraged aspiring writers to believe in their own message.

A self-published author is an entrepreneur. He or she makes the product, the book, and sells it. They might go door-to-door, but more than that, they use processes to identify their specific target audience, make them aware of and interested in the book, convert that interest to sales, and win loyal followers who will tell others to buy the book.

Writing, therefore, is much more than putting words into paper. It is a profession, different from regular jobs because it needs a lot of expertise in multiple skills, and education in and out of school.

Where do writers get their education? Shieh, Lucas, and Olan are college graduates. They then spent more than 10 years in marketing, advertising, sales and content generation for various companies. At the same time they worked on their own writing — Shieh on human interest and horror stories, Olan on sci-fi, and Lucas on self-help. They attended talks, workshops, and joined communities to sharpen their knowledge and skills in research, writing and editing.

They also found Central Books. Why was this important? Because, aside from publishing and marketing textbooks in the traditional manner, Central Books also provides production services such as editing, formatting, and printing for self-published authors. After they produce the book, the authors themselves sell it. This requires a totally different set of skills. We’re talking metrics, demographics, analytics, cold calls, optimizing search engines and platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Tik Tok, Google, and Instagram.

Olan, a trained marketing professional, outlined a strategy that templates the process of marketing a book. The process consists of three steps: Know the Magic, Know the Reader, and Connect Those Two.

1. Know the Magic: This is the key step where the author articulates his or her Big Idea. What is your book about? Answer that in 2 or 3 sentences. What is your book’s Unique Selling Point, what makes it different from similar books? What are the events, characters, facts that make the story believable? What is your branding? We talk about color palettes, fonts, tonality, imagery. In short, why is the book worth buying?

2. Know the Reader: Authors write for a specific reader, so well defined one could describe him or her down to her shoes. You can’t sell to everyone; in fact, try to do that and you won’t sell. Testing that niche is a process of trial-and-error backed by calculated assessments of metrics. The author knows about the audience’s demographics: age, gender, where they live. The author knows their psychographics: hopes, dreams, fears, beliefs, likes, passions, hobbies. The audience’s attitude towards books, where and how they buy, in what platforms do they search, these an author researches.

3. Connect the Two. Olan presented a model called the “marketing funnel” (see below). It consists of 4 stages: Awareness (I learned about your book); Consideration (I’m interested); Conversion (I bought it); and Loyalty and Advocacy (I’ll recommend it). It’s a funnel, because out of 100 who are aware, 30 will check it out, 10 will buy, and 3 will tell their friends to buy it. The big insight is that those 3 friends? They’ll sell the book better than you will. Also, the funnel phenomenon means a writer must be constantly marketing and selling if he or she wants to sell a lot. The author will attend events: book launches, online and on-ground, partner with influencers, pen deals with bookstores. The author will see peaks and troughs in sales as with any business, and will monitor what readers are saying on social media. The author has about 2 or 3 years to maximize the book’s appeal, after which the product fizzles.

The Marketing Funnel. Image: https://media.sproutsocial.com/uploads/marketing-funnel.jpg

The speakers made it very clear that writing is just half the work; producing and marketing a book costs time and money.

The problem is: most writers don’t know this. Even if they did, such as our three successful writers, they must still take risks. That’s the nature of business. In fact, they all described themselves at some stage like standing at the edge of a cliff. Yet they insist: just jump. That’s when things really happen!

It’s not all flying and colors and what. The speakers did not talk much about their personal down moments. But their advice to find influencers who can sell the books better than they do, their insistence on never editing your own work, and their surprise at the kind of people who buy their work, indicate that they paid their dues in blood and sweat along the way.

To me, it seems that writing and selling gets easier as one learns to read the right metrics and click the right icons to increase the chances of selling the product. The risks themselves, however, are always there. A writer who has been through this will know that their belief in their own message gives them the clarity and determination needed to navigate the risks. As one of my favorite authors wrote, in a different context:

Those who hesitated at the moment of trial, who did not act with clarity and determination when the moments of crisis were upon them, deserved the limitations to which their fears committed them.

