How important to you are the answers in a story?

I read an online homage to Ridley Scott's Alien (the original), which has spawned a lot of sequels. In this article that I stumbled upon (in my daily browsing), the author claimed that it is still a perfect movie. I also agree with this statement. However, they pointed out something about its storytelling (that I hadn't quite noticed before) that may be the main reason it is a perfect movie. It sets up a bunch of mysteries and it never resolves them. It also explains that for these same reasons, Prometheus is a failure of a story. It seeks to answer those questions set up by Alien.

So, this was a weird but important take on storytelling that I wasn't prepared for: knowing the answer spoils the story. But in most situations, this seems to be true. In Alien, we are introduced to a crew on some kind of industrial vessel that gets diverted to answer a distress beacon. We later assume that the distress beacon was from an alien vessel, and then the android on the ship ends up being a villain because the company knew that there were creatures on that planet, and the company that built the android wanted a sample brought back to them.

But there are never any answers given in any of that. How did the company know that the alien vessel was on that weird planet? Why did they want a sample brought back? And so on and so forth. As human beings, I think that we are programmed to want to follow questions back until we either come up with nothing, or an answer surfaces and then we can find some level of satisfaction and move on. But in storytelling, it is probably better to have an arc where you set up mysteries and just never resolve them. For example, in Amazon's Open Range you have a big hole in a field that has no bottom and allows people to time travel to different eras if they fall in. Answering the "why" as to this thing's existence just ruins the show. You can't be bothered by "why." It's better to have people just react to the weird thing that makes no sense. This also probably takes a big burden off the author or the "idea creator," because they don't need to know the "why" and the "how." All that matters is that the mystery "is."

I think that this is the genius of the X-Files, and why it worked so well. They had an alien arc that ran across the show's life, interwoven with "monster of the week" episodes that wrapped up nicely in an hour. However, it can also be overdone. Some people (like myself) do get annoyed with shows or movies that continuously introduce more and more mystery without ever fully resolving anything. Lost is probably the best example of this kind of storytelling.

Some people like to refer to this kind of tale spinning as "high concept." As a refresher, high-concept narratives are typically characterized by an overarching "what if" scenario that catalyzes the following events. Jurassic Park and its sequels are "high concept" in that it takes a question of "what if we could clone dinosaurs?" and then proceeds to answer that question. But in my experience, most high concept storylines write themselves into a corner, and then they can't figure out where to go with the story to make it where you care about the characters enough to keep coming back. In other words, it becomes more about the concept that it does the characters. And then they have no idea how to answer all the many questions that pop up in any satisfactory way. The Walking Dead is a perfect example of this. I read Robert Kirkman's explanation of how the zombie apocalypse started and he said that it came from outer space. He decided never to answer the mystery of how the zombies all started, because doing so lessened the story.

So, having said all of the above, I'm wondering: how important to you are the answers in a story? Are you okay with endless mysteries just so long as the present narrative of people/characters dealing with those mysteries is interesting and well-written? 

What word processor do you use to write with?

I hope everyone who visits my blog today has a wonderful July 4th. Along with it being "America's Birthday," it is also time to do the July 2024 installment of the Insecure Writer's Support Group (sign up for it at this LINK). This blogfest was started a long time ago by author Alex J. Cavanaugh. If you have never checked out his books, you should.

So, what is the Insecure Writer's Support Group anyway? Allow me to explain.

What is the purpose?: It is to share and encourage. Writers participating in the IWSG can express their doubts and concerns without fear of appearing foolish or weak. Those who have been through the fire can offer assistance and guidance. It’s meant to be a safe haven for insecure writers of all kinds.

When do we post?: The first Wednesday of every month is officially Insecure Writer’s Support Group day. On this day, you should write your thoughts on your own blog. Some examples of what to write might involve talking about your doubts and the fears you have conquered. You could also discuss your struggles and your triumphs. Another idea is to offer a word of encouragement for others who are struggling.

