You don't have the chance yet to read OTHERS, my novel manuscript in the hands of an agent. If you did, you'd likely cut through the noise surrounding this national news story and find clear elements of the problem.
It comes down to confrontation. How one confronts someone else, and how that defuses a situation or escalates tension to psychotic and potentially lethal levels.
Once you read OTHERS, you'll get it, and you can imagine your own peaceful non-story, along the lines of this:
George Zimmerman puts on a perky attitude, and approaches Trayvon Martin.
"Excuse me, Sir. We've had some dangerous people breaking into houses around here. Do be careful. I don't want you hurt, okay?"
What does that do?
First, it shows zero threat, and some apparent concern for the safety of the intruder.
The intruder, possibly just a kid passing through, does not feel threatened in the least. In fact, he realizes there is a pair of eyes on him who may be watching out for him. He could conclude that there are others watching, too. All stereotyped assumptions vanish.
If the intruder has any negative intentions, he now knows the situation is not good for secrecy or criminal action.
Only a total idiot would escalate that moment into something ugly. Chances are astronomical against any lawbreaking, crime, threat, or violence.
Apply that point of view to the facts of this case and the evidence is clear: What occurred wrong and what should have occurred right.
It's common human nature not to defuse but to escalate tension or give the appearance of such, to show who has control of the moment. Tone of voice, movement, appearance. Those instincts--let's call them habits--are unrelated to a moment of rational thought that would keep the scenario just another quiet moment in a mediocre day.
A ten-second non-story, everybody lives, nobody goes into hiding, and the world has one less reason to babble around the water cooler or charge up useless emotions and not accomplish what needs to be done.
What needs to be done is peace.
I learned this technique from others. I've tried it. Wow, does it work. Unfortunately, the times I've used that technique never made it to the news.
Let's start, right here, right now.
--Dave
Thursday, April 5, 2012
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
How To Change The Future In One Easy Lesson
If you knew that you could do one simple thing to save lives and redirect the course of the future to a safer and more beneficial path, would you?
Most people would get past the "absolutely" and ask, how?
I'll give you a simple (but not necessarily easy) answer, but I'm not counting on action out of anyone who hears it.
History tells us that the inaction of good people often leads to the death of thousands and maybe millions, with uncountable cost in other assets vital to daily quality life. Hitler was appeased by Chamberlain. Hitler survived at least one assasination attempt, and a successful one early in his infamous life may have spared the world a war, and altered how nations and their politics exist.
That's just one example.
Stephen King wrote an entire novel examining what could happen if President Kennedy had lived. This is no spoiler alert; you can guess that he concluded that life around the world became miserable and depressing for many.
That sort of turns people off to the idea that they can do something that may actually benefit the living in future years. Well, I guess that's his job as a legendary novelist.
What turns his novel into an escapist what-if story is the fact that people around the world are making real-life decisions that--with wisdom and sound judgement--save many lives and improve the lot of those who go after us, only his characters change history to do so. We don't have that option, but ours is more assured.
Jail is supposed to correct criminal behavior. War is supposed to stop whole nations from aggression and bring them into some sort of peaceful circle of international brotherhood.
Supposed to.
You can think of examples where the normal structures of law enforcement and international peacekeeping don't quite have the consequences the peaceful innocent would like to see.
But there is another way.
It, too, is not perfect, but the saving of lives and human assets cannot be measured. Because, obviously, we can never go into the future and see how horrible things could be.
If the world had an idea what Hitler was going to do--really knew--do you think someone, one person, could have done something, and Hitler would have been a footnote?
Probably.
That kind of future is largely unknowable--unless you're already immersed in a war... and then you can roughly guess. Maybe you can also guess if you know for sure that your neighborhood violent criminal is taken out of society in some way, through incarceration or misadventure.
Many people bet on keeping the future on a safe and peaceful path, every day.
When good people do something to bet that their actions will stop violence, prevent trouble, keep life peaceful, they're making the kind of bet that most would agree with.
It's quiet, barely noticed if at all. Some would call it vigilante justice, but if it's as simple as Momma punishing little Hitler for some childhood indiscretion, or the serial armed intrusions suddenly ending, most people of civility would have a difficult time questioning the method.
