“The works of highest quality were all produced by the group being graded for quantity”

Thanks to Tanay (@tanayj) for sharing the anecdote below. Because of it, I’ve begun to read Art & Fear (Amazon). The book is inspirational and reads like a softer version of “The War of Art” (which I thoroughly enjoyed and wrote about here).

The ceramics teacher announced on opening day that he was dividing the class into two groups. All those on the left side of the studio, he said, would be graded solely on the quantity of work they produced, all those on the right solely on its quality. His procedure was simple: on the final day of class he would bring in his bathroom scales and weigh the work of the “quantity” group: fifty pound of pots rated an “A”, forty pounds a “B”, and so on. Those being graded on “quality”, however, needed to produce only one pot — albeit a perfect one — to get an “A”. Well, came grading time and a curious fact emerged: the works of highest quality were all produced by the group being graded for quantity. It seems that while the “quantity” group was busily churning out piles of work – and learning from their mistakes — the “quality” group had sat theorizing about perfection, and in the end had little more to show for their efforts than grandiose theories and a pile of dead clay.
— From “Art and Fear”

It also reminds me of this quote:

“Quantity is a quality all its own.”

The source?

Joseph Stalin.

A whole buncha notes from Shonda Rhimes’s Masterclass on screenwriting for TV

The best Masterclass I’ve watched to date. Shonda’s lessons are practical and detailed and really get into the nuts and bolts of how to create a TV show, how to pitch it, and how to write scripts.

If you haven’t heard of Shonda: Grey’s Anatomy, Scandal, and a grip of other network hits.

Here are some edited and simplified notes from the course. Most notes are verbatim, even if they aren’t in quotations…

Notesies

  • Understand the difference between procedural and serial shows (procedure is like Law & Order; serial is like Breaking Bad)
  • A movie has an ending; a TV show could go on for 7 years
  • When deciding on an idea: “It’s like a song that you can’t get out of your head”
  • The key is “compelling characters with compelling dilemmas”
  • For Grey’s Anatomy, the a key was finding the sort of gut wrenching cases that center each episode, that people would talk about over dinner the next day
  • Plan as much as you can upfront – especially episode ideas; once the show gets going, you’re not gonna have time
  • For every one of her shows, the title came at end; usually they’re written and shot as “Untitled Shonda Rhimes project”
  • “I don’t think [the name] matters” – that’s left to the marketing gods
  • Even character names change due to legal clearances (her broader point is, “don’t get too attached to any of your ideas”)
  • The key for her characters is to act and sound TRUTHFUL
  • Characters are like a band – it’s not individual perfection but group harmony
  • For the main character, you need them to have a confidant, and you need someone to tell them when they’re wrong
  • The importance of specific and small character details, like each character in Greys Anatomy having a favorite drink
  • in GA, she used Wizard of Oz tropes in a rough way (Izzy wanted a brain, George wanted courage, Christina wanted a heart, etc)
  • What makes a bad pitch: No structure, No sense of arc, Too much stuff / too long
  • The best pitches focus on character – Why do we care about this or that character?
    • Paint the picture, but don’t get too specific – let their imaginations do the work
    • Have a clear way to market the show – eg, Grey’s was “Sex and Surgery” (from Sex and the City)
  • A 1 hour drama has 5 acts
    • ~55 pages
    • Sometimes an opening teaser
    • Act 1 – introduce characters and world in an exciting way; present problem; setoff A and maybe B stories
    • Act 2 – things escalate, expand world, meet more people
    • Act 3 – the center, middle 11 pages, things start to peak, worst / exciting, start a ticking clock (or Act 2)
    • Act 4 – story turns in different direction, in procedural it’s a new piece of evidence, or ticking clock, or real character reveals
    • Act 5 – moment of victory, reveal / cliff for next ep
    • Each act should end make the viewer lean forward, end on a “wow” moment, each act break should “turn the story”
  • “You don’t want a flat show” – have plenty of ups and downs
  • There is usually an A story, a B story, and a C story (the “runner”)
    • A is usually but not always bigger than B; C is very minor
    • A story – usually 2-3 scenes an act
    • B story – one scene an act
    • C story – 3 scenes total in episode
  • If you make it about character, people will buy anything
  • Stuff that gets cut is usually from Act 1 and 2 – the setup stuff
  • Show a person’s emotional reaction instead of hearing them say what they’re feeling / thinking
  • Shonda tries to limit stage directions, emotional reactions, let actors do the job – give them room for interpretation
  • I can tell in the writers room, if there are a lot of fights about a scene…that scene’s interesting and it’s gonna work
  • Episode 2 is Episode 1 all over again; this helps you build trust and familiarity
  • Make the studio your partner, not your keeper – include them in the creative process
  • Get to know your line producer well; let them know what you do and don’t know
  • The set is all about the CREW – it’s their team, their domain, their expertise
  • Shonda’s routine
    • Only checks email once a day
    • Closes her office door when she needs to focus
    • No emails or phone calls after 7pm
    • Writes on weekends – writes every day
    • Wakes up at 5am (!)
  • If you’re not the showrunner, you’re working for someone else – even if you’re the creator

Thanks for reading! If you’re looking for more advice or notes on writing and screenwriting, here’s an even longer blog post.

