Shouts From Down Under

Pen + paper = communication but is it < or > publi$hed?

Why do people sit together having a picnic, but remain engrossed with their phones, and don't talk? Why do humans talk on Facebook or look up things on Google, but only grunt to each other when asked a question?

Well, I'd answer all those questions here with expert fatherly wisdom, except I'm a bit busy looking up something on Wikipedia. I won't be a sec... *bares teeth in very focussed concentration and tense learning effort*




How crazy is it that you can throw the weirdest question into Google, and you find it's already been asked before. Your question isn't the holy grail of original thinking you thought it.

I asked this, thinking I was being a smarty pants.

"Why is why spelt why, and not y?

The answer was a stack of hits with this one first in line - a huge amount of information.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y

Then there was a question I really do need help with;

"Why am I receiving duplicate emails on my iPhone?"

I learned there is such a thing as emails forwarded to your second email address which in turn forwards them to the original, thereby causing a looping effect, with no final destination for the email. So you never get the email. But more to the point; you can get identical emails because there is a lag in a server somewhere on the internet, and because of its inherent system, the sending computer makes sure you've received the email by sending it again.

Or you can have two subscriptions to the same provider. I'm not sure what my problem is with this, but its all food for thought. Answers to weird questions.

Some answers in life can be false, and have come from nowhere, from assumptions, from some virtual world where nobody asked the question in the first place, where Mr Nobody did it, or didn't do it, where all those odd socks, pens, change, cotton spools, paddle pop sticks, cards of matches, rubber bands, paper clips and other lost property end up. Whether it's behind the fridge, underneath all your dresser drawers in that place no one looks, or under the back seat of the car, there's a place that seems to exist where falsehoods, lies, or just vague statements come from that people follow, thinking its right, but if someone researches it properly there's no substance, evidence, truth to any of it.

Urban myths are one such example. Rumours that gather strength like a game of Chinese whispers until "The elephant carried the Queen of Sheba across the desert to meet King Solomon" becomes "The sycophant's magic carpet beamed above the pheasants to meet at MacDonald's" Like, what the...?!



No, son. Those are not Umbrellas, even though they look like them. That was some time back in the 2014's and as you can see, they were used in some sort of worship function. See the cathedral style ceiling, and the priest at receipt of custom, further along the temple's aisle? Just take it from your father, son. They aren't umbrellas, and nobody hung umbrellas from the roof like that. These are something else entirely. Ancient Hard-Drive archaeologists know what they're doing...

I read in a very confidential file, but won't mention names or places, of a person with disabilities note that said "Can't read".

On asking the question, how does anyone know if this person can read or not, the answer came "Good point".

The non-reader in question has severe autism, epilepsy, is non verbal (meaning cannot communicate verbally) except for some vocalising in different pitches and styles that can be interpreted for meaning, and except for one very rude word which I won't mention either.

What I don't need to mention, having prodded this bit of information into my blog entries a couple of times before, is Carly Fleishmann. However, for those who haven't read those entries, or don't know of Carly's story, I'll include a link to YouTube. She isn't a rumour, and neither are her answers to the questions posed by the condition known as, and labelled "Autism".



Carly- "I think a lot of people get their information from so called experts..."

The point here is, who was it who said "This person can't read" ? How did they come up with that beam of illuminating information? From some tests a Doctor or Psychologist, Psychiatrist performed? By asking the person? By observing the person? By giving them material to read and then ASSUMING they couldn't read because of no obvious response?

So, where did this little "fact" come from? I'm sure someone thought it was correct at some time. Perhaps it is. But you can't ask the person. The people qualified to ask this sort of question have no way of really knowing. Those responsible for the person's care also cannot really know for sure, even after years of observations, guesses, and even "hunches". I've had a couple of hunches myself, even yesterday, with this person. Even though there is nothing said plainly, some vocalisation is so contextually correct that you could almost swear of the meaning.

But its still a guess.

When we write fiction, how far do we go to have information that's accurate? Are there things we can delve into, guess at, read between the lines of what we consider "normal" behaviour, and then write a story / chapters / plot scenes that reflect our assumptions? Is this legitimate?

From all this, I come to a conclusion about something of far greater consequence than writing fiction. This could be life affecting.

Consequence is the keyword.

I heard recently that as carers or support staff of people with disabilities, we are not to treat the client (person with disability) that their action has any consequence. In other words, because they did such and such, doesn't give us cause to reward them, or punish them so to speak, by the consequence of so and so.