Robert Ludlum (1927-2001)

The more tries, the more sales. The more rejections, the more sales. The more fear, the more sales. Just believe in your work, all this throwing to the wind becomes just a thing you have to do.

So, to the question “Have I taken enough risks”, I echo the sentiment of those three writers and answer with another question: “Have I jumped off a cliff today?”

(Q.C. 230604)

Why aim for 100 rejections a year?

Image: https://static01.nyt.com/images/2018/12/16/opinion/sunday/16winter/16winter-videoSixteenByNineJumbo1600.jpg

I came across this insightful article, Why You Should Aim for 100 Rejections a Year by Kim Liao (https://lithub.com/why-you-should-aim-for-100-rejections-a-year/). The logic is this:

“Collect rejections. Set rejection goals. I know someone who shoots for one hundred rejections in a year, because if you work that hard to get so many rejections, you’re sure to get a few acceptances, too.”

I searched the internet for figures about the percentage of works that are rejected. The estimates are high: at least 90%, one giving 99+%. With that information, I asked, how many submissions must one make to have a 95% chance of being accepted.

Set up the equation:

Success = 1 – (Failure)^X

Where Failure = 99% (I will try 95% and 90% as well), and X=the number of submissions.

What this equation is saying is this: How many times do I have to fail in succession until I get an acceptance, a Success?

0.95 = 1 – (0.99)^X

X = log(0.05) / log(0.99)

X = 298

Solved for X using the method of logarithms.

Results and recommendations? For 99% probability of rejection, submit 298 times; for 95%, submit 58; for 90%, submit 28. These are submission, not 298 distinct works.

When Ms. Liao recommends 100 rejections a year, she is saying that the probability of rejection is between 95% and 99%, which squares well with what many anecdotal accounts in the internet say.

Let’s unpack that rather high figure. First of all, my estimate assumes that the figure is random, like flipping a coin. It’s not. Among other things, it is a function of capacity: publishers simply cannot accept much more than a small number, and if submissions are seasonal then the probability of rejection changes. Second, the probabilities are better for better writers; but “better” can refer to many things, not necessarily talent. For example, seasonal timing, or greater fit with the target audience. And third, the figure is not constant. Also, every rejection likely improves your chances in the next submission because you learned something.

Although I said it cannot be much smaller, there are ways of improving your chance of acceptance.

How can one decrease the probability of rejection?

There’s no surefire way. However, you can significantly improve your chances by following these approaches:

  1. Research Potential Publishers/Agents: Understand the kinds of work they usually accept and make sure your manuscript aligns with their preferences. It would be a waste of time to submit a science fiction novel to a publisher that specializes in non-fiction history books.
  2. Follow Submission Guidelines: This may seem simple, but many submissions are rejected simply because they do not adhere to the specified submission guidelines. These may include specific formatting requirements, word count limits, and instructions for what to include in your cover letter.
  3. Write a Compelling Query Letter: This is often the first thing a publisher or agent sees. A good query letter should be concise, capture the essence of your story, and convey why you believe your manuscript is a good fit for the publisher or agent.
  4. Proofread and Edit Thoroughly: Make sure your manuscript is as polished as it can be before submission. This means careful proofreading for grammatical errors, typos, and inconsistencies. Consider hiring a professional editor or using a reputable editing service if possible.
  5. Get Feedback Before Submitting: Have others read your manuscript and provide honest feedback. Beta readers can offer valuable insights and catch mistakes or confusing passages you might have missed. Consider joining a local or online writing group.
  6. Consider Professional Assessment: Before submitting, consider getting a professional manuscript assessment. They can provide a detailed critique and advice on how to improve your manuscript.
  7. Stay Current and Relevant: Keep an eye on trends within your genre. While you should not change your entire manuscript to fit the current trend, it might help to be aware of what is selling in your genre.
  8. Be Patient and Persistent: Publishing is a highly competitive field, and many successful authors faced numerous rejections before getting their work accepted. Keep submitting, keep improving your craft, and don’t let rejection discourage you.

