Tag Archives: #WritingCommunity

Characters: Round and Flat

Posted on by

“You can never know enough about your characters.” —W. Somerset Maugham

* * *

In his work Aspects of the Novel, E.M. Forster introduced the concept of round and flat characters (i.e., three-dimensional and two-dimensional.)

Round Characters

Basically, round characters are defined by their complexity. They are likely to have complicated personalities and wrestle with life’s issues.

According to masterclass.com,

“A round character is deep and layered character in a story. Round characters are interesting to audiences because they feel like real people; audiences often feel invested in these characters’ goals, successes, failures, strengths, and weaknesses.”

Characters cited as examples of roundness are Elizabeth Bennet in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, Jay Gatsby in F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, and Huck Finn in Mark Twain’s The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. Forster says most Russian novels are filled with round characters. He believed all the principal characters in War and Peace and all of Dostoevsky’s characters are round. Russian authors are apparently fond of complexity.

When we discuss characterization on TKZ, we often talk about adding complexity to our characters, whether they’re major or minor. We want multi-dimensional characters that engage the reader. But according to Forster, the use of flat characters can be very effective as well.

Flat Characters

For example, here’s an excerpt about flat characters from Aspects of the Novel:

“In their purest form, they are constructed round a single idea or quality: when there is more than one factor in them, we get the beginning of the curve towards the round.”

Forster goes on to explain that flat characters are easily recognized and easily remembered by whatever one quality defines them.

Flat characters are often humorous, and readers have a certain comfort in knowing the flat character won’t change over the course of the story. Their singular quality will remain intact. The bumbling sidekick is one such character. He breaks the tension in the story, and you know he’ll trip and fall into a mud puddle or spill coffee in someone’s lap whenever he appears.

Flat characters can often be summed up in one sentence. For example, in his audio course “Writing Great Fiction: Storytelling Tips and Techniques,” James Hynes defined Huckleberry Finn’s father, Pap Finn, as flat. Pap could easily be described as “a mean drunk.”

Although we think of flatness mostly in terms of minor characters, major characters can also be flat. Forster cites the author Charles Dickens as a case in point.

“The case of Dickens is significant. Dickens’ people are nearly all flat…. Part of the genius of Dickens is that he does use types and caricatures, people whom we recognize the instant they re-enter, and yet achieves effects that are not mechanical and a vision of humanity that is not shallow.”

In his lecture, James Hynes also mentioned Sherlock Holmes as an example of a main character who is flat. Holmes rarely changes in Doyle’s novels. He’s always the perfect human automaton who solves crimes by his amazing powers of deduction. Yet Holmes was such a wildly popular main character that when Sir Arthur killed him off, the public outcry was so loud, he had to find a way to bring Holmes back for future books.

* * *

But whether your characters are round or flat,

“Remember: Plot is no more than footprints left in the snow after your characters have run by on their way to incredible destinations.”—Ray Bradbury

* * *

So TKZers: What fictional characters would you describe as round or flat? How about characters in your novels?

 

Private pilot Cassie Deakin struggles with her distrust of Deputy Frank White when she has to team up with him to solve a murder mystery.

Available at  Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Kobo, Google Play, or Apple Books.

Tickling the Dragon’s Tail

Posted on by

The bravest are surely those who have the clearest vision of what is before them, glory and danger alike, and yet notwithstanding, go out to meet it. —Thucydides

* * *

Dr. Louis Slotin was a brilliant young physicist. Only thirty-four years old, he had been working at Los Alamos on the super-secret Manhattan Project since 1943. He was known to be a quiet, reserved man, and yet one who was attracted to dangerous assignments.

Perhaps that’s what drew him to an experiment that would ultimately kill him.

Most of us are in awe of the work done on the Manhattan Project. Names like Oppenheimer, Bohr, Fermi, and others who worked there defined much of nuclear physics research in the mid-twentieth century. Yet despite the magnificent brain power, one of the experiments that was required in order to construct an atomic bomb was surprisingly primitive.

“Critical mass” is a term that describes the condition that occurs when the amount of fissionable material brought together is enough to start a nuclear chain reaction. In an effort to determine critical mass in the Los Alamos lab, a human operator would bring two hemispheres of such material close together until the mass just started to go critical. A Geiger counter and a neutron monitor would gauge the radiation emitted by the two lumps of metal. The goal was to get the assembly to begin to go critical but stop before it became dangerously over-critical and released lethal amounts of radiation.