We all just want peace.
We all just want safety and security.
We all just want the violent to stop.
How that happens needs to be the worry of the violent.
The pressure should be all on them.
Monday, February 27, 2012
The Ultimate Crime Prevention
A NH man will not be charged of a crime for firing a warning shot into the ground near a burglar he confronted.
This is just one element of a worldwide wave of crime prevention and suppression of violence that forms the basis of OTHERS.
Gun advocates came out and supported this guy, hollering that he should not be charged.
They don't get it.
Neither do the people who reported that numerous gun advocates supported this man's actions.
Others who are not gun advocates wanted his charges dropped, too. Why were they not mentioned? Because they were not easy to categorize--even inaccurately.
Let's state this as it is: A moment in which a criminal was scared enough to surrender immediately, and maybe scared enough so he'll never rob again.
Could that be what the world needs to go for? Guns or not?
*********
Civility works best when the violent are terrified of revenge for their deeds, by people they'll never know.
Scaring the violent into peaceful behavior is one thing, but if that comes from who-knows-where, maybe from friends or relatives or outsiders, they don't know who to look out for or retaliate against. They'll not know who knows of what they've done, who forgives them, who watches them, who shuns them, who snubs them, who gives up on them. And who seems entirely at ease with them, because they're not faking it.
The violent need correction. They need some lack of trust with the outside world they live in. They need flipping to the good side. And constant concern about what may happen to them if they return to crime. Lifelong regret, maybe. They may prefer that. You think?
If they don't care, well, somebody can make an example of them. Or maybe their remains.
Is there something wrong with the ultimate justice if it stops the violence and turns others from it?
Maybe that's distasteful to you, and not your way.
All it may take is one person to administer that kind of correction you may not agree with.
But, if it works, can you agree with the outcome? And if there is something there that bothers you, is it best to lay some sort of responsibility on the violent? Why should you take the concern, the worry, when they earned it?
This justice happens all the time, in some form. Always has.
Does the world need more of it? Might beat the peacekeeping we've got now.
That's the philosophy behind TAG.
The hitch is, no one else knows what's in our hearts until its shown. Is that real anger, is it venting, or genuine threat?
That's Ky's problem.
Not TAG. Not its operation. TAG can reveal something of itself, to terrorize the violent and allay the concerns of the peaceful.
Ky's problem lies in the hearts of those who don't care, for their own frightening reasons.
Let's see how a precocious and insightful young lady handles possible deadly threat.
From four directions.
This is just one element of a worldwide wave of crime prevention and suppression of violence that forms the basis of OTHERS.
Gun advocates came out and supported this guy, hollering that he should not be charged.
They don't get it.
Neither do the people who reported that numerous gun advocates supported this man's actions.
Others who are not gun advocates wanted his charges dropped, too. Why were they not mentioned? Because they were not easy to categorize--even inaccurately.
Let's state this as it is: A moment in which a criminal was scared enough to surrender immediately, and maybe scared enough so he'll never rob again.
Could that be what the world needs to go for? Guns or not?
*********
Civility works best when the violent are terrified of revenge for their deeds, by people they'll never know.
Scaring the violent into peaceful behavior is one thing, but if that comes from who-knows-where, maybe from friends or relatives or outsiders, they don't know who to look out for or retaliate against. They'll not know who knows of what they've done, who forgives them, who watches them, who shuns them, who snubs them, who gives up on them. And who seems entirely at ease with them, because they're not faking it.
The violent need correction. They need some lack of trust with the outside world they live in. They need flipping to the good side. And constant concern about what may happen to them if they return to crime. Lifelong regret, maybe. They may prefer that. You think?
If they don't care, well, somebody can make an example of them. Or maybe their remains.
Is there something wrong with the ultimate justice if it stops the violence and turns others from it?
Maybe that's distasteful to you, and not your way.
All it may take is one person to administer that kind of correction you may not agree with.
But, if it works, can you agree with the outcome? And if there is something there that bothers you, is it best to lay some sort of responsibility on the violent? Why should you take the concern, the worry, when they earned it?