I’m not familiar how the dynamics work out for self-publishing as I have not explored that area. A priori, I do have a high regard for mechanisms of selection or external review, which I feel is lacking when one is in full control. It’s something to study.

That said, every publisher and agent is different. What works for one might not work for another. Keep learning, keep refining your approach, and keep trying. It’s all part of the paying your dues.

I expect this event to be very helpful:

At the Hall C, Hidalgo Room, Booths E53-E56. World Trade Center, Manila. Image: https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/content/v1/5902f354893fc0548ada3585/1d802c7f-5f26-491c-a228-89703c5ad6ea/IMG_2200.jpeg?format=1500w

(Q.C. 230530)

Writing as Gym Work

I came across a Youtube video with that title some time ago. The speaker told about how once as a kid she refused to perform a musical number because she was shy. Her mother told her “Don’t flatter yourself. No one’s really going to care about you; your job is to go up on stage and perform. The rest doesn’t matter.”

I, like most people, will sometimes worry about how I appear when I give a talk. Am I making a good impression? Are they convinced? After a talk, I’m sometimes worked up thinking I should have said this or that.

One solution I tried to lessen that problem was to write out my whole talk and then deliver by reading; extemporaneous is for Q&A. This lessened my worry about forgetting anything important. Writing a whole talk looks like it takes more time, but the benefits to me are worth it.

The benefits to my audience, too. A talk that I used to deliver for about half an hour without notes is now down to 15 minutes.

When I started that practice, I thought, “What would people think, that I have to read my talks? Would they sound too academic?” Now I’m so used to the practice and people who know me are used to it as well I do not think anymore about performance. I just know it works.

I’ve even stopped comparing my performance to others, outside of getting what I can learn from them. I’ve tried many approaches, and now I realize that that what’s makes one person impressive is not usually transferable. Writing reveals what is unique to oneself.

I do not wish to describe exactly how that happens. But let’s take it from the fact that writing is not just an activity; it is a cognitive artifact. A cognitive artifact is something physical or digital that has aided a mental process. Cognitive artifacts can be used to guide problem-solving, recall, and/or thinking. These items are referred to as artifacts because they are leftover remnants indicative of the efforts it takes to unravel mental processes.

Writing is just one of many cognitive artifacts; others include books, maps, calculators, language, decision software, calendars, checklists. Napoleon Bonaparte’s hobby was to study maps and solve geometry problems. Choose an artifact and, like Napoleon, use it at every occasion. Master it.

Image: https://www.awai.com/_img/content/2015/05/the-fastest-way-to-build-your-writing-muscles/001.jpg

Use your favorite cognitive artifact like you’re going to the gym. You will develop powerful cognitive muscles, and you will discover confidence, especially in solving your favorite problems.

One day you will find others who enjoy the same pursuits. Common aims and complementary skills lead to collaborations. That is what a profession is: a community built around solving specific kinds of problems and whose tools, techniques and traditions have been tried and tested over generations. One can change the world with such collaborations.

In the old days people joined professional guilds from a very young age. Nowadays, we do that training in school, but also in clubs.

What is important is to start young. Cultivate these talents and networks even without seeing their immediate use. For when the opportunity does present itself to make your grand entrance to the world you will be ready.

(Q.C., 230515)

The work ethic of Anton Chekhov

My favorite fiction writers? Stephen King, John Grisham, Robert Ludlum, Michael Crichton, Guy de Maupassant, Fyodor Dostoevsky. But one writer is not on this list who should be, a master of the mundane whom I have not read until now.