Louis Slotin had performed this experiment dozens of times using a simple screwdriver as a lever to control the approach of one lump of material toward the other. He referred to the procedure as “tickling the dragon’s tail.”

On a fateful day in May 1946, Dr. Slotin was in the lab. Amazingly, there were visitors in the room to observe the operation.  According to an article on the Canadian Nuclear Society website,

The experiment involved creating the beginning of a fission reaction by bringing together two metal hemispheres of highly reactive, beryllium-coated plutonium.

Seven people watched as Slotin brought one hemisphere close to the other. The Geiger counter ticked a little faster.

Then Slotin’s hand slipped, and the upper hemisphere of metal fell onto the lower one causing a hard release of radiation. The Geiger Counter went crazy, then stopped completely, and people in the room reported a strange blue glow.

Slotin lunged forward and flipped the top hemisphere of beryllium off and onto the floor. Nine days later, Dr. Louis Slotin died in a hospital from the results of radiation poisoning. Miraculously, none of the other people in the room succumbed.

* * *

I have read “The Strange Death of Louis Slotin” by Stewart Alsop and Ralph E. Lapp several times. Each time I read it, I’m surprised by the crude contraption used to determine critical mass. The scientists at Los Alamos would have known better than anyone else how dangerous a mistake could be.

I’m even more surprised by the willingness of anyone, especially someone with a clear understanding of the risk, to volunteer to run the experiment. But there are those people who not only enjoy a sense of danger, but even seek it out. Those to whom “tickling the dragon’s tail” is an essential part of their lives.

* * *

It makes me wonder. Who are these people who enjoy living on the edge? Are there many of them?

Last week, Alan mentioned a test pilot friend of his had died while flying an experimental aircraft. It reminded me of books I’ve read about test pilots, and I wonder what it takes for a man or woman to climb into a contraption that’s never been tested before, and take off. I think of the Wright brothers, Charles Lindbergh, and Chuck Yeager.

And what about those ultimate test pilots, the astronauts? Can you imagine sitting on top of a rocket with a few hundred thousand gallons of fuel underneath you, and blasting off to be the first to land on the moon? Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin were willing.

Maybe those are the extreme examples. More down to earth (pun intended) are police and fire fighters whose livelihoods embrace danger.

And then there are fictional characters who refuse to back away like Atticus Finch, James Bond, or Sam Spade. How about Nancy Drew?

Writing mysteries, thrillers or suspense means we create characters who deal with danger in a variety of ways. Some are attracted to it, some run away, and others don’t seek it out, but stand and fight.

So TKZers: Do you have favorite fictional characters who love to push the envelope? How about the characters in your books? How do they handle danger?

* * *

 

Private pilot Cassie Deakin doesn’t go looking for danger, but she lands right in the middle of it when she searches for the key to a mystery—and finds a murderer.

Available at  Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Kobo, Google Play, or Apple Books.

Reader Friday-Let’s Talk Coverups…

Posted on by

Awhile ago, I picked some of your brains (such as they were…#sorrynotsorry) to get some ideas for Friday posts. Just kidding… 🙂

This gem of an idea came from our own Elaine Viets.

Book covers are important.

To the author because after toiling for months or years on a book, getting to the point of actually hating the sight of the manuscript, then voila! Seeing the cover energizes like nothing else. I know you know what I mean.

To the reader because it’s like an appetizer for what comes next. Like a doorway into another world that the reader wants to step through, but is kind of scared to…should I leap through the door or sneak through? I know you know what I mean (again).

The questions to follow are from Elaine, and I thank you for them, friend!

How much does the cover of an author you don’t know influence whether you buy the book?

If you like cozies, does it help if you see a dog or cat on the cover?

For hard-boiled, do you prefer weapons, cars and other symbols of action?

(Please share your favorite covers in the comments if you want, either yours or your favorite author’s.)

