use less imagination

Writers learn to use their imagination then, foolishly, let it loose on their lives. They either imagine disasters that won't happen- it's surprising how common fear of flying is among writers- or they torment themelves with visions of a life more perfect than the one they are living. But hold on- the imagination is a hard tool to use well. It needs very precise handling, give the imagination a very well defined problem and it'll solve it brilliantly. Give it a ragbag task- 'a literary novel' or 'improve my life' and it'll flounder - and, hey, don't blame it for going off in all directions at once- that's its primary strength as a problem solver it'll keep worrying away and trying new potential solutions until they are tested - and with a long term project that means you'll be tormented for a very long time. Maybe your entire life if you don't put a halt to it. Use the imagination when a specific problem arises rather than as a source of nitro fuelled day dreams. The best ideas and plans come from the ether direct, or you recognise them and grab them from the ether. You don't 'dream' them up with the fickle and unstable essentially problem solving imagination. When you have that idea for a novel or a plan in place then use spurts of well aimed imagination to get it done. As for everyday life, the search for perfection in external surroundings will go on for ever if you let the imagination loose on it. Better to give thanks for having the time and space to do the work you want to do. When you haven't use, the imagination to solve that specific problem.

the outsiders

Recently I have been reading comics written by Harvey Pekar. Impossible not to like. I have also glanced again at Hollywood by Charles Bukowski. Hollywood, Post office and his poems are my favourites of his. Ham and Rye, Women and Factotum featured a much less aggreable Hank figure. Though of course there are gems in there too. I've stopped sneaking back to Kerouac's Big Sur, which has some brilliant writing in it but is far too much of a downer. I tend to keep a book near my desk and obsessively reread it, sometimes nine or ten times- then never again. Often the books are obscure: This Bloody Mary by Jonathan Rendall- an honest and always interesting writer- was one book I read many times. Also Rebuilding the Indian by Fred Haefele. The books are all autobiographical fiction and non-fiction by outsider types. None of this stuff is that uplifting though the humor of Bukowski in Post Office is cockle warming stuff. I'm not sure why I like these books, mainly American; probably has something to do with wanting to see another side of America than the one portrayed in films and on TV. The American viewpoint is so widespread, and even when espoused by the ignorant seems as unassailable as the British Imperial viewpoint a century ago, that its refreshing to see internal dissent so to speak. When Harvey Pekar travels out of Cleveland his insights remain unashamedly provincial, and, while still interesting you feel he's missing a lot because, actually, he wants to get home.

jason webster

I have just been looking at writer Jason Webster's blog- I thoroughly recommend smallscale radical and other pieces- really perfect. His books are terrific too,by the way. Jasonwebster.net

von mises on politics

Who could argue with what economist Ludwig Von Mises wrote in 1940?

"The usual terminology of political language is stupid. What is ‘left’ and what is ‘right’? Why should Hitler be 'right' and Stalin, his temporary friend, be 'left'? Who is 'reactionary' and who is 'progressive'? Reaction against an unwise policy is not to be condemned. And progress towards chaos is not to be commended. Nothing should find acceptance just because it is new, radical, and fashionable. 'Orthodoxy' is not an evil if the doctrine on which the 'orthodox' stand is sound. Who is 'nationalist,' those who want to bring their nation under the heel of the Nazis, or those who want to preserve its independence?"

The same terminology is still used freely. Seventy years on. Why? Because politics is the art of exciting people into doing things they aren't that interested in. Whenever "language is stupid"- PR and advertising are more obvious examples- then the objective is usually to create excitement. Being excited is fun, brain boxes like Von Mises were not against this, but they thought it healthier, I suspect, to not confuse excitement with actually getting something done.

luxuries you cannot afford

comparing self to others

thinking of the future by lying on the sofa

planning your entire life out instead of finishing the project at hand

demanding a flattering identity rather than a workable one

undervaluing the freedom of not having a job

self pity in any of its myriad guises

feelin' old?

Feel old in a good way today. It's not impossible- for example reflect on how lucky you were to see something that is now long gone.

selling using the lego principle

Any parent proud of his or her IQ must wince and squirm when facing the prices charged by Lego.

Lego, especially outside the US, is incredibly expensive. A kit to make a small space pod or tracked vehicle will cost $20 or more. But all the cheapo copies of Lego are useless. I know because I started to buy them and discovered there were always a few bits that didn’t fit. I began to really appreciate the very high quality of Lego and its ongoing inventiveness. I played with Lego as a child and it’s better now. I now feel good, almost, when I spend big amounts on Lego kits. I feel I am buying something really worthwhile and lasting. Crazy? Maybe- but what is monetary value except the value we arbitrarily give to something? Scarcity makes things expensive- but it changes not a whit the real value of something. If Lego halved in price it would still be great- but maybe I wouldn’t have looked so carefully at it and consequently appreciated it so much.

If you are worried what you offer is too expensive remember we live in an abundant world. If people want what you have to offer they can always find the money from somewhere. And the more they pay the more they will FIND value in it. Experiment with the Lego principle: the more you charge the more people will discover the hidden value in what you sell. This is different from snob value, I'm not proud of my kid's lego in the way I might be proud of a Montblanc pen (which are inferior to Sailor pens from Japan I might add). It's not like designer perfume which loses perceived value when it is lowered in price. What interests me beyond the great microeconomic example of how a monopoly (kind of) can charge what it wants, is the way I have psychologically come to terms with paying insane sums (80USD once for a kit my son made in minutes. minutes!) for small bits of plastic. It's like those penniless villagers from upper Egypt who somehow get $5000 together to stow away on a leaky boat to Italy. Even a 'wealthy' westerner like me thinks that's a ton of money for a one way trip in the hold. When you have decided that you need this thing you'll pay. I think maybe that when pricing something to sell you shouldn't even consider the purchasers capacity to buy, the size of their purse, their income. You should focus entirely on increasing their desire. Certainly when I've been 'sold' that's what happened.