Anton Chekhov (1860-1904) is one of greatest writers of all time. He was a contemporary of Maxim Gorky (1868-1936), Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821-1881), Leo Tolstoy (1828-1910), Ivan Turgenev (1818-1883), and others. Unlike the great Russian novelists, he mainly did short stories. Also unique to him is that he wrote about the banal, the ordinary. He did not psychologize like Dostoevsky, or moralize like Tolstoy, but only wrote about what he saw. And unlike many of his contemporaries, he did not put the peasants on a pedestal. To him rich and poor have the same problems, all strive for moments of joy in lives just as filled with moments of misery.

Chekhov wrote:

If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don’t put it there.

Anton Chekhov

This advice is known as Chekhov’s Gun. It says that every element in a story must play a part in the story. This led to a minimalist style that has become characteristic of today’s stories. Chekhov is considered the father of modern fiction.

But it is the man’s work ethic, not his writing, that first got me interested to know more about him.

While there are no definitive records of the exact number of hours Chekhov wrote each day, it is well known that he kept a disciplined and consistent writing schedule. His productivity suggests that he devoted a significant amount of time to his craft.

What have I learned about his discipline?

Chekhov would spend hours every day writing, revising, and perfecting his stories and plays. I think his schedule would not be very different from that of another minimalist writer, Japanese author Haruki Murakami (1949 – ), for whom we have more precise information: Murakami spends the first 4 to 5 hours of his day writing.

Chekhov was a practicing physician. He managed to write and to heal by dedicating specific time blocks to each profession. We know he spent 3 hours a day, 6 days a week seeing patients in his clinic and on house calls. His output attests to his time-management skills.

He was deeply committed to his writing, continually honing his skills and developing his unique realist style. He placed a strong emphasis on creating vivid characters, engaging dialogue, and exploring the complexities of human nature. He had the best beta readers and correspondents, his friends Tolstoy, Gorky and other members of the Russian literary elite.

He faced numerous rejections early in his career, but he persisted in submitting his work and learning from feedback. He himself did not realize and in fact felt a little embarrassed to learn that he had, in his lifetime, become one of the most significant literary figures of his time. He died of tuberculosis at 44 before knowing that he had become one of the most greatest literary figures of all time.

Chekhov, the doctor, had very sharp powers of observation. He incorporated his experiences and observations of people and society into his work; if his short stories were read in chronological order one would in fact be reading his autobiography. He had a keen eye for detail, which allowed him to create realistic and relatable characters and stories. He aggressively pointed Chekhov’s Gun on his work and polished it to great precision and clarity.

I greatly admire Chekhov’s discipline, dedication, and a commitment to his craft. I hope I can adopt his ability to balance multiple roles and to persist in the face of rejection.

(Q.C. 230407)

Stephen King On Writing

If I had to recommend just one book on writing, it is On Writing: A Memoir on the Craft, by the author of some of the most beloved of children’s stories like It, Carrie and Pet Sematary.

On Writing is a memoir and a writing guide in which King shares his personal experiences and advice for aspiring writers. The book is divided into three sections: “C.V.,” which covers King’s early life and writing career, “On Writing,” which provides advice and insights on the craft of writing, and “Toolbox,” which offers practical tips and exercises for writers.

King emphasizes the importance of reading widely and writing regularly. He also stresses the value of creating a writing routine and setting specific goals for oneself. King emphasizes the need for writers to be honest and authentic in their writing, and to avoid excessive adverbs, adjectives, and other unnecessary words.

King also discusses the importance of revising and editing one’s work, and of getting feedback from others. He offers practical tips for improving one’s writing, and they are listed below.

On Writing is an engaging and practical guide to the craft of writing, filled with personal anecdotes and insights from one of the most successful and prolific writers of our time. It holds a favored spot in my Stephen King collection.

