"that journey wasn't fully completed until I wrote about taking it."; this is the truest of all writer's truths. It always applies. I'm a little surprised, though - if you had to make a cartesian allusion to symmetry, that it wasn't in the form x^2-y^2=1. Or isn't hyperbole/a what you were going for? Oh, it is only when you possess things of value that there can be fear of losing, no? Another of those truths, I suppose.

One sign of an artist confident in his competence is to accept the guidance of an artist they respect. No disappointment warranted.

That's a great observation about tone, Jules. I'm actually asking a little different question - I'm talking about word selection, for example, being different now than it was then (bolder, more distinctive, less direct) and paragraph construction and the lengths of paragraphs.... Maybe it's an obscure question, but I'm interested in the relationship between confidence and voice (where voice is a specific quality of literary devices that makes everything a writer produces distinctive). Dweeby aspiring writer question?

Just curious, Wil. Have you compared these writings, and/or others from your recent acting and reading appearances, those insincere ones from the bad audition experiences that you included in JaG? I think there's a great learning there - While it's true that you've matured as a writer overall, it's also true that there is an authenticity of style in the more recent postings that comes through clearly. I think it's discernable in sentence length and complexity, word choice, and in particular the natural dynamics (think of the musical definition) of the piece, and other ways, I'm sure. Anyone else who's been around a while kinda see what I'm saying? Do you agree?

You always do such a good job of being grateful. That leftover redemption (ref: Just a Geek) serves you quite well.

It went something like this.... DM: As the door opens, you see... Fighter 1 (interrupting): I draw my broadsword and charge into the... Fighter 2 (interrupting): I'm right behind him with my +2 mace. DM (after a few seconds): Okay. (To F1) You take (rolls 2d6) 7 points of damage as you crash your stupid hand on the low ceiling and stumble to the floor. And you (to F2), tripping over your fallen mate, drop your mace on him, causing (rolls) 4 points more damage. The room in front of you us empty, your friend is unconscious, and I'm going get some Ring Dings.

It went something like this.... DM: As the door opens, you see... Fighter 1 (interrupting): I draw my broadsword and charge into the... Fighter 2 (interrupting): I'm right behind him with my +2 mace. DM (after a few seconds): Okay. (To F1) You take (rolls 2d6) 7 points of damage as you crash your stupid hand on the low ceiling and stumble to the floor. And you (to F2), tripping over your fallen mate, drop your mace on him, causing (rolls) 4 points more damage. The room in front of you us empty, your friend is unconscious, and I'm going get some Ring Dings.

But how do they compare to Accordion Hero?

But how do they compare to Accordion Hero?

Well, I'm glad to see someone above quoted Ted Hughes, because my thought on this matter is from the world of poetry. Certainly, word count (and other metrics) are important for commercial publishers - which is why a lot of talented writers have published several books with smaller houses and then graduated to larger ones with (1) guaranteed audiences and (2) more flexibility as regards "the rules". If you're under contract and committed, this thought does not apply, but if your 35,000 word restriction is self-imposed as a way of positioning the final product for a better jump to a bigger house, I think you may be better off reversing your attitude: serve the material rather than trying to make it serve you. Poets frequently describe themselves (OK, ourselves) as the vehicle through which the words flow. A lot of times that's pretentious crap, but it reminds us not to make the material something it's not. That never works. Good luck.

Well, I'm glad to see someone above quoted Ted Hughes, because my thought on this matter is from the world of poetry. Certainly, word count (and other metrics) are important for commercial publishers - which is why a lot of talented writers have published several books with smaller houses and then graduated to larger ones with (1) guaranteed audiences and (2) more flexibility as regards "the rules". If you're under contract and committed, this thought does not apply, but if your 35,000 word restriction is self-imposed as a way of positioning the final product for a better jump to a bigger house, I think you may be better off reversing your attitude: serve the material rather than trying to make it serve you. Poets frequently describe themselves (OK, ourselves) as the vehicle through which the words flow. A lot of times that's pretentious crap, but it reminds us not to make the material something it's not. That never works. Good luck.

Really a terrific point - the social aspect of gaming in any form is really only understood in by those who play. I wonder what Daniel Goleman (Social Intelligence) would have to say about this? Interestingly, this calls attention to an essential role tabletop gaming can play in developing the social intelligence of your children. Even Disney Princess Spinning Wishes.

Really a terrific point - the social aspect of gaming in any form is really only understood in by those who play. I wonder what Daniel Goleman (Social Intelligence) would have to say about this? Interestingly, this calls attention to an essential role tabletop gaming can play in developing the social intelligence of your children. Even Disney Princess Spinning Wishes.

Terrific retrospective; congratulations on a great 2006. Wish we could have see more of you in TV Land's 100-catchphrase countdown.

Terrific retrospective; congratulations on a great 2006. Wish we could have see more of you in TV Land's 100-catchphrase countdown.

I agree blogging _changed_ journalism, mostly by challenging its response time, but most blogs are _not_ journalism, because they are equal parts reporting, memoir, speculation, and rant.

I agree blogging _changed_ journalism, mostly by challenging its response time, but most blogs are _not_ journalism, because they are equal parts reporting, memoir, speculation, and rant.

Well, now, wait a minute. I'm with you and Iggy on the conversation and medium comments, but journalism? To my understanding, journalism _does_ have some constraints that blogging does not. Journalism, even freed from traditionally imposed limitations of newsprint and 6:30PM timeslots is less immediate and emotional, less opinionated, more rigorously checked, etc. If blogging is conversation, journalism is a more formal response to one question at a time. I think the things that separate successful documentary films from unsuccessful ones are some of the same things that separate bad blogs from good, and good blogs from journalism.

Well, now, wait a minute. I'm with you and Iggy on the conversation and medium comments, but journalism? To my understanding, journalism _does_ have some constraints that blogging does not. Journalism, even freed from traditionally imposed limitations of newsprint and 6:30PM timeslots is less immediate and emotional, less opinionated, more rigorously checked, etc. If blogging is conversation, journalism is a more formal response to one question at a time. I think the things that separate successful documentary films from unsuccessful ones are some of the same things that separate bad blogs from good, and good blogs from journalism.

Congratulations on your epiphany. Some guys never realize what you have realized, and many are uncomfortable once they do. If you want to reinforce your learning, there's a pretty neat book called Just Enough by Nash and Stevenson that helps people sort this all out.

Congratulations on your epiphany. Some guys never realize what you have realized, and many are uncomfortable once they do. If you want to reinforce your learning, there's a pretty neat book called Just Enough by Nash and Stevenson that helps people sort this all out.