Daily Habits Checklist #101 (February 25 to March 31): “Monday is an awful way to spend 1/7th of your life.”

Another five solid weeks, and more of the same realization: If I start the day early (before 7am, preferably), I have both the momentum and time to finish all – or most – of the habits. But if I get started at, say, 9am (whether from poor sleep, or a mild hangover, or sheer laziness), then the rest of the day is an uphill battle.

I’m also trying to be more cognizant of the habits that energize, too: for example, Reading. If I can read articles or books for even 30 minutes in the middle of the day (as opposed to, say, getting all my reading done while lying in bed at the end of the day), the very act of reading tends to stimulate and energize me, providing a little boost for whatever activity comes after. It can be hard to just stop what I’m doing, sit on the couch, and open Pocket / Kindle and quietly read for 30 minutes, but the payoff is usually worth it.

Currently thinking: “Monday is an awful way to spend 1/7th of your life.” – Steven Wright

Currently watching: Food Wars aka Shokugeki no Soma, a sweet and funny anime about ambitious teenagers accepted to an elite cooking academy slash prep school.

Hope everyone’s doing well. It’s already April :) You can do it!

31 nuggets from Alan Watt’s The Wisdom of Insecurity

Alan Watts’s The Wisdom of Insecurity.

I came upon the book in a Twitter thread – the source eludes me now, or I’d give credit.

His writing style is so crisp and dense that it will take many re-reads to better grasp what he’s saying, but even the first pass was great.

Here are some of my favorite highlights:

  • When belief in the eternal becomes impossible, and there is only the poor substitute of belief in believing, men seek their happiness in the joys of time. However much they may try to bury it in the depths of their minds, they are well aware that these joys are both uncertain and brief.
  • Consequently our age is one of frustration, anxiety, agitation, and addiction to “dope.” Somehow we must grab what we can while we can, and drown out the realization that the whole thing is futile and meaningless. This “dope” we call our high standard of living, a violent and complex stimulation of the senses, which makes them progressively less sensitive and thus in need of yet more violent stimulation.
  • The common error of ordinary religious practice is to mistake the symbol for the reality, to look at the finger pointing the way and then to suck it for comfort rather than follow it.
  • As far as we can judge, every animal is so busy with what he is doing at the moment that it never enters his head to ask whether life has a meaning or a future.
  • If, then, we are to be fully human and fully alive and aware, it seems that we must be willing to suffer for our pleasures.
  • For the animal to be happy it is enough that this moment be enjoyable. But man is hardly satisfied with this at all. He is much more concerned to have enjoyable memories and expectations — especially the latter. With these assured, he can put up with an extremely miserable present. Without this assurance, he can be extremely miserable in the midst of immediate physical pleasure.
  • The power of memories and expectations is such that for most human beings the past and the future are not as real, but more real than the present. The present cannot be lived happily unless the past has been “cleared up” and the future is bright with promise.
  • For the machine can submit to strains far beyond the capacity of the body, and to monotonous rhythms which the human being could never stand. Useful as it would be as a tool and a servant, we worship its rationality, its efficiency, and its power to abolish limitations of time and space, and thus permit it to regulate our lives.
  • If I want to be secure, that is, protected from the flux of life, I am wanting to be separate from life. Yet it is this very sense of separateness which makes me feel insecure. To be secure means to isolate and fortify the “I,” but it is just the feeling of being an isolated “I” which makes me feel lonely and afraid. In other words, the more security I can get, the more I shall want.
  • Herein lies the crux of the matter. To stand face to face with insecurity is still not to understand it. To understand it, you must not face it but be it.
  • To understand music, you must listen to it. But so long as you are thinking, “I am listening to this music,” you are not listening. To understand joy or fear, you must be wholly and undividedly aware of it. So long as you are calling it names and saying, “I am happy,” or “I am afraid,” you are not being aware of it.
  • In moments of great joy we do not, as a rule, stop to think, “I am happy,” or, “This is joy.” Ordinarily, we do not pause to think thoughts of this kind until the joy is past its peak, or unless there is some anxiety that it will go away.
  • Every experience is in this sense new, and at every moment of our lives we are in the midst of the new and the unknown.
  • Wanting to get out of pain is the pain; it is not the “reaction” of an “I” distinct from the pain. When you discover this, the desire to escape “merges” into the pain itself and vanishes.
  • In the widest sense of the word, to name is to interpret experience by the past, to translate it into terms of memory, to bind the unknown into the system of the known. Civilized man knows of hardly any other way of understanding things. Everybody, everything, has to have its label, its number, certificate, registration, classification.
  • For all the qualities which we admire or loathe in the world around us are reflections from within—though from a within that is also a beyond, unconscious, vast, unknown.
  • Philosophers, for example, often fail to recognize that their remarks about the universe apply also to themselves and their remarks. If the universe is meaningless, so is the statement that it is so. If this world is a vicious trap, so is its accuser, and the pot is calling the kettle black.
  • Obviously, it all exists for this moment. It is a dance, and when you are dancing you are not intent on getting somewhere.
  • Death is the epitome of the truth that in each moment we are thrust into the unknown.
  • Morals are for avoiding an unfair distribution of pleasure and pain.
  • The “natural” man lives for one motive: to protect his body from pain and to associate it with pleasure.
  • One of the highest pleasures is to be more or less unconscious of one’s own existence, to be absorbed in interesting sights, sounds, places, and people. Conversely, one of the greatest pains is to be self-conscious, to feel unabsorbed and cut off from the community and the surrounding world.
  • But the best pleasures are those for which we do not plan, and the worst part of pain is expecting it and trying to get away from it when it has come. You cannot plan to be happy.
  • For the more my actions are directed towards future pleasures, the more I am incapable of enjoying any pleasures at all. For all pleasures are present, and nothing save complete awareness of the present can even begin to guarantee future happiness.
  • I am depressed, and want to get “I” out of this depression. The opposite of depression is elation, but because depression is not elation, I cannot force myself to be elated. I can, however, get drunk. This makes me wonderfully elated, and so when the next depression arrives, I have a quick cure. The subsequent depressions have a way of getting deeper and blacker, because I am not digesting the depressed state and eliminating its poisons. So I need to get even drunker to drown them. Very soon I begin to hate myself for getting so drunk, which makes me still more depressed—and so it goes.
  • The Christian mind has always been haunted by the feeling that the sins of the saints are worse than the sins of the sinners
  • The “saint” who appears to have conquered his self-love by spiritual violence has only concealed it. His apparent success convinces others that he has found the “true way,” and they follow his example long enough for the course to swing to its opposite pole, when license becomes the inevitable reaction to puritanism.
  • There is no problem of how to love. We love. We are love, and the only problem is the direction of love, whether it is to go straight out like sunlight, or to try to turn back on itself like a “candle under a bushel.”
  • Everyone has love, but it can only come out when he is convinced of the impossibility and the frustration of trying to love himself. […] It comes only in the awareness that one has no self to love.
  • It is obvious that the only interesting people are interested people, and to be completely interested is to have forgotten about “I.”
  • The highest to which man can attain is wonder; and if the prime phenomenon makes him wonder, let him be content; nothing higher can it give him, and nothing further should he seek for behind it; here is the limit.