Along with your post, you should try to visit others in the group and connect with your fellow writers. A good rule of thumb might be to aim for a dozen new people each time. When you return comments, you will find that you gather followers and connect. So, prior to that, you will want to make sure to link to this page and display the badge in your post. These are the digital breadcrumbs you will leave behind that make certain others can find you in the huge ocean that is the internet.

The X handle for the Insecure Writer's Support Group is @TheIWSG and the hashtag everyone uses is #IWSG.

The awesome co-hosts for the July 3 posting of the IWSG are JS Pailly, Rebecca Douglass, Pat Garcia, Louise-Fundy Blue, and Natalie Aguirre!

Now, every month, the IWSG announces a question that members can answer in their IWSG post. These questions may prompt you to share advice, insight, a personal experience, or a story. If it does, you could totally use this as your post. But you should remember that the question is optional.

July 3rd question: What are your favorite writing processing (e.g. Word, Scrivener, yWriter, Dabble), writing apps, software, and tools? Why do you recommend them? And which one is your all-time favorite that you cannot live without and use daily or at least whenever you write?

For me, it is Microsoft Word. I think it is an indispensable tool now, and I know how to format everything. I make it so that my spacing between lines is automatic, that the indent is automatic (I don't press the "tab" button anymore), and it has some fantastic a.i. driven spell check as well as "document review" editing options. I never use a.i. to write. However, I would be a fool if I didn't use its power to read my document and look for errors. It does this literally for free. I'm old enough to remember when people needed to hire editors to look through their stuff. This new way is incredibly good, and I think it is better than trying to find someone who will take the time to go through hundreds of pages of material looking for errors. It's also extremely easy to format things for online publishing, like Kindle or Lulu. The only downside to Microsoft 365 is that it requires a subscription now. But I've installed some copies of it on computers owned by friends, and they've paid me a modest sum, so the cost is relatively modest.

Thanks for visiting, and may all of you find the word/writing processors that suit your style.

 

House of the Dragon season 2 is off to a strong start.

House of the Dragon is so damned good. Now that I've stopped nitpicking things as much as I did when I was younger, I can fully appreciate just how far we've come in our entertainment options to actually have a fantasy series that looks as incredible as House of the Dragon. I mean...it looks better than movies with $200 million dollar budgets looked back around year 2000. And we get this weekly until season 2 ends for the price of a subscription to Max.

I've only seen two episodes in season 2 thus far, but both of them just hit the ground running. The first episode fed right into an assassination plot that was as gruesome as Game of Thrones could plaster on screen, and then this went into another assassination plot. Out of all of the new and returning characters, I think I dislike Otto Hightower the most. The civil war in House of the Dragon is entirely his own making because he assumes that the Realm won't accept a female heir to the throne. In my opinion, Rhaenyra would definitely have experienced a ton of sexism and low-level resistance to her rule, but that would have passed with time and reminders of the power of dragons.

Otto's weakness (which I will go into in just a minute) is also why I kind of despise him as a character. He's a fantastic political mind, but it's cold and calculating. When it came to his own daughter, he just pimped her out to the king so that she would be queen. However, the king was a decidedly gross individual and House of the Dragon never failed to remind us of how gross he was. 

Otto always fails to understand the people who are close to him. Examples are ignoring the fact that Aegon is completely unsuited to rule. Another example happens after the assassination (done by Blood and Cheese) of Aegon's heir happens in the castle. Otto decides that displaying the dead body through town would garner a lot of sympathy, even though the two women he commands to ride on the wagon behind the funeral procession don't want to do it.

Anyway, the season is off to a strong start. Anyone else care to weigh in?

Lately I've been planning a fantasy trip to Japan.

In the past couple of weeks, I've been keeping notes on places to go and see in Japan should I decide to take a trip there in 2025. It is likely to happen, because my roommate has declared his intention to climb Mount Fuji. My roommate is not in very good shape, but I've decided that I like him enough that it would be fun to watch them succeed at this personal goal. However, I have no intent on joining them on a climb to the top of a mountain. That doesn't sound at all fun to me. What does sound fun is doing a few events with them, and then striking out on my own to see other places. Google translate has gotten really good, and I think that I could navigate the systems there a lot easier than I could the last time I was in Japan decades earlier.