***

Here are two of mine. And I might be biased, but I love them!   🙂

 

Ask a Writer

Posted on by

While people-watching, I overheard an inquisitive young man ask his mom a series of questions. All her answers were quick and untrue. Not at all helpful. And I couldn’t help but think, she’s not a writer. Probably not a reader, either. Can’t recall the exact questions posed, but the following is close. Only this time, I’ve included a writer/reader’s response as well. 😉

Why is the sky blue?

Easy answer: So birds can see where they’re going.

Writer says: Sunlight reaches Earth’s atmosphere and is scattered in all directions by all the gases and particles in the air. Blue light is scattered more than any other color because it travels as shorter, smaller waves.

Why are leaves green?

Easy answer: So they look pretty, honey.

Writer says: The green coloration of leaves occurs due to a pigment called chlorophyll. Chlorophyll plays a crucial role in the process of photosynthesis, which is how plants convert light energy into sugar to fuel their growth and development.

Why can’t Fido talk to me?

Easy answer: He’s a dog.

Writer says: He does. Dogs communicate all the time. Most can easily recognize at least a dozen or so words — never say “walk” or “treat” unless you mean it — and the smartest ones can reach vocabularies of hundreds of words. They don’t speak using human sounds because physiologically they can’t make the same sounds.

Other animals can speak in human language. Koko the gorilla communicates in sign language and has a vocabulary of around 1,000 words.

Even animals that have no contact with humans use some form of language to communicate. And many humans can decipher the words and expressions of all sorts of animals, from house cats to wild elephants. When all else fails, look at the body language. All creatures communicate, even if they never utter a sound. Pay attention and listen. Fido is talking to you.

Can trees talk to each other?

Easy answer: Don’t be silly. They’re trees.

Writer says: Trees of the same species are communal, and will often form alliances with trees of other species. Forest trees have evolved to live in cooperative, interdependent relationships, maintained by communication and a collective intelligence like an insect colony. These soaring columns of living wood draw the eye to their full canopies, but the real action takes place underground, inches below our feet.

“Some are calling it the ‘wood-wide web,’” says Wohlleben, author of The Hidden Life of Trees. “All the trees here, and in every forest that is not too damaged, are connected to each other through underground fungal networks. Trees share water and nutrients through the networks, and also use them to communicate. They send distress signals about drought and disease, for example, or insect attacks, and other trees alter their behavior when they receive these messages.”

Scientists call these mycorrhizal networks. The fine, hairlike root tips of trees join together with microscopic fungal filaments to form the basic links of the network, which appears to operate as a symbiotic relationship between trees and fungi.

For young saplings in a deeply shaded part of the forest, the network becomes a lifeline. Without sunlight to photosynthesize, they survive because big trees, including their parents, pump sugar into their roots through the network much like human mothers suckle their young.

Why do whales breach?

Easy answer: Because it’s fun.

Writer says: Communication plays a vital role in the social lives of whales, and breaching is one way they send messages to others in their pod. The powerful splash and sound from breaching travels vast distances underwater, allowing whales to communicate with individuals far away. Breaching serves as a long-distance visual and acoustic signal, alerting other whales to their presence and/or signals important information, such as mating readiness or the location of food sources.

Also, territory is crucial for whales to establish dominance and secure resources. Breaching can display strength and power. When a whale breaches, they showcase their physical prowess and send a clear message to other individuals or competing pods that this area is their territory. This behavior helps establish boundaries and reduce potential conflicts between rival groups.

While breaching is visually striking, it also serves a practical purpose. The forceful impact with the water removes parasites that attach themselves to the whale’s skin and inside their mouth. The sheer force of the breach is enough to dislodge unwanted hitchhikers, which helps the whale to maintain good health and hygiene.

Breaching can also assist whales and dolphins in a successful hunt. The force and sound of a breach disorientates and intimidates prey. Orca — aka Killer Whales — who belong to the dolphin family, will launch out of the ocean to create the loudest impact. The family pod of Orca work as a team to breach around prey to disorientate, confuse, and panic that individual.

Breaching has also been used to assist whales and dolphins to get a better visual on their surroundings. Although not as common as a spy hop, a breach enables them to see above the ocean’s surface and navigate through busy areas near the coastline.

My point is, writers are curious creatures who view the world through a different lens. We’re filled with information from multiple trips down research rabbit holes, and we love to share what we’ve learned. Can’t put it all in our WIPs, so it often spills into real life. 😀

What have you learned during research? Ask and answer your own question using the same format. Or just tell us. We want to know.