This justice happens all the time, in some form. Always has.
Does the world need more of it? Might beat the peacekeeping we've got now.
That's the philosophy behind TAG.
The hitch is, no one else knows what's in our hearts until its shown. Is that real anger, is it venting, or genuine threat?
That's Ky's problem.
Not TAG. Not its operation. TAG can reveal something of itself, to terrorize the violent and allay the concerns of the peaceful.
Ky's problem lies in the hearts of those who don't care, for their own frightening reasons.
Let's see how a precocious and insightful young lady handles possible deadly threat.
From four directions.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Study Guide For Your Book
You may not be a fan of detective stuff on tv and in movies and books, but you may become a fan of my method of questioning I was told is highly effective in real life.
I'll say things or ask questions just to get a response out of others. I may say something I know they'll object to or refute, or state a point of view that I know will bring me information I may not have thought to ask for.
I'm using this method to work on a useful what-if: what if my book is published and it breaks huge and it becomes a topic of discussion in schools and reading groups? What questions can I anticipate, and can I answer them now? If so, I may see the structure of my book in a brighter light, and see ways to improve it, or develop subsequent books.
A few examples:
I didn't introduce my m.c. immediately and broke a rule. I had a reason for that: I needed to set up a feel for the mindset of the world as it now is, now that the mysterious vigilantes did so well to clean up most of the violent people from the streets. I wanted to show up-front that it's okay for the innocent to defend themselves, and possibly in a way that will stop the violent and save other innocents. I had to show that this defense may not be considered excessive, no matter what the outcome. I also had to show some remorse on the part of the defendant. I had to show that--according to the prevailing wisdom--there should be minimal--if any--ongoing cost to innocent lives except for the memory and the attitude towards the act of defense. The burden should all be on the violent--but there should be some consideration for the humanity of the violent.
I could call that the ongoing theme, or the thread that ties it all together, or possibly the m.c., in a sense.
I also needed to have something immediate that a reader could hook onto and relate to and understand, something unusual but by no means strange. I had to get the reader thinking about their own feelings right from paragraph one.
I couldn't do it with much description, either. It's the amateur novels that open with a description of the scene. I had to show, not tell, and show feelings and moods and thoughts, and break up moments of description with stretches of dialogue.
My main question is, did I manage to sustain the right mechanics, the right moods and interest, to keep a reader reading, even past what I could call quiet moments (some would say slow) that I hope would show their reason for being later in the book?
I tried to maintain interest by recalling several earlier elements, not saying, "remember?" but mentioning those elements a second time, showing how they may later have meaning that didn't appear there earlier. In comedy this is called a callback, but I'm not sure if literature has a name for it. And some of it was not funny at all.
I also needed better closure than just to defeat four different deadly threats. That's lame, and I suppose I could have had my m.c. just go into an antique store and buy the Stone Of Infinity or the Sword of Omigod, and just zap her foes. but what I wanted to do was create an entirely plausible universe, one that readers could relate to in a variety of ways, one that may seem mundane, but possibly familiar and accessible.
I love the fantasy/adventure stuff; don't get that wrong. At least once I left the movie theater, feeling as if I'm flying James Bond's rocket-laden gyrocopter or Luke Skywalker's X-wing fighter. Stopping my 2006 Subaru Outback wagon at a red light is a real mood-killer, however. I always hope, after that happens, that I could find a story that could possibly feel real for days after, and maybe make a positive difference in my life and that of others.
Or write one.
One beta reader regarded this vigilante-type of justice as an "interesting concept". I know that those who hook onto that may find it controversial. That's sort of the idea. I wanted to write something that had a "big idea" but not necessarily a high-concept thing, something that most anyone could express an opinion about. I may get some angry reaction, and I understand.
Those readers need to understand two things, however:
1. If you love the form of vigilante justice, or if you're fiercely against it, then mission accomplished.
2. It's only a story.
******************
I expanded on this and realized I could compose the equivalent of a study guide, running maybe three pages, maybe a dozen or more, answering questions and stating reasons for my structure, word choices, reasons for characterization and plot twists, and explaining what my thought process was at various stages.
