My Latest Feature Article: “Creating Communi...

How to Finish What You Started

Posted on 2013/01/032013/01/03 by Jason Hensel

My friend, L-, wrote me an email the other day that included no greeting or closing. It only said, “Finish what you started, Jason.” I know exactly what it’s about. Nevertheless, it was ominous.

What L- wrote about was a play that I’ve meant to revise for a few months. L- was prodding me to complete the script so that it could be performed soon. Still, when I received the email, I thought, “Oh no, if I don’t finish everything I’ve started, something bad will happen to me. I may, in fact, die before reaching my goals.” Dramatic? Yes. Warranted? No. There’s no reason to freak out over every goal not met. That’s why we’ve been endowed with the good gift of justification.

There are some steps, though, you can take if you’re really bent on finishing what you started, courtesy of Ali Luke, a writer and writing coach.

Stop starting new projects
Access your current projects
Choose one project to focus on
Decide what “finished” will look like
Set some milestones (and start hitting them)

Those appear reasonable and doable. For this play I’m writing, I’m going to focus only on it the next two weeks, concentrating on producing at least two polished pages a day. Then I’ll be ready to send L- the script. Of course, I’ll attached an equally ominous note, something like, “Read carefully what you’ve been given, L-.”

Please read Ali Luke’s blog entry on writetodone.com for in-depth analysis of each step, and please let me know in the comments the best ways you finish what you started.

(Image via Flickr: marcus_jb1973 / Creative Commons)

Send to Kindle

Become a Better Writer

Posted on 2012/12/182012/12/19 by Jason Hensel

I have the following poster hanging near my desk. I just need to remember to read it every day.

Like this infographic? Get more content marketing tips from Copyblogger.

Send to Kindle

The Value of Discovery

Posted on 2012/12/052012/12/20 by Jason Hensel

The great improvisation teacher Del Close often said that performers should play up to their audiences, that they should treat them like poets and geniuses. This idea, though, shouldn’t be relegated to theater only. It should guide choices for anyone that creates and works with an audience, whether you’re a writer, a teacher, or an event planner.

Because here’s a truth: Like attracts like. If you cater your content for idiots, all you’ll ever get are idiots consuming your content.

Perhaps that’s what you want to do, and if so, great. Keep on keeping on. Personally, I’m unable to go down that path. I’ve always struggle with “write to an eighth-grade level” or “be overt with how it’s applicable to the audience.” To dumb down content, for me, is appalling.

The best part about improvisation is discovery. It’s an incredible feeling when you’re on stage