 

Epigraphs

Posted on by

 

* * *

I love epigraphs, those sparkling word gems that a writer places at the beginning of the novel. The epigraph is a chance for the author to share what was on his/her mind when writing the book, or perhaps an intriguing hint of what’s to come. If done well, it will compel the reader to turn the page and begin reading.

Back in August 2021, James Scott Bell wrote “The How and Why of Epigraphs.” While I can’t improve on Jim’s post, I’ll add a few things I’ve read recently.

* * *

According to masterclass.com

An epigraph is a short standalone quote, line, or paragraph that appears at the beginning of a book. The word epigraph is derived from the Greek epigraphein meaning “to write on.” The use of epigraphs varies from book to book, but generally, authors use them to set up themes or place the events of their story in context. Epigraphs are most commonly a short quotation from an existing work. Epigraphs usually appear offset by quotation marks at the beginning of a text, but there are no set rules dictating how writers use them.

 

Epigraphs can be quotes from other works, quotes from famous people, Biblical quotes, or they can be newly-minted words by the author for his/her specific work.

Here are ten examples of epigraphs to inspire and encourage us:

 

FRANKENSTEIN by Mary Shelley

“Did I request thee, Maker, from my clay
To mould me Man, did I solicit thee
From darkness to promote me?” –John Milton, Paradise Lost

 

 

 

CORALINE by Neil Gaiman

“Fairy tales are more than true: not because they tell us that dragons exist, but because they tell us dragons can be beaten.” –G.K. Chesterton

 

 

 

ANNA KARENINA by Leo Tolstoy

“Vengeance is mine, I shall repay, saith the Lord” –Romans 12:19

 

 

 

Version 1.0.0

 

DISTANT STAR by Roberto Bolano

“What star falls unseen?” –William Faulkner

 

 

 

 

 

THE BROTHERS KARAMAZOV by Fyodor Dostoevsky

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.” –John 12:24

 

 

 

A HANDFUL OF DUST by Evelyn Waugh

“I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.” –T.S. Eliot, The Waste Land

 

 

THE QUIET AMERICAN by Graham Greene

“This is the patent age of new inventions,
For killing bodies, and for saving souls,
All propagated with the best of intentions.” –Lord Byron

 

 

 

LET THE GREAT WORLD SPIN by Colum McCann

“All the lives we could live, all the people we will never know, never will be, they are everywhere. That is what the world is.” –Aleksandar Hemon, The Lazarus Project

 

 

 

INTO THIN AIR by Jon Krakauer

“Men play at tragedy because they do not believe in the reality of the tragedy which is actually being staged in the civilised world.” —José Ortega Y Gasset

 

 

 

THE END GAMES by T. Michael Martin

“Everything not saved will be lost”. –Nintendo “Quit Screen” message

 

 

 

So TKZers: What epigraphs have you used in your books? Do you have a favorite epigraph?

* * *

 

Here’s the epigraph from Lacey’s Star:

“The truth is bitter, but with all its bitterness, it is better than illusion.” — Ahad Ha’Am

Available at  Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Kobo, Google Play, or Apple Books.

Reader Friday-Let’s Pet Our Peeves!

Posted on by

Everyone born on planet earth develops peeves, right? And the *older* we get, the more peeves we’ve got IMHO. At least it seems to be true with me. I don’t want it to be true . . . it seems like the older we get, we should let loose of some, right? Hmm…

So, without further ado, let’s share some of ours . . .

Because I live in apple and cherry farm country, one of my pet peeves is orchard guns. What are those, ask the uninitiated?

Orchard farmers have to deal with birds, birds, and more birds snacking on developing fruit. Some orchardists use mechanical predator bird noises; some use fluttering ribbons and flags; some use netting over the entire orchard, both to keep birds out and to control how much sun the fruit receives.

Others use . . . you guessed it . . . gun noises. Big gun noises! Like cannons and high-powered rifle big noises.

Mom, make it stop…!

 

The problem isn’t with us, though. It’s our German shepherd, Hoka. See those ears? Not much gets by them…

She’s deathly afraid of any gunshots out here in red-neck country. And for 6-8 weeks, she tries to hide from the orchard guns. She won’t go outside by herself, she tries to hide in the bathtub (picture that!), or crawl under our bed.

