Last tuesday (this means may1st) I went to my first Ignite event (in Lisbon).I knew some friends were working on it and I offered to help because:
A – I love helping to set stuff up, stressing out and getting my hands dirty (It reminds me of my times at Natwerk. Which rocked)
B – It was hosted by some people I really wanted to meet.
The energy of the whole event was fantastic, filled with people that are jobless and yet not really feeling depressed about. I saw a lot of active people with potential and drive, and honestly, I couldn´t help but to think of the suckers (yes, i mean this) that let them slip under the radar and out of their previous jobs.
Continue lendo “Ignite LX and Livesketching”
Well, screw it. I was doing something else, mildly urgent but this just came up to my mind.
I´ve noticed that I have two writing modes that I most often use:
- Very structured and efficiency-biased for “technical stuff”, gradually uncovering how I got there
- A more loose “hook and bait” approach, that leans a bit on a narrative flow
I use the first to explain ideas and projects, so that busy readers will get the gist of it very quickly (focused on result and not process). Typically I´ll have a “if you got 5 minutes” section where the whole thing is compressed in and then little by little talk about my approach, methods and the little steps that informed the final decisions.
The second is the one I try to use when writing about more abstract topics. Here in the blog, this how I try to make it. Most often it starts with a curious fact or statement and then moves on to the step by step justification (I´m a sucker for validation).
I´m quite sure this is not rocket science, but I think it is interesting that I´ve never consciously noticed I had these two modes. Of course I knew I had different priorities when writing, but this is the first time I see them side by side. Oddly enough there is a consistent focus on aspects of structure, flow and justification. I wonder what would happen if I were to write short stories. Would these characteristics remain?
Interesting how our writing style so closely follows how we think.
The other day I re-watched Dr. No. It had been on my list for a long time due to its cultural relevance. One of the things that struck me in this film was the balanced use of plot cues. Things are simply not explained ostensibly, which gives the alert viewer enough time to process information and come to her own conclusions. The beautiful thing is that even if you don´t immediately understand what is happening (e.g. some specific gadget is used and you don´t know what it is), later in the story this will be explained in a very natural way.
It´s a win-win. If you pay attention to details you get the plot earlier, if you don´t, you won´t be insulted by patronizing explanations that break the flow of the narrative.
This got me thinking about subtlety and why I appreciate it. I suspect that most people that appreciate it do it for similar reasons, but maybe I´m wrong. If you think so, please just hit me up on the comment box below.
Continue lendo “Subtlety is a compliment”