273. "The Scale of Gigi" Edited by Hector Javkin and Submitted to SEED Media Group

Quote of the Day: "If you stop greasing your axles, it is a sign that you have stopped caring for yourself." (from Hector, quote from existentialist folk singer in Argentina).

Yesterday was the first writers meet up between me and Hector, linguistics guru, Santa Barbara Writers Conference photographer, and my close-to-next-door-neighbor. Hector and I are united very deeply by common interests and experiences: (1) academia, (2) cross-national identities (Argentine-Jew and Greek-American) (3) writing stories, and (4) photography.

I have come to realize that sharing stories with other people is a VERY intimate experience. You come to know and understand the structure and content of the human mind through writing analysis. It's amazing to be surrounded by talented writers who are alive (not dead figures all in a different century, my high school literature experience)--and all live in Santa Barbara.

Our meeting yesterday was a very positive, useful experience, and I am excited that we will be meeting this upcoming Wednesday for a short time as well.

This PDF below is the modified version of "The Scale of Gigi," which was commented on by Hector.
http://stokastika2.googlepages.com/1scaleofgigi5bubsecondround.pdf

Having only two of us at a writers group was VERY constructive for me. Listening to the writing of multiple people is quite overwhelming and difficult to dissect. But if you are interacting with one other person, you really start to think about "the method to the madness," or more so trying to dig into the brains of Shelly Lowenkopf and myself, and discover, and analyze the underlying components that weave together the fabric of superb storytelling. I started making a list below (which I implemented yesterday in my thought processes):

(1). The element that ties all variables together into a fabric is the UNDERLYING MOTIVE. THE PURPOSE. The problem and the drama and the dilemma that intrigues the reader to run the page. The reader attaches to the STRUGGLE and the TURMOIL. The way how I construct characters was through understanding of myself (1) my motives (2) my unique history (3) my current options (4) my current constraints. The whole "god-grant-me-the-serenity-to-accept-the-things-I-cannot-change-courage-to-change-the-things-I-can-wisdom-to-tell-the-difference" effect. Besides viewing a story from externalized factors (outside the brain of the main character), e.g. decriptions of other characters and landscapes, it is important to document the multi-layered internal view of the main character(s): (1) desperation, fixation (2) emotion (3) rationale. If you remain highly internalized, then the internal atmosphere of the characters mind warps external reality.

(2). Other knobs to tweak: "the time-dependent matrix effect" of SETTING, CHARACTERS, PLOT and their proportions and overall ratios of use, which affects pacing. What data to include and not include. Who knows what and why.

(3). COGNITIVE MAPPING AND VISUALIZATION. When reading a story, the best thing to do is to create a series of SYMBOLIZED COGNITIVE MAPS of the story (aka STORYBOARDING), much like when geologists analyze the layers of an outcrop. You invent and include symbols in space and time to assess the level of consistency of events and who knows what. I also see it as VIDEOGAME DESIGN, constructing OBJECTS-SUBJECTS IN A BOX and their interactions (much like how organisms interact with their environments and each other overall). These simple visualization diagrams for a story can be also considered as a series of VISUALIZED FOOTBALL PLAY DIAGRAMS. The other practice that I engaged upon (thanks to Michael Hanrahan and Blue Horizons at UCSB) is that I read the story like a SCREEN WRITER. I pretended that I was going to adopt the story into a movie. I started to identify plot, setting, character components, in addition to setting up what types of shots to be set up--wide angle, close up, pan, etcetera.

Writing is painting a moving picture. It's an investigation of an optimal distribution of pigeonholes in space and time that holistically stimulate the human mind in an optimal way. Hence the whole Dartboard Theory on how to manipulate humans that I presented to Toastmasters a few weeks ago.

For example, with Hector's story, "Identity," I started to create a time-dependent matrix, much like a movie editing sequence like in Final Cut Pro (or even music editing in Sonar Home Studio), and I came to realize that holistically, the ratio of plot to character to setting was a bit imbalanced--too much setting in the beginning let me dangling a bit in terms of "where was this story going." Hector then realized there was an entire paragraph that--though had historical and aside humorous significance--did not tighly intertwine or directly function with the plot and direction of the story.

In terms of traditional writing versus science and environmental writing, I am starting to identify overarching themes: (1) personal experience deeply tied with universal reality, scientists find emotional attachment to universal truths (2) the gradiation from "one death is a tragedy to 1000 deaths is statistics" (3) the "environment" or "setting" is not just "static backdrop" but becomes more connected and intertwined with the main characters and the plot. Emotional connections are being made with landscapes. Landscapes may start to become more described in human characteristics. Well, fxck. Don't go there! HUMANS ANTHROPOMORPHIZE EVERYTHING! If humans label elements of the environment, then they are automatically projecting their HUMAN PERCEPTION on the element or the overall system! Geez shapooey!