At least there is an end in sight, though, come harvest time…

 

 

So, now that I’ve shared one of my pet peeves, it’s your turn, TKZers! What’s one of yours, and do any of your characters pet a peeve once in awhile?

 

1-Star Reviews: The Ugly Truth

Posted on by

When a writer pours their heart and soul into a book, the last thing they expect is a 1-star review. Negative feedback can significantly impact book sales, especially these days where many readers rely on reviews to decide what to read next.

It’s disheartening to accept months of hard work, dedication, and passion dismissed in a few harsh words. Authors may experience a range of emotions, from disappointment to anger, but most don’t lash out at the reviewer.

My original plan for this article began with one severe case of an author physically attacking a reviewer over a 1-star review of his unedited debut. I’m now sickened by the number of authors who engage in this type of behavior, including one who called the reviewer a b*tch in a BookTok video for a 4-star review of her upcoming novel (ARC copy). Shortly thereafter, the publisher dumped her. But thanks to all the viral videos about the controversy, her book has allegedly been optioned for film. If it pans out, I’ll share the title. Otherwise, no. For all I know, the author lied about the option to gain exposure.

Who complains about a 4-star review?

Anyway, the original case that prompted this topic revolves around a 28-year-old writer named Richard Brittain.

In 2014, Brittain self-published his unedited debut novella. Like every new author, I’m sure he expected the entire world would love his “epic fairytale romance.” When an 18-year-old student named Paige Rolland read his work, she was less than impressed.

Not only was the book riddled with “spelling and grammatical errors,” “endless ramblings,” and the “plot [was] rather nonsensical,” according to other reviewers, but…

“There’s a very unpleasant subtext to the novel that only comes through if you’ve read the author’s blog post about stalking a woman until she called the police in terror. It’s creepily clear that the princess/protagonist stands for either the woman he stalked or women in general, and that her loyal dog likewise represents him or ‘nice-guy’ stalkers.”

Seething with anger over Paige’s 1-star review of his book, Brittain looked her up on Facebook. Paige’s profile included her hometown and her place of employment (How much personal information do you share?). Brittain embarked on the 400-mile journey to Scotland to track down the teenager.

On October 3, 2014, Brittain proceeded to the supermarket where Paige was working that day. Intent on revenge, he grabbed a bottle of wine from the alcohol section and stalked into the cereal aisle, where Paige was restocking the lower shelves. Enraged, he slammed her over the head with the bottle. The petite teenager suffered a horrific head injury—a gaping wound to her skull.

Emergency services responded to rush her to the hospital. By then, Brittain had fled the scene. It didn’t take long for police to track him down in London. A search of his home revealed travel documents and evidence of his obsession with finding the girl who dared to criticize his work. Charged with assault, Brittain received a 30-month jail sentence.

How AI Thinks We Should Handle Negative Reviews (my comments are in blue)

  • Respond to every review: Responding to all reviews, both positive and negative, shows you care about your customers and are willing to apologize when necessary. (What? Not even close to correct. NEVER respond to negative reviews. Curse, cry, or scream, but do not interact with the reviewer.)
  • Apologize: Apologize when responding to a negative review, even if the customer’s tone was hostile. (Huh? Reviews are one reader’s opinion. Not everyone will like our work, and that’s okay. Grow a thick skin and move on with your life.)
  • Ask for an updated review: If you’ve responded to the customer’s review and solved the problem, you can ask for an updated review. (This sounds more like a shipping issue on a random product than a book review. NEVER ask for an updated review.)
  • Contact the reviewer and request the review be removed: It’s always worth the effort to contact the person who left the review. They can remove the review by logging back into the site and deleting it. (This might be the worst advice of all. NEVER contact the reader and ask them to delete the review. Ever.)
  • Thank the reviewer: Show gratitude for their time and show that you value their feedback. (I know authors who do this. They’re polite and grateful. Still, I never respond to reviews, good or bad. Reviews aren’t for authors. They’re for other readers.)
  • Never get personal: Don’t get personal and certainly don’t ever attack or retaliate. (Finally, a logical point I agree with!)