They are not to have any consequence to what they do. I haven't been trained this myself personally, so I'm not sure where it came from- for all I know it could be part of the policy I'm meant to abide by, and I'm sure it probably is too.

But, no consequence? I totally get that you don't punish these people, even by withholding something because of their "bad behaviour" or unacceptable actions etc.

That's against the law.

But isn't learning part of this? If you do A, you get B? If you don't do A you get C, or sometimes by chance, still B? Or if you can con, or trick person Q, you can get more of R and S?

Consequences. Where would we all be if we hadn't learned at a very young age the consequences of physical life?

Are we living a lie? Are we doing things, believing in things, forcing others to do things, because of a lie that we assume is fact, but in reality is just something that came from in our own head, or from that strange netherland where no one knows where it originated?

There is faith. Faith. Definitely there is faith. If we didn't have faith, when we woke up in the morning, we'd all just lie there on our bed, thinking that we'd die in a few minutes, and perhaps the sun would suddenly stop shining. But it has shined every morning as far as we remember, so we have faith that it will shine again tomorrow, just the same.
Yes, there is faith, whether a spiritual one or just faith that the car will start today because it did yesterday. Nobody (except me perhaps) goes to their car carrying the jumper leads and spare battery each time do they? Nobody rings the locksmith every morning because they assume suddenly that their keys wont fit the lock, or the remote will suddenly operate someone else's car.

No, its a fact. We all have some sort of faith. It can be lost, and often that's when people give up, give in, or start thinking that there is no such thing as consequences.

There is a very helpful article about John Grisham's style of writing and some rules I've found very interesting. These rules are ones he's proved or figured out himself by trial and error, and by hard yards. And the person who wrote this article has also been helped immensely by John's hints.

http://www.writersdigest.com/editor-blogs/there-are-no-rules/john-grishams-3-mus...

Consequences. If you do this, you'll get that. Consequences are a provable thing, unless its something that's shrouded in a realm we cannot access.

Non verbal persons, those with this disability, cannot get across information, sometimes almost nothing, sometimes nothing. Zilch. We cannot access their thinking, and they cannot access ours.
But consequences change their motivation, and ours.
If they can get their favourite food or an object they like to have, they will go to great lengths, they will THINK a lot more. Do you think this is not important to those of us who don't have these challenges?

It still applies to everything we do in life. We don't want to be basing how we live, or what we do, on information that is false. Who said it in the first place? Are we making choices daily and going to a lot of bother and trouble, just because of something that may or may not have been said or written?
Are we reluctant to prove it either way, because we may be proved wrong.

This even applies, especially applies, to our religious beliefs. Well, I should be the first person to sit on my digs and say, well, you have to have faith to believe in God, or whatever. I especially should be reluctant to have my beliefs put to the test in this way. What if I was wrong? What if I was following a way of life that wasn't true? Do I really want this sort of research and examination?

Proof doesn't have to be public. It can be very private, even something known only to ourselves. Even so, I don't feel its healthy to live our lives without proving these things for ourself. Consequence.

Proof of something may not be a tangible thing, to others at least, but we can prove something for ourselves by putting it to the test of consequence.

If I do this, what happens? If I do A, do I get B? If I get C, then is what I'm doing wrong?

There are consequences outlined in the Bible, Mathew Chapter 5.

http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-Chapter-5/

The first bunch of verses clearly say if you do this, you get that. Over and over again it says the same thing. You could even venture to say that overall, the Bible's theme is if you do this, you are victorious, if you do that you fail. If you do this you win, if you do that you lose. If you act this way, you arrive, if you act that way, you don't.

I'm not pedalling anything specific here along those lines. But the point of consequence is present, I feel, in whatever we do in life.

Let it never be said that we could drive a car flat out down the road, without our hands on the steering wheel, and life would keep on being the same as ever.

What questions are you posing with the plot of your novel? What lesson in conflict and resolution, in action and consequence are you sequestering, or featuring, even unknowingly, in your plot and back story?

If you think you haven't, and in fact haven't, then your story will be like a house with no frame, a human body with no chassis, just a floppy, saggy bag of bones.

Action and consequence are a necessary part of human existence. To say otherwise is ludicrous and wishy washy.

Even something so guess-workey as a riddle has a question and answer.

If you don't charge your iPhone, it goes flat, and people can't ring you. If you don't pay your bills, the Internet, phone, power, water and gas are cut off.

If you keep writing, your blog entry goes on forever. If you cease raving on, people heave a sigh of relief.

Sparky