Summary of King’s recommendations, and some of my own:

  1. Read widely and often, and pay attention to how other writers use language and structure their work.
  2. Write regularly, even if it’s just for a few minutes each day.
  3. Develop a writing routine and set specific goals for yourself.
  4. Be honest and authentic in your writing, and avoid using excessive adverbs, adjectives, and other unnecessary words. [Most adverbs and adjectives are too excessively used.]
  5. Revise and edit your work carefully, and seek feedback from others.
  6. Use concrete, specific details to create vivid images in the reader’s mind. [Use concrete nouns – “what you can place on a wheelbarrow,” said King – proper names and dates, numbers in arabic. As an exercise, try writing WITHOUT adjectives or adverbs, only nouns and verbs.]
  7. Avoid passive voice and other common writing pitfalls.
  8. Practice, practice, practice! Writing is a skill that can be developed and improved with time and effort.

(Q.C. 230331)

What makes your heart sing

Chris Gardner asked: “What makes you want to wake up in the morning and then do it all over again?”

A lot what we do we do because we need to. Administrative tasks, firefighting, routine activities like doing the groceries. We’re not very good at these. Gardner, however, directs our attention to perhaps just one activity during the day that makes everything else worth going through.

We need to identify what that is.

Now, before going further I may need to adjust some of my narrative surrounding the issue of whether writing is what makes my heart sing. Although I do need to write as PART of my professional tasks, I keep telling myself that it’s not the kind of writing I dream of, that is, to write as my PROFESSION.

Carmine Gallo, in The Storyteller’s Secret, tells the story of a man who had such doubts, Joel Osteen. He didn’t think he could be a good speaker. His father was a pastor and a great preacher who had a spot on a network. When his father died, Osteen thought about giving up the spot thinking he could never sustain it. But thanks to his wife, Osteen kept the slot, and soon found that he could speak. Joel Osteen is now one of the most successful public speakers in the world.

Osteen had more than talent. His wife, she is essential. He had contacts, an audience, and a reputation. His success represents 1/10,000 of all those who will try to replicate his history, because they do not have all these other factors that are not emphasized in a communications book.

Osteen is not the best public speaker in the world. But having these other factors surrounding him means that he occupies a high place in a “hyphenated” niche. In other words, he may be in the top 25% of public speakers, and at the top 25% of pastors, but at the top 1% of public speaker-pastors. Hyphenated.

So, an aspiring writer can succeed if he were in the top 25% of writers in terms of skill, and then be in the top 25% of something else. Find out what these areas are, and we could answer Gardner’s question confidently.

I would put myself in the top 25% of writers in terms of skill with the English language, because I actually teach technical writing. Like anybody else, I put myself in the top 1% of people who know my perspective on things. But having a perspective is not the same as being good at telling it. Specifically, telling a good story around one’s idea requires skill in storytelling and faith in the story.

Samantha Gail B. Lucas, The Lucas Journaling Method (Ukiyoto, 2023). Image downloaded from: https://dwtr67e3ikfml.cloudfront.net/bookCovers/0188107-78c1f0ab-34b7-46a6-b113-5bc0746fb7dd.jpg

One of my friends is very good at storytelling, Samantha Lucas. She approached the publishing company Ukiyoto with a proposal to talk about life, relationships and the craft of writing from her perspective. They liked it, and now they’re doing all her marketing. Her books are sold in Amazon, Barnes and Noble, and others. Her 13th book under Ukiyoto was released in January 2023, The Lucas Journaling Method. A large part of her success is that she blogs and posts of Facebook daily, and whenever we meet she always has a ton of interesting stories to tell.

A firm, consistent belief that one’s story is interesting– this requires one to truly embrace everything about oneself. This does not imply saying that everything about oneself needs no improvement or change. Thus, if one is very good at analysis now, then embrace it; embrace it as well if today one is mediocre. Embracing is caring, and caring leads to improvement. Good writers are always looking to improve some aspect of their being.

Most people would be very good at more than two things, and because of that they can potentially exploit more than one hypthenated niche. One of the world’s favorite authors, Stephen King, is a master of English-Horror (fiction) who also wrote a wonderful book On Writing where he displays strength in the niche English-Writing Craft (non-fiction).