I am also interested in writing an essay on "Evolutionary Psychology and New Analytical Techniques in English Literature." Applications of evolutionary psychological knowledge and how humans tell stories.

Having described some mechanisms I started using for literature analysis..... Hector and I both took turns reading our short stories. We only got through one story each, which was great. Before story-reading, we started with a warm-up. I took some cool silhouette pictures of hummingbirds with a mega-lens 17-300mm vibration reduction.

Hector read a story entitled "Identity" (as mentioned before, but to elaborate, there is historical and family significance, a story written by Hector through his grandfather's eyes, Jewish in a non-Jew Argentine landscape, the whole UCSB Gaucho thing), which he apparently read to Shelly Lowenkopf's group. Hector thought I would have no quibbles with the story (which was already critiqued), but I actually had three major qualms: (1) the title needed to reflect the story a little bit more, which I emailed him today (it needs to incoporate the notions of identity, encounter, and the knife, but in a direct or indirect way) (it's funny to think when you title a short story "Identity" the first thing that comes to my mind is some drugged-up-depressed-east-coast-intelligent-prozac-girl struggling to survive the next day, maybe it's my Elizabeth Wurtzel encounter... or something) (2) the setting description was out of proportion with the rest of the story--it was "drifting" for a little bit, with no sense of directionality, which Hector responded well to, and (3) the climax moment of the protagonist's decision (which I won't give away) had emotional disconnect and disjunctness such that it didn't flow. Hector wanted to maintain the element of surprise, but the event and train of thought was so surprising that it was disconnecting. Hector needed to add something such that his grandfather can remain "desperately rational" rather than "schizophreniac." Which I think he did change a few words. But that was all that was needed.

Hector's writing is very concise and to the point. No flowery bullshxt. His scientific streaks emerge in the precision of his writing. He also has very simple word usage, which is very good. I need to work on that a little bit. Well, it depends on the audience. Ugh. I am learning. Learning to write. Adapting and manipulating the audience.

Sometimes I need to remain unreasonable. It's not like people understand Descartes on the first read, but somehow it's still intellectually acceptable to read this guy on pot. I think I need to write a short essay on a Brief History of Western Philosophy: Evolution of Human Thought Mediated by Mind-Altering Substances. Just like the whole Painted Cave, Shamanism thing. Given what they were writing, Plato MUST had been tripping out on whatever hallucinogen, or something. That would be a great thesis: Western Philosophers are equivalent to quasi-secularized Shamans. What a trip! Piss off a bunch of social scientists. Drugs and the evolution of thought. Re-analyzing history of philosophy and science through the perspective of mind-altering substances.

Reading The Scale of Gigi to Hector was great: (1) I did not humiliate myself in front of Shelly's story-driven fiction group, and (2) I became re-conscientious of my own mechanisms of writing.

**For one thing, I am integrating science and the human experience. This story was 10% fiction and 90% philosophy. Just like many great philosophers. But unfortunately not your mainstream style and a more difficult read. It's just where my mind is. There are many authors/journalists out there who make scientists' lives adventure stories. I am sure over time, my writing will transition from 90-10 to 50-50. The most important element right now for my writing is establishing self-sanity. And I will do whatever it takes. I am not worried about writing quick fix airplane blockbuster reads--which is essentially what most New York Bestsellers are nowadays.
**In "The Scale of Gigi" I used too much technical jargon for Shelly's group, but probably just fine for a philosophy of science journal or maybe even science journalism.
**Hector argued that this story was not personal, when indeed it was very very personal to me. My experiences in the world and in the university has trained me to understand myself and my relations to the environment in more universal terms. From an outsider perspective, this essay is a transitional comparison of a character Uabwa (who is a scientist) going from a small Gigi in some forest to a megascale Gigi that spans across the entire globe. Uabwa, who was unaware of her sense of place in small-scale Gigi, acquired a tangled knot in her mind's heart, and she needed to unravel and come to understand why she was mentally struggling so hard in Supersized Gigi. I had come to realize retroactively, the character Uabwa was essentially ME--transitioning from a (non-internet) high school environment to a (altered-technological-communication-regime) megaCollege environment far away from home in Riverside, California. In high school, I had this whole illusion of community and meaning and purpose and when college hit, all of the illusion fell apart. And I found out I was a nothing, nobody. I was a number. I was a sandgrain. I was one of six billion. I still am, but in Santa Barbara, the community is so intellectually and emotionally stimulating that I need to live here and I don't care if the rest of the world fxcks itself over. I am convinced the community of Santa Barbara can still exist in relative isolation from the rest of the global human meshpot. Pardon me for my streak of optimism in a well of pessimism. (aside: high school ritual burn schoolwork)
**The other thing I tend to do is describe human society through "biological parallels"--bryozoans, coral reefs, zooid boxes, honeycomb matrices, primordial ooze, Petri dish full of bacterial, pinball (okay, that's more physics). I have re-projected myself upon human systems based on my knowledge in ecology and evolution. That is why I need these parallels.
**Given my writing phase, I need to get it out, because it's not economically profitable, but more for mental sanity. Upon rewritng and rewriting and re-understanding and assessing the "audience," it is a difficult road to connect the "shallow" with the "deep." To take the public down the rabbithole of science and philosophy, and then to challenge scientists and ask them to take a step back and ask what the big picture is. Right now, I need to clear out my own head, and I don't have much summer left to do that!

