A Discontinued Series

The other day I was rereading some of my previous work and came across a post (found here) from 2014 where I discussed my disappointing experience with the Medal of Honor game from 2010. It was intended to be the first post in a series of three but I never added any more posts to the series and I feel I would be negligent for not giving an (overdue) explanation. Simply put, in the weeks following the publication of the post, I decided that it was not in line with the sort of writing I wanted to do. While you will find scattered bits of criticism on various topics throughout this blog, I want to try to keep it an overall positive space for discussing things on my mind. From time to time I may have something negative to say on a particular topic, but I will try to at least supply thoughtful commentary and not just be an internet troll.

Oh, and just for those who were curious, the other two games I was planning on including in the series were The Force Unleashed 2 and Homefront.

Types of Writers

I read an article online a few weeks ago where the author discussed the types of writers that he had come across during his time. He organized writers into three broad categories: the Microwave Writer, the Crockpot Writer, and the Stir Fry Writer.

The Microwave Writer works well under pressure and produces writing material quickly, usually to meet some sort of fast approaching deadline. This writer might procrastinate and not get started on their writing until shortly before it needs to be finished, but once they do get started they can get in the zone quickly and crank out whatever is required of them.

The Crockpot Writer is the slow cooker. He may not write much on any given day, but he writes consistently for an extended period, slowly adding and editing as he goes along until he has the finished product. The Crockpot Writer isn’t lazy; he just does his best work when it’s one small piece at a time.

Lastly, the Stir Fry Writer starts fast but then slows down. He writes a lot of material in an initial burst of creativity but then refines that initial work over the following time period until he is satisfied. Major and minor revisions to his writing occur over that “seasoning” period and not everything that was written in that initial burst will ultimately make the final cut

If had to choose from these three categories, I would say my own writing has been closest to the Crockpot Writer and the Stir Fry Writer. I’ve had a number of posts that started as a single sentence or paragraph and then slowly got added to over several weeks and I’ve had posts where I had the first draft finished in a single hour but then I stopped and came back to them over several days to make adjustments after that first surge of writing adrenaline wore off. The common denominator between the Crockpot and Stir Fry methods that I use is an extended writing period. I’ve tried the microwave method in the past, (see my Week of Blogging experiment from late April and early May, 2014) but like cooking with a microwave, when I try to write quickly under pressure I am not as satisfied with the final product as when I have more time to marinate on a piece of writing.

This particular post is a Stir Fry creation. I wrote the original version one day but came back and tweaked over the course of the following week. Hopefully you enjoyed the meal.
 

Growing Ambitions

My upcoming trip to Europe is growing more ambitious, or, maybe it would be more accurate to say that it’s getting out of hand. Originally, I had thought I would be traveling for about a month and a half. At this point, I’m looking at around two and half months, beginning around the start of September. The original plan was to fly into Paris and spend a few days there. Then I would go up to Normandy for a few days before returning to Paris for a single day and then working south to Lyon and then Nice. From there I would go to Milan for a day before going down to the Cinque Terre and then cutting over into Tuscany. Then I would go back north to the Veneto for a day or two before going to Venice and from there take the ferry to Croatia and travel down the Dalmatian coast to Dubrovnik. After that I would fly to Istanbul and after a few days in Istanbul I would probably return to Paris for the return back to America.

This plan was a good one, but the more I studied and mapped out my route it became increasingly clear that 1.5 months was not nearly enough. The more I read, the more places got added to the itinerary. Some of these places are just day trips from the town I’ll be staying in, but they add on a day to the amount of time spent in that city. Others are new places I that I want to stay at least one night in to more fully experience them. Another factor adding time to this trip is that while I am trying to visit as many new places as I can, some places I traveled to on my last journey demand another visit. I went to Florence on my last trip so I figured I would do Sienna this time for my home base in Tuscany, but I really want to do Florence again, if only briefly, so now I’m thinking of adding one to two days in Florence.

At the same time, a few places have been cut from the list for being too far out of the way or because I judged that the time spent there could be better spent elsewhere. I had originally been thinking of going to Rome in-between Tuscany and the Veneto, but now I’m leaning towards cutting it out as I got in a good visit on my last trip and don’t feel the need to come back to it just yet. In France I considered going out to Brittany but it would be too much time and effort to get out there and then get back on track with the rest of the journey. It’s no fun making cuts like this, but you have to balance your idealism with some realism when planning a trip like this.

Looking towards the end of the trip, the big question is where to go after Istanbul. At this point I am looking at flying from Istanbul to somewhere else in Europe and then making my way back to Paris from there. At first I thought of Rome, but it became clear that this would result in a lot of backtracking and passing through places I had already visited. Now I’m thinking Madrid, or Barcelona if time is short. Central, Northern or Eastern Europe could also work, but I think those regions are best grouped together on their own separate journey.

As for when the journey ends, I would love to just keep going but I’m well aware that I need to end it around mid November. I travel very light and I won’t be outfitted for the dropping temperatures at the end of fall and early winter. There’s also the fact that I would have to leave the EU’s Schengen Area after 90 days since I’m traveling without a visa. And, of course, the money issue. I travel cheap but even traveling cheaply costs money and I don’t have an unlimited supply of it. At some point I just have to call it quits and come home. But then again, not seeing everything on one trip is a good incentive to plan another one in the future.
 

100%

I’ve noticed a trend over the preceding months of people saying “100%” to indicate that they completely agree with whatever was just stated. It used to be that you would say something like “I agree with you 100%,” but now it has been shortened to just saying “100%.” While I don’t think there’s anything wrong with this, I find it interesting that no other percentages are ever used. You never hear someone say “86%” when they largely agree with the statement just made but for a few small caveats. You also never hear someone say “15%” when they disagree substantially with a statement but grant one or two minor points. I realize this is because it would be very difficult to quantify an exact percentage for how much you agree or disagree with any given statement, and because there’s no rule requiring consistency in the usage of popular expressions. Still, sometimes I wish people would use other percentages, if nothing else for the hilariously awkward conversations they might create.