Belief in one’s story gives life to that story, but ultimately, what one is known for will depend on which part of one’s portfolio gets the most readership. It could take a lot of time to find that out. Therefore, it is more important to start something sooner rather than later — propose to a publisher within a month or two of coming up with an 8,000-word book — and adjust along the way.

(Q.C., 23_0207)

Always be writing

I once thought I could not draw; yet I drew continuously for 2 years. I should be able to do that with writing. The time spent is not even that different. Think: I used to draw even on weekends and into the night just to complete the day’s plate. I used to draw even in restaurants.

I want to write exactly the way I drew.

In order to do so I need to fight excuses. Those were coming from three areas: 1) expectations; 2) infrastructure; and 3) need,

Expectations

The key strategic decision that made daily drawing possible was the decision to use A5 paper instead of A4 or higher. The smaller format made it possible to complete a work faster. Since my objective was to draw everyday, it did not matter that the work was unsellable. I have, however, given them out as gifts. Framed even.

I had already decided that I didn’t need to draw “beautifully”. The key expectation I threw out the window was perspective: forget the lines. Later I learned that the eye does not actually “see” according to perspective lines that many artists, and that I, used.

I just drew what pleased me. I may not have produced sellable stuff, but I did make a few appreciative contacts on Instagram.

Infrastructure

What ignited my drawing project was an optical device, a mirror which, combined with my cell phone, allowed me to trace photos on paper. This device eliminated the excuse that “I can’t draw what I see.” With practice I no longer needed the device.

SuperSave was another minor app that I found useful. It allows copying pictures from Instagram into Gallery on the Android. With this I could line up drawing projects, usually in groups of 20.

A very important tool is the drawing board. What this allowed me to do was to design a simple ritual: taping my paper down with masking tape. Once this was done, it was much easier to finish the drawing project.

Whenever I felt lazy, I just began by taping my paper on the board (easy). And with SuperSave and my pipeline of pictures, I no longer needed inspiration. Inspiration came in the course of actually making the works.

Need

Did I need to draw? Not for professional or any utilitarian reason. I went into this project telling myself that if I could do it, I could do anything. I needed to see that it was possible.

When I look at all those drawings now on Instagram, and many more that are not, I could not believe I actually did it.

Now writing.

What I expect in writing is to post on WordPress once a day, for the next two years at least. Some of the posts are private, and so there are gaps. Just before this one, I posted an article that is visible only to certain people. And a post is not very long.

The infrastructure that is enabling my writing are two apps: JDarkroom and Scrivener. JDarkroom I have been using for some years now. It emulates the green-on-black screen reminiscent of DOS. I like it because it has few distractions.

Scrivener is new. It is a great app for organizing content. My posts form part of a bigger Scrivener project that is designed to become at least one book. At the moment I’m not fully optimized yet because I lost a number of Scrivener files migrating from Dropbox to OneDrive.

And, of course, I have notebooks that I scribble on at any time. I transfer the contents to Scrivener or JDarkroom later.

I need to write for professional reasons. The “small” writing I do, the posting, the Scrivener and JDarkroom work, these are warm up exercises for the bigger task: scientific journal articles. Once I start writing, it doesn’t take much to continue writing. Scientific articles are just more difficult to write because they combine research and data analysis.

A new development: ChatGPT. I used it to write two posts. ChatGPT took 20 seconds to do its thing, and I spent 20 minutes editing what it did. An exothermic reaction needs an initial energy investment called the activation energy. A catalyst lowers that cost. Coffee is a catalyst that kickstarts the day but is not the product of the day. ChatGPT for me is the coffee of writing.

Finally, how do I envision the final product?

I do not normally describe my more important goals publicly. However, I could say this: 365 x 2 articles in WordPress between December 23, 2022 and December 22, 2024.

(Calamba, 23_0202)

Write to fail

We asked our classmate, Teddy Corpuz of Rocksteddy, why he joined improv class. He said that he did so in order to fail.

I thought to myself, I’ve made many writing resolutions but completed less. Did I tire of it? Did I think a regular schedule was untenable? Was I afraid of being criticized or corrected, worried that I’m not good enough? That I’m pretentious and amateurish?