Before I left to go home and attempt to "chill out," Hector related a story to me in concern of how he got involved in science. At age 7, Hector's parents took Hector to the Buenos Aires airport (which was very tiny). His father made a claim that all airplanes were the same size no matter what distance they were (some relativity effect). It ended up that this claim turned out to be wrong when a small two-seater dropped from the sky and pulled up to a mega-plane. More relativistic trickery in size and scale! Though Hector loved his parents dearly, he came to realize that they could be wrong and he needed to think for himself. My sister obviously snapped at age 10, with those horrid fights with my mother. As for me, I remained obedient. Obedience to my mother and pleasing my parents and teachers was more important than thinking for myself. Until age 17. Then life and death choices forced me to overthrow people's projections upon me. I was forced to think for myself.

I submitted "The Scale of Gigi" to SEED Magazine a couple of hours ago and thanked them for the inspiration. Otherwise, the story needs to sit!

269. In Preparation for Shelly Lowenkopf's Lion's Den at the Montecito Library with "The Scale of Gigi" and "The Tragedy of Celebrity" at Hand

Above is just the FIRST PAGE of the short story. Here is the PDF for "The Scale of Gigi." http://stokastika2.googlepages.com/1scaleofgigi5bubsecondround.pdf.
"The Scale of Gigi" written a couple of weekends ago in hot and smoggy Riverside, California. That weekend I lost a tooth and received two ridiculous parking tickets. The parable was a response to a SEED (science magazine) contest to which I missed the deadline doublefold: the article was supposed to be 1200 words in length and I was supposed to submit it August 1st, 2008 by midnight eastern time. Oh well. I ended up writing a parable that might be useful for other magazines. After review, I need to send this article out to at least five potential publication sources. Must do today or the energy is lost!
My father edited the story TWICE and we took out the "I" and "me" to a mystical, enchanted scientist character by the name of "Uabwa" who was transported through time to be a scientist from the past to a scientist of the modern day. If I had the opportunity, I would post the "I" and "me" and "us" and "we" version of the "Scale of Gigi," but it's best not to do so. I reread the Uabwa-version and started to realize that I needed to weave the character a bit more deeply into the beginning of the story to make it work.

First page of "Behind the Scenes" subconcious thoughts of a writer when writing a story, in this case "The Scale of Gigi." Here is the entire PDF file: http://stokastika2.googlepages.com/2behindscenesscrapnotesscalegigi.pdf. Mostly I am obsessing about my own grammatical/tense consistency. I worked to create a "matrix" or cognitive map of my story before writing out the details. I worried about who is to edit the essay. And lastly I started to think about "who is my audience?" and "where will I place and try to publish this short story?"

First page of "The Tragedy of Celebrity," edited by my father, Richard Minnich. I submitted the piece to The New Yorker--as suggested by my father. Long shots are always good dreams. I already received two, vague fuzzy responses along the lines of "Sorry, can't take your work, but has nothing to say about its merit." I don't end up with publication, BUT I do end up with some positive feedback and compliments from The New Yorker. I feel good! The truth is I only read one email fully. The other email was a more lengthy response, I think with an attached article. Hey! I am stimulating response here! No one is remaining apathetic to my writing! Wow! Pat on the back. The PDF file for "The Tragedy of Celebrity" edited by "Bub" is here:
http://stokastika2.googlepages.com/3tragedyofcelebritybubedits.pdf.

I prepared these two articles for today's reading, though if I were "on time" with life, I would have had prepared "The Elephant and the Oak Tree." Dxmmit. And "The Myth of Sisyphus." Well, that's next on the to-do list. Maybe back to Shelly's next week.

I am a bit nervous. But I am also excited to have the chance to share my work with a very well-respected writer. Dr. Lowenkopf's blog "Writer's Notes to Himselves" is found here: http://www.lowenkopf.com/. It's really nice to put a human face to all these prestigious names of the Santa Barbara Writers Conference website!