When I started writing notes down, it was a "tabula rasa" or clean slate. So anything goes really. I just wanted to start listing them so that I wouldn't forget about them. Up first is a visit to a museum that is showing this thing called Team Lab Planets. It's some kind of exhibition of rooms that have all kinds of light all over the floors, the walls, the ceiling, to give you some kind of immersive "otherworldly" experience. It sounds like a lot of fun, and it is in Tokyo.

My second thing that I want to go and visit is Ghibli Park, which is a new theme park that opened (rather low key but I guess it is very popular) that celebrates Hayao Miyazaki's lifetime of work, including homes and buildings that are from his many animated films that you can actually walk into. That sounded like a lot of fun and an entertaining diversion for an afternoon (should I score myself a ticket, which I've heard can be a bit difficult). 

Another thing on my Japan trip list is a visit to Hotel Hoshi in Komatsu. This is on the side of Japan (northern side) that faces the Sea of Japan. It is billed as the oldest hotel in the world, and it has many hot spring type baths that one can enjoy. Additionally, while staying in Komatsu, there is a theme park called Yunokuni-no-Mori. Once you enter the gate, you can choose a craft to participate in from the many rooms in the buildings...and you basically do that craft for an afternoon. The types of crafts they have are making a wood block Japanese character, a music box, etching glass, glass blowing, making a candle with colorful waxes, moulding dyes for t-shirts or handkerchiefs, drawing with paint (called cashew) to make these things called maki-e, engraving characters on a diamond shaped glass board, making handmade soba noodles, putting plants inside of bottles for small terrariums, crafting insects out of bamboo, making handmade sweets of Ishikawa, or using gold leaf to adorn a thing (like a plate or a box or a cup), trying your hand at the potter's wheel, or using bean paste to fill a Doryaki skin.

In Osaka (at about the same time I plan to arrive in Japan) they are having a six-month world expo (formerly the "World's Fair"). If I go to this (which I probably will) there will be some irony. You see, when I was 13 years old I visited Japan with my mother (1985) and we went to a World's Fair there. They only have them every five years or so. The last one was in Dubai. The irony "may be" that I've been to two world's fairs in my life and both of them happened to be in Japan. I think that would be a funny coincidence.

In the Kobe area I would like to go to the Godzilla museum. They reportedly have a life-sized godzilla head that you can zip line into, but the weight limit is 250 pounds. I'll need to drop some weight to be able to qualify, and I'm working on that right now. Hopefully, I'd be able to make the goal weight and get this experience in the books. Additionally, in Kyoto there is an alleyway called "Pontocho" that is supposed to be one of those old-world streets where you can get food from street vendors like you see in movies and television shows that are set in Japan. I think eating at one of those would be a lot of fun, and it isn't something I'm familiar with.

Even though I haven't made any exact commitments or plans, talking about this trip with others seems to bring out the worst in the "well-heeled." Last night (for example) I just mentioned that I was interested, and this guy who I just met (he's Meg's friend and Meg is a good friend of mine) had to interject with all of his insights and "You have to do this in Japan" stuff that was just really off-putting and irritating. 

He whipped out his foldable phone and started showing pictures of him eating kobe beef, followed with questions like "Are you going to try kobe beef?" and when I said..."I don't know. Maybe." He immediately followed up with, "You better bring your money then because it is expensive! But look at this! and look at this! and look at this!" I had so many eye-rolling moments, mostly because he really drifted across the line of "informing" to "bragging" and I'm not a fan of braggarts. I'm not sure why people act like that, but it's like they are waiting to vomit their trips all over a stranger for some reason. I just want to say, "Dude...I'm happy you had a good trip. Really, I am. But I really don't give a shit what you did. Those are your memories, not mine." Of course, I didn't say that, but I wanted to.