Well, TKZers, how do you deal with negative reviews?

Do the AI suggestions surprise you? Unfortunately, new writers may believe the advice.

Do you think Richard Brittain should have gotten more jail time?

The Chronology of Story: Foreshadowing

Posted on by

“Time flies over us, but leaves its shadow behind.” – Nathaniel Hawthorne

* * *

 As we all know, stories are the recollection of events that happen through time. In January, I posted an article on flashbacks in story-telling. Today, I’d like to go in the other direction with foreshadowing.

* * *

To begin, let’s look at the difference between flash forward and foreshadowing.

A flash forward takes the reader to a point in the future. A good example is Charles Dickens’s A Christmas Carol where Ebenezer Scrooge is taken into the future by a ghost to show him what will happen after his death if he doesn’t change his ways.

* * *

But foreshadowing is different, and despite what Hawthorne said, a shadow may indicate events to come.

According to masterclass.com,

“Foreshadowing is a literary device used to give an indication or hint of what is to come later in the story. Foreshadowing is useful for creating suspense, a feeling of unease, a sense of curiosity, or a mark that things may not be as they seem.”

Foreshadowing may be direct or indirect.

* * *

Direct Foreshadowing overtly states an upcoming event or twist in the story.

For example, the prologue of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet specifically states that the two lovers will die in the story:

“From forth the fatal loins of these two foes
A pair of star-cross’d lovers take their life;
Whose misadventured piteous overthrows
Do with their death bury their parents’ strife.”

 

Another example of this straight-forward form of foreshadowing is when the author simply makes a statement about the future.

I recently read the novel Tom Lake by Ann Patchett where the first-person narrator recounts to her three daughters the story of her love affair with a famous actor. Late in the book, the narrator explains to the reader that she has told all of her past to her children – well, almost all. “And I am done, except for this: I saw Duke one other time, and of that time I will say nothing to my girls.” So the reader knows that an event which is explained in detail to the reader will not be related to other characters in the book. (Sort of a negative foreshadowing.)

* * *

Indirect Foreshadowing is a more subtle way of hinting at future events or outcomes in the story.

 

“If you say in the first act that there is a rifle hanging on the wall, in the second or third act it absolutely must go off.” –Anton Chekhov

 

 

 

 

In To Kill a Mockingbird, Atticus talks to Jem about courage after the death of Mrs. Dubose.

“I wanted you to see what real courage is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man with a gun in his hand. It’s when you know you’re licked before you begin, but you begin anyway and see it through no matter what.”

That conversation foreshadowed Atticus’s own courage in defending Tom Robinson.

In an early chapter of Tom Lake, the first-person narrator betrays her best friend by stealing the other girl’s boyfriend. That event foreshadows a similar betrayal later in the book when the same thing happens to the protagonist.

* * *

So TKZers: Do you think foreshadowing is a useful device in novel writing? Have you used foreshadowing in your novels? Can you think of any examples in stories you’ve read?

* * *

Private pilot Cassie Deakin declares her distrust of handsome men in the first paragraph of Lacey’s Star. That statement foreshadows her flawed decisions on trust throughout the book and almost gets her killed.

Available at  Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Kobo, Google Play, or Apple Books.

Reader Friday-Dine In or Dine Out?

Posted on by

Simple question(s) today, TKZers! I’m liking simple more and more these days . . . you too?

Here goes.

1) Do you prefer dining in or dining out?

2) If you’re dining in, please share with us your favorite home-cooked meal.

3) If you’re dining out, please tell us what your favorite place is, and your go-to fave food to eat there.

4) AND, please tell us about a character you’ve written who has any foodie quirks.

 

Hungry yet?

 

 

Here’s my answers: I love salmon. I could eat it seven days a week and never tire of it. And I prefer a home-cooked meal to eating out. (Even if I have to cook it!)

 

 

By the time today is over, Annie Lee is convinced she has no tomorrow.

 

 

 

In my novel, No Tomorrows, the main character is Annie Lee. She’s a married mother of four who for years has served pork chops to her family every Thursday night. Why? She has fear issues, but that’s all I’m sayin’! You’ll just have to read the book…

 

 

 

 

Redux: Can Multitasking Harm the Brain?