I think this writer's group in Montecito (and others around) is the best possible audience I can have! The two criteria of an audience I desire is (1) one that is capable to think and question, and if you do not do that, my writing is designed to be koan-esque and shock you int thinking and questioning (e.g. my koan of the day "is anorexia a 'mental' problem or an 'environmental' problem?" I told Hector, Willard, and Bruce over lunch at Peabodys. Bruce said, "Yes, that is the motive that will make me turn the pages.") and (2) a non-scientific, non-university audience. I need an audience that can be affiliated with the university but not drowned with it. Thirdly, I would say it would be nice to have an audience that is into book reading, but I am not particular about that anymore, because I decided myself to ADAPT to this multi-media society so I can even hit the teeny-bopper-ipod-addicts with some koanesque music and short films. Multi-media is all derived from writing.

It had only been my dad editing my writing over the years. Plus my good grades on my lab reports from courses. But I need to expand outside the box. I have to write stories that hit scientists and environmental stakeholders directly in the stomach but do it with an accidental, indirect, parablesque, allegoryesque cloak. And I need to make university outsiders ENGAGED and INTERESTED. For example, today, I told the Peabody's lunch group (how ultimate and elite! To have lunch in Montecito, California! First time ever! I am not into wealth, but hxll, to be conscious of an experience within the Mecca of the Globe?!), "Everything I am writing to the university outsider is like a 'rediscovery of the common sense' because most university outsiders already have some level of big picture understanding of reality. But when it comes to university bureacracy and reductionist scientific research, people are so pin-headed that they have lost sight of any larger picture, especially in concern of human-environmental relations. They are clueless! So, I am re-discovering purpose and common sense, based on a synthetic view of knowledge, derived from my own experiences weaved with the more universal context of accumulated academic knowledge." Okay, so maybe I didn't speak that eloquently. The first instantaneous response came from Willard Thompson (self-publisher and author of Dreamhelper), "Before, when I used to be an editor for a magazine, I was involved on an article on the overall condition and management of the Sacramento River Delta. It was splendid and amazing to be surrounded by brilliant scientists! But--you talk to one scientists and he or she would know anything and everything about this one little fish and know NOTHING ELSE about the river system. Then you go to the next scientist, and he or she would know everything about this small set of plants, but would know NOTHING ELSE... about larger issues on how to even more optimally manage the delta and the crisis with the salmon! So, based on this, I already know what you are talking about." I also hooked Bruce, who is an insurance agent (mind you, Bruce, Willard, and I are ALL left-handed!) in concern of the crux page-turning question of my book: "Is anorexia a mental disorder or an environ-mental disorder?" Can an experience so personal lead to conclusions quite universal? The main character of the story had to rationalize herself out of a life-threatening condition of anorexia. And instead of taking pills, out of desperation, she had to re-invent and re-organize Reality in her mind such that she can find purpose and the will to live in this modern society. I think I managed to hook Bruce and Willard really fast....

So, as you can tell, I ended up going to the Lion's Den Writers group with Hector in Montecito, California. I ended up liking it a lot! I already vaguely knew Shelly--in addition to knowing Christina Allison (playwright) and Penny (both whom are veterans of the first ever-Santa Barbara Write-off Reality show competition). There were a few other characters in the group I did not know, which of course made the whole ordeal very exciting! And to me (and soon to be my father's delight), 5 out of 8 people attending the workshop (Shelly excluded), were LEFT-HANDED. Talk about a SOUTHPAW MECCA! Wow. This group is the bomb. And everyone is very professional and has a bit of very good reputation!

I didn't get to read today, but I am actually very GLAD that I didn't. I sat and listened and took lots of notes. I like the way how Shelly critiques. He doesn't attack nitpicks of the writing structure but he attacks the overall gestalt "big picture" of the story. The underlying motives that ultimately drive all strings of the matrix of reality to weave together in a complex web. Shelly has the method down PAT and through his exposure I am finally writing out the method as well, and as an environmental writer, how I am "tweaking" the method that distinguishes creative science/environmental writing from the rest.

It was nice to be around a bunch of people and have lots of pebbles of ideas being tossed and turned and swished around in my brain. Lots of dislodgement! Things had been too "settled" and I needed something that was equivalent of a "chaotic quarter system" but in a mild-to-moderate dose. I soaked up everything like a sponge, I was so hungry for Novelty and Breaking the Routine! Thanks Shelly! I think I will add his website to my blog list.

I am scheduled to read next week. I have a HOT one-week deadline to work with. Toastmasters. Meet up with Hector to do a reading of the stuff I couldn't read today. Blue Horizons presentations. Shelly's reader group kick off. And to put a face to Lauri MacLean's office (as well as Current TV and Meatrix producers) offices up in San Francisco. I am going to go sampling agents/publishing houses up in San Francisco. I decided to stay west coast. For logistical reasons. Plus I need to visit Zac. Sooo exciting! Go, go, go!