You can find the book on Kindle here.

“Platforms for rule-breaking apps”, or what we can learn from BitTorrent about the true value of decentralization

For anyone remotely interested in internet history, BitTorrent, and cryptocurrency, I recommend reading this great 4-part essay by Simon Morris, BitTorrent’s former Chief Strategy Officer:

Part 1 – https://medium.com/@simonhmorris/why-bittorrent-mattered-bittorrent-lessons-for-crypto-1-of-4-fa3c6fcef488

Part 2 – https://medium.com/@simonhmorris/if-youre-not-breaking-rules-you-re-doing-it-wrong-bittorrent-lessons-for-crypto-2-of-4-72c68227fe69

Part 3 – https://medium.com/@simonhmorris/intent-complexity-and-the-governance-paradox-bittorrent-lessons-for-crypto-3-of-4-1d14ac390f3f

Part 4 – https://medium.com/@simonhmorris/decentralized-disruption-who-dares-wins-bittorrent-lessons-for-crypto-4-of-4-f022e8641c1a

Here are some of my favorite highlights in the series:

  • The general purpose public blockchains out there might best be understood as platforms for rule-breaking apps.
  • coordination is hard and costly especially with many paranoid participants whose interests are not necessarily obvious to you — in the world of Bittorrent this meant that changes to different parts of the Bittorrent protocol to introduce obvious win:win optimizations or attack mitigations took many months and sometimes were shelved completely.
  • While the Bittorrent ecosystem was decentralized and extremely hard to censor, BitTorrent Inc — one of the few participants with real potential influence — was highly visible and felt exposed to legal repercussions of any of its actions
  • But in practice the only way to make any large-scale governance viable is to re-centralize power in a smaller number of deciders with some number of rules around how you can become and remain a decider
  • And this is the main conclusion — decentralization may be great for disruption, but if the experience of Bittorrent is anything to go by it is not at all clear that it has a role in whatever comes next. Blockchain architectures are great for unleashing unstoppable rule-breaking mobs, but we shouldn’t mistake the rule-breakers for the winners.
  • Bittorrent could have been eradicated by state intervention, but most states chose a lighter touch approach. The same is mostly true so far for crypto-currencies, but the scope is so much greater and time will tell at what point a state actor will feel compelled to intervene
  • The ‘winners’ created in the wake of Bittorrent disruption (Spotify and Netflix) shed any semblance of decentralization — it simply wasn’t necessary any more, and actually made things harder. But their success was the result of a paradigm shift where files were abstracted away.