Posted on by

When I realized Labor Day landed on my Monday, I panicked. I’m in the middle of packing, as I write this, and have nothing prepared. Hence the redux of an older post but one that still pertains to all of us. For those who celebrate, hope you’re enjoying a fun and safe holiday weekend!

Writers need to multitask. If you struggle with multitasking, don’t be too hard on yourself. The brain is not wired to complete more than one task at peak level. A recent study in the journal Frontiers in Human Neuroscience showed when we’re concentrating on a task that involves sight, the brain will automatically decrease our hearing.

“The brain can’t cope with too many tasks: only one sense at a time can perform at its peak. This is why it’s not a good idea to talk on the phone while driving.” — Professor Jerker Rönnberg of Linköping University, who conducted the study.

The results of this study show that if we’re subjected to sound alone, the brain activity in the auditory cortex continues without any problems. But when the brain is given a visual task, such as writing, the response of the nerves in the auditory cortex decreases, and hearing becomes impaired.

As the difficulty of the task increases—like penning a novel—the nerves’ response to sound decreases even more. Which explains how some writers wear headphones while writing. The music becomes white noise.

For me, once I slide on the headphones, the world around me fades away. I can’t tell you the number of times a family member has strolled into my office, and I practically jump clean out of my skin. Don’t be surprised if someday they kill me by giving me a heart attack. But it isn’t really their fault. I’m in the zone, headphones on, music blaring, my complete attention on that screen, and apparently, my brain decreased my ability to hear.

Strangely enough, I don’t listen to music while researching. When I need to read and absorb content, I need silence. This quirk never made sense to me. Until now.

Have you ever turned down the radio while searching for a specific house number or highway exit?

Instinctively, you’re helping your brain to concentrate on the visual task.

Research shows that our brains are not nearly as good at handling multiple tasks as we like to think they are. In fact, some researchers suggest multitasking can actually reduce productivity by as much as 40% (for everyone except Rev; he’s a multitasking God). Multitaskers have more trouble tuning out distractions than people who focus on one task at a time. Doing many different things at once can also impair cognitive ability.

Shocking, right?

Multitasking certainly isn’t a new concept, but the constant streams of information from numerous different sources do represent a relatively new problem. While we know that all this “noise” is not good for productivity, is it possible that it could also injure our brains?

Multitasking in the brain is managed by executive functions that control and manage cognitive processes and determine how, when, and in what order certain tasks are performed. According to Meyer, Evans, and Rubinstein, there are two stages to the executive control process.

  • Goal shifting: Deciding to do one thing instead of another
  • Role activation: Switching from the rules for the previous task to the rules for the new task (like writing vs. reading)Moving through these steps may only add a few tenths of a second, but it can start to add up when people repeatedly switch back and forth. This might not be a big deal if you’re folding laundry and watching TV at the same time. However, where productivity is concerned, wasting even small amounts of time could be the difference between writing a novel in months vs. years.

Multitasking Isn’t Always Bad

Some research suggests that people who engage in media multitasking, like listening to music through headphones while using a computer, might be better at integrating visual and auditory information. Study participants between the ages of 19 and 28 were asked to complete questionnaires regarding their media usage.

The participants completed a visual search task both with and without a sound to indicate when the item changed color. Heavy multitaskers performed better when sound was presented, indicating they were more adept at integrating the two sources of sensory information. Conversely, heavy multitaskers performed worse than light/medium multitaskers when the tone was not present.

I can attest to that. If I don’t have my headphones on, chances are I won’t hit my writing goals that day. I’ve conditioned my brain to focus when the music starts. And I store a spare set of headphones in case mine break. Learned that little lesson the hard way.

“Although the present findings do not demonstrate any causal effect, they highlight an interesting possibility of the effect of media multitasking on certain cognitive abilities, multisensory integration in particular. Media multitasking may not always be a bad thing,” the authors noted.

How can writers multitask and still be productive?

  • Limit the numbers of things we juggle to two (*laughter erupts in the audience*)
  • Use the “20-minute rule.” Instead of constantly switching between tasks, devote your full attention to one task for 20 minutes before switching to the next task.

What do you think about these studies? How well do you multitask?

Because of my holiday plans, I may be late responding to comments, but don’t let that stop you from sharing your thoughts.