Whether I actually compose it or not is moot. It could prove useful to me to understand exactly what I wrote, and for readers to understand. It could lead to refinements in word choice and structure, and it's somewhat along the lines of an expanded outline or synopsis that could be used on subsequent books.
I don't know of other authors who do such a thing, but, gee, maybe it's worth really doing.
Excuse me if you please... I have another job to do.
I'll say things or ask questions just to get a response out of others. I may say something I know they'll object to or refute, or state a point of view that I know will bring me information I may not have thought to ask for.
I'm using this method to work on a useful what-if: what if my book is published and it breaks huge and it becomes a topic of discussion in schools and reading groups? What questions can I anticipate, and can I answer them now? If so, I may see the structure of my book in a brighter light, and see ways to improve it, or develop subsequent books.
A few examples:
I didn't introduce my m.c. immediately and broke a rule. I had a reason for that: I needed to set up a feel for the mindset of the world as it now is, now that the mysterious vigilantes did so well to clean up most of the violent people from the streets. I wanted to show up-front that it's okay for the innocent to defend themselves, and possibly in a way that will stop the violent and save other innocents. I had to show that this defense may not be considered excessive, no matter what the outcome. I also had to show some remorse on the part of the defendant. I had to show that--according to the prevailing wisdom--there should be minimal--if any--ongoing cost to innocent lives except for the memory and the attitude towards the act of defense. The burden should all be on the violent--but there should be some consideration for the humanity of the violent.
I could call that the ongoing theme, or the thread that ties it all together, or possibly the m.c., in a sense.
I also needed to have something immediate that a reader could hook onto and relate to and understand, something unusual but by no means strange. I had to get the reader thinking about their own feelings right from paragraph one.
I couldn't do it with much description, either. It's the amateur novels that open with a description of the scene. I had to show, not tell, and show feelings and moods and thoughts, and break up moments of description with stretches of dialogue.
My main question is, did I manage to sustain the right mechanics, the right moods and interest, to keep a reader reading, even past what I could call quiet moments (some would say slow) that I hope would show their reason for being later in the book?
I tried to maintain interest by recalling several earlier elements, not saying, "remember?" but mentioning those elements a second time, showing how they may later have meaning that didn't appear there earlier. In comedy this is called a callback, but I'm not sure if literature has a name for it. And some of it was not funny at all.
I also needed better closure than just to defeat four different deadly threats. That's lame, and I suppose I could have had my m.c. just go into an antique store and buy the Stone Of Infinity or the Sword of Omigod, and just zap her foes. but what I wanted to do was create an entirely plausible universe, one that readers could relate to in a variety of ways, one that may seem mundane, but possibly familiar and accessible.
I love the fantasy/adventure stuff; don't get that wrong. At least once I left the movie theater, feeling as if I'm flying James Bond's rocket-laden gyrocopter or Luke Skywalker's X-wing fighter. Stopping my 2006 Subaru Outback wagon at a red light is a real mood-killer, however. I always hope, after that happens, that I could find a story that could possibly feel real for days after, and maybe make a positive difference in my life and that of others.
Or write one.
One beta reader regarded this vigilante-type of justice as an "interesting concept". I know that those who hook onto that may find it controversial. That's sort of the idea. I wanted to write something that had a "big idea" but not necessarily a high-concept thing, something that most anyone could express an opinion about. I may get some angry reaction, and I understand.
Those readers need to understand two things, however:
1. If you love the form of vigilante justice, or if you're fiercely against it, then mission accomplished.
2. It's only a story.
******************
I expanded on this and realized I could compose the equivalent of a study guide, running maybe three pages, maybe a dozen or more, answering questions and stating reasons for my structure, word choices, reasons for characterization and plot twists, and explaining what my thought process was at various stages.
Whether I actually compose it or not is moot. It could prove useful to me to understand exactly what I wrote, and for readers to understand. It could lead to refinements in word choice and structure, and it's somewhat along the lines of an expanded outline or synopsis that could be used on subsequent books.
I don't know of other authors who do such a thing, but, gee, maybe it's worth really doing.
Excuse me if you please... I have another job to do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)