Anyway, even though I've made no concrete plans, it is still fun to think about and imagine myself doing some of the activities that (on paper) look fun for a kind of relaxing trip. And yes, if this post makes you want to brag about your trip to Japan in the comments, you have my permission. Who knows? I might learn something.

I never would have thought that shades of gray was a Star Wars thing until recent times.

When I was in college and playing the West End Games version of Star Wars (it was a lot of fun), I would explain to the uninitiated a few ingredients that are essential to any Star Wars tale. The first of these is that it is a story of good versus evil. I'd reiterate that there are "no shades of gray" in Star Wars. You are either just really good or you are the most evil thing that has ever existed. The second thing that I would tell people is that, in Star Wars, things like capital ships are enormous. Scale is exceptionally important. So you want things to be so big that when they are in orbit around a planet, they create an eclipse. That's just a "rule of thumb."

So here I am in 2024, and none of those things I used to tell players in my Star Wars games make any sense anymore. Star Wars now is about moral and ethical discussions. It's an infatuation with "the gray" in everything. On one hand, I think that it is good for Jedi characters to be fully realized people and not just cookie cutter good guys. It's also excellent for the Sith to have motivations for what leads them down that path or to point out things that they care about that drive their actions.

However, at the end of the day, I have a difficult time reconciling modern Star Wars with what I used to believe about it. I used to believe that Star Wars existed in a universe in which there is a Light Side of the Force and a Dark Side of the Force. The Dark Side was spoken of in terms of aggression, selfishness, hatred, a thirst for power, and general bad feelings. A fall to the Dark Side was considered a tragedy and a fallen Sith finding their way to the Light Side was called a "redemption arc."

But in 2024? Things are a lot different. In 2024, Jedi can be complete and utter assholes. A Dark Side user can be a hero because they are an assassin that gets rid of problematic Force users who profess outward virtue but did a lot of terrible things that they kept secret. There's lots of projection that the characters who are (by definition) good are actually very bad and do terrible things. And now we have a group of characters who are by definition bad (they are literally villains) who have really good points and are actually good?

Anyway, all of these complaints about the latest iteration of Star Wars, which is called The Acolyte, don't make me want to stop watching. It's a gorgeous show, and I think I just like watching Star Wars characters interact on screen. It's also interesting to see Jedi as galactic peacekeepers who are so overpowered relative to the average person that they rarely ever need to use their weapons. Instead they all seem to know kung-fu. Maybe this is a nod to the "style" over "blunt tools" that Obi-Wan once spoke about to Luke Skywalker regarding the elegance of the lightsaber. In any event, its entertaining. I just am continuously surprised by what I'm seeing and wonder how I could have gotten the "Star Wars formula" so wrong.

Let's talk about season 3 of Bridgerton

Dearest Gentle Reader..., we need to talk about the beautiful end of season 3 of Bridgerton. For long-time followers of my blog, you may know that I am heavily invested in Bridgerton. The story always sweeps me away, and Bridgerton is so good at reducing me to a crying slob on the couch because these romances are so good! But, that doesn't mean I am without criticisms for the show. There are a few things I'd like to point out, so if you are a Bridgerton watcher, these may make sense. If not, these could be spoilers. However, I'd argue that if you haven't watched Bridgerton by now, you probably won't.

First off, this season was all about Penelope Featherington and her dual identity as Lady Whistledown. I was surprised that they went there, and with such vigor as to expose Penelope completely by the end of the season. I was also surprised that it all worked out for Penelope, and I was worried that it would not. The Julie Andrew's narration adds a lot to the show, and I think if it were to disappear, I would miss it. However, this is Bridgerton and a sad ending to her fairy tale romance simply wouldn't do. The final lines delivered by Colin Bridgerton to Penelope, wherein he decided to completely stand by her side and tell her that she was the most courageous person he knew was incredible. It was one of those deliveries that you wait an entire movie to hear. Needless to say, if you like well-scripted writing, you should watch season 3.