So many questions like these cross my head. Turns out, they cross every writer’s head. It’s a lot of material to write about: perhaps we should just write whatever happens to be there.

The Most Dangerous Writing App (Squibbler) forces you to do just that. Set a time, say 10 min. The app then prompts you with, say “A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.” Chew on that a bit. Then hit the keys, and do not stop. If you do for just 5 seconds everything you typed before the 10 min is over will disappear forever. That’s the only way to fail with The Most Dangerous Writing App.

Not everyone has warmed to it. I know a few who jump off the cliff and since they can’t do anything about it anymore, just enjoy the flight. What I like about this app is that it changes your focus from “Can I finish this assignment in an hour?” to “Will I risk stopping for 5 seconds?”

The draft, well, should be bad. You need to polish it, obviously. And here find the real insight: editing is the true art of writing.

William Zinsser wrote in On Writing Well: “I don’t like to write; I like to have written. But I love to rewrite.” We think our heroes are such good smiths they produce good drafts. Some probably do, but no one publishes a draft. Before a work goes in print it goes through rounds and rounds of editing and review.

Traditional writing and publishing has long been changing. Grammarly makes editing much easier and can even be used to teach correct usage. WordPress, Twitter, Facebook and others allow anyone to make their works accessible to the public, from unedited tweets of a few words to whole novels. Kindle Direct Publishing allows writers to publish and sell their works online. More recently we see are seeing Artificial Intelligence programs generating novel controversies such as “Should ChatGPT be acknowledged as an author in a scientific publication?”, to which journals have answered “No.”

So, is traditional writing dead? It isn’t. I think that coaches today should emphasize that writers should write mainly for themselves and only secondarily for their audience. I know this is not standard teaching. But if you can automate the writing process almost to perfection from the get-go, the justification for people to write is because it is as good for their cognitive skills as gyms are for their bodies.

We have this concept at the gym called “lift to failure”, meaning, go for a weight that you can only barely lift, because that is the most efficient way to become strong. And so, write to fail.

Start the day with writing blogs

I feel overwhelmed by the task of writing some reports. I want them to be great. But, how can everyone be excellent? Statistically impossible, so there’s no shame in doing only what one can even if that was not excellent.

But this report is different: I have only a few months to produce something that can be shown to Congress.

And there are others. This is the publication plan.

  1. Finish the imaging flow cytometry paper and send it to Cytometry first.
  2. Target publishing one of our bacteria (Asia’s) in MRA (GA) including epigenetic induction and BGC mining plus a few other characterizations. Frontiers might work, too. Target that everything for which she has a) antibiotic production phenotype; b) whole genome sequence; c) BGC mining; d) 16S showing novelty; and e) general features like growth curve and Biolog data will be published.
  3. Publish the agglutination assay with Poy and Roanne.
  4. Aedes.

Now, long term,

  1. Exploit the novel bacteria for publications in Frontiers and MRA.
  2. Use the malaria facility to get co-authorship in various papers.

These are where I will publish, and only in these areas.

Now, the plan to work using “work” as “distraction” may not be optimal if I put equally important work on the plate. I think, though, that it could work when one item is almost urgent, if I have a second item that is strategically important (publication), and one or two items of minor importance, for rest. A typical list would include

  1. Almost urgent reports.
  2. Manuscripts
  3. Minor important: blogs, music practice, cultural reading, administrative papers

Looking at this list I see that it is not optimal. The reason is that it begins with activities that, though urgent, are also painful. I think the optimal way is to start with a relatively simple and somewhat enjoyable activity that “sets the mood” for everything that follows. The first activity might therefore be to write for the blog:

  1. Begin with writing blogs then posting.
  2. Segue into the academic writing.
  3. Carry out research tasks as planned and as indicated by the writing.

And if I get engrossed with an activity, no worries. In the end, the point is to enjoy work.