A few words on the passing of William Goldman: In addition to being a legendary screenwriter, he was a friend and mentor to so many other writers, offering guidance and support, directly influencing hundreds of films beyond his own work...
Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid
More from Writing
I want to talk about how western editors and readers often mistake protags written by BIPOC as "inactive protagonists." It's too common an issue that's happened to every BIPOC author I know.
Often, our protags are just trying to survive overwhelming odds. Survival is an active choice, you know. Survival is a story. Choosing to be strong in the face of the world ending, even if you can't blast a wall down to do it, is a choice.
It's how we live these days.
Western editors, readers, and writers are too married to the three-act structure, to the type of storytelling that is driven by conflict, to that go-getter individualism. Please read more widely out of your comfort zone. A lot of great non-western stories do not hinge on these.
Sometimes I wonder if you're all so hopped up on the conflict-driven story because that's exactly how your colonizer ancestors dealt with people different from them. Oops, I said it, sorry not sorry. Yes, even this mindset has roots in colonialism, deal with it.
If you want examples of non-conflict-driven storytelling google the following: kishoutenketsu, johakyu, daisy chain storytelling/wheel spoke storytelling. There was another one whose name I forgot but I will tweet it when I recall it.
Writing tip: let\u2019s talk about the INACTIVE PROTAGONIST. I\u2019ve seen a lot of amazing books lately with incredible plots, intricate worlds, and just really great writing with one recurring issue, which is the inactive protagonist. I think it can get tough when you\u2019re writing (1/10)
— Briston Brooks (@briston_brooks) January 26, 2021
Often, our protags are just trying to survive overwhelming odds. Survival is an active choice, you know. Survival is a story. Choosing to be strong in the face of the world ending, even if you can't blast a wall down to do it, is a choice.
It's how we live these days.
Western editors, readers, and writers are too married to the three-act structure, to the type of storytelling that is driven by conflict, to that go-getter individualism. Please read more widely out of your comfort zone. A lot of great non-western stories do not hinge on these.
Sometimes I wonder if you're all so hopped up on the conflict-driven story because that's exactly how your colonizer ancestors dealt with people different from them. Oops, I said it, sorry not sorry. Yes, even this mindset has roots in colonialism, deal with it.
If you want examples of non-conflict-driven storytelling google the following: kishoutenketsu, johakyu, daisy chain storytelling/wheel spoke storytelling. There was another one whose name I forgot but I will tweet it when I recall it.
So a final thread from me as your host today: some top tips on how to write for a popular audience about complicated subjects #space #science #writing #storytelling
The essence of any good communication is simplicity. It’s the same in print, television, radio, online, or attaching notes to carrier pigeon’s legs.
In the sixties, a Granada current affairs show set the template for using a visual medium more effective: it was pioneered by a remarkable fellow called Tim Hewat, a flavour of whose personality is here:
Up to this point, most television in this country had been akin to putting radio on television: most of it was beyond parody though this from Harry Enfield is spot on -- the patronising smug tone that meant the BBC was nicknamed "Auntie" --
And take a look at the longest running TV show as it then appeared: https://t.co/T4FdppnQMo
(Patrick was a brilliant broadcaster. The point I am trying to make is the medium was not exactly groundbreaking in the visuals department)
The essence of any good communication is simplicity. It’s the same in print, television, radio, online, or attaching notes to carrier pigeon’s legs.
In the sixties, a Granada current affairs show set the template for using a visual medium more effective: it was pioneered by a remarkable fellow called Tim Hewat, a flavour of whose personality is here:
Up to this point, most television in this country had been akin to putting radio on television: most of it was beyond parody though this from Harry Enfield is spot on -- the patronising smug tone that meant the BBC was nicknamed "Auntie" --
And take a look at the longest running TV show as it then appeared: https://t.co/T4FdppnQMo
(Patrick was a brilliant broadcaster. The point I am trying to make is the medium was not exactly groundbreaking in the visuals department)
You May Also Like
The entire discussion around Facebook’s disclosures of what happened in 2016 is very frustrating. No exec stopped any investigations, but there were a lot of heated discussions about what to publish and when.
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
The story doesn\u2019t say you were told not to... it says you did so without approval and they tried to obfuscate what you found. Is that true?
— Sarah Frier (@sarahfrier) November 15, 2018
In the spring and summer of 2016, as reported by the Times, activity we traced to GRU was reported to the FBI. This was the standard model of interaction companies used for nation-state attacks against likely US targeted.
In the Spring of 2017, after a deep dive into the Fake News phenomena, the security team wanted to publish an update that covered what we had learned. At this point, we didn’t have any advertising content or the big IRA cluster, but we did know about the GRU model.
This report when through dozens of edits as different equities were represented. I did not have any meetings with Sheryl on the paper, but I can’t speak to whether she was in the loop with my higher-ups.
In the end, the difficult question of attribution was settled by us pointing to the DNI report instead of saying Russia or GRU directly. In my pre-briefs with members of Congress, I made it clear that we believed this action was GRU.