But I do have questions. First, why did the printer guy say Lady Whistledown was a redhead when Pen clearly pretended to be a servant girl, Irish accent and all?  Wouldn't they have otherwise said that "her servant is a redhead?" It became a huge leap in logic that Cressida immediately figured out that Lady Whistledown was Pen, and the boy so easily suspected that the printer's servant was the author herself. If you think about previous seasons, you know that Pen had partnered with the modiste so that she wouldn't be the only one dropping the issues off.

However, the writers did treat Colin really well by clarifying who he is through many scenes. For example, when he criticizes Eloise for acting like the rest of the girly girls, she retorts that it's because she has no more appetite for fighting social pressure. And then she points out to Colin that he has done the same thing by putting on a manly guise to appease the Ton. Additionally, when Colin reminisces about his childhood, he alludes to the self-consciousness of adulthood and emergent worries about what people think. He then claims to have transcended that, but all he does is reveal a lot of insecurities. This puts Colin on a journey to accepting his real "dorky self" as good enough while we also see Pen accepting herself as being inseparable from Lady Whistledown. It all comes together so brilliantly.

I also loved that Pen walked down the aisle to a classical version of "Yellow," which was a nod to Pen's yellow dresses in previous seasons. That was really cute.

And thus, season 3 has ended and left me for wanting more. I wonder whose story will be told in season four? Maybe Eloise? I've never read the books, but I think it's time for Eloise to have her story (if there is one that has been written for her).

I'm surprised that Scooby-Doo's overall message was never challenged by anyone in its many iterations.

Scooby-Doo has a lasting legacy as a cartoon. I used to enjoy watching the original cartoons when I was a kid. But now that I'm older, I'm kind of digging a little deeper, wondering what this cartoon is about. Without talking to the actual creators or looking at a pitch meeting for the show, I think there are a variety of things one could say about it. For example, it's about kids solving mysteries but a ton of those mysteries have to do with the supernatural. And the end result for as many episodes as I can remember was always the same: some person (human) was the threat, and they were using the supernatural to frighten or endanger a person or a group.

However, if one goes back and watches many of those original episodes, there are lots of unexplained supernatural gags. For example, Scooby transforms his appearance with a magic book, or there's a talking skull. The supernatural definitely exists in Scooby-Doo. It's just depicted as being harmless. So, it would be erroneous then to say that the show was about "dispelling the supernatural."

I think that Scooby-Doo as a concept is one of the most versatile franchises out there. At its core, it is just Scooby Doo and Shaggy and his friends (most of the time they are Fred, Daphne, and Velma) solving mysteries. Then you just add in a very basic characterization of being afraid of ghosts and monsters and being hungry all of the time due to "drug-related munchies". It's extremely easy to build different character personalities based on those traits which is why each interaction has the characters the same on the very basic level, but they end up different overall because each show can give them depth and personality in other ways.

So you could do Scooby-Doo but Isekai

or, Scooby Doo Noir 

or, Scooby Doo Into the Dooby-Verse

And you literally could just keep going. In a way, it's kind of like Monopoly the board game in the sense that you could have hundreds of different versions of the game and just keep selling it to new people. They've even got a new "anime" version that is coming out in the next year. As a huge lover of Japanese folklore, I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with this. They could introduce the tricky shape-shifting kitsune, the beautiful yet deadly yuki-onna, the powerful and proud wind gods that are the Tengu. 

Anyway, it kinda looks like they are definitely continuing to embrace the supernatural. But there will probably be lots of humans who are revealed to be the real threat. It's weird to think that this is a cartoon that has been broadcasting that message to children for a long time (humans will deceive and lie to you), and no one's had an issue at all with it, especially since many of the villains under those "supernatural masks" were white men. I think that it is still relevant decades after that first episode aired on television is pretty telling and may say a lot about the people who pitched this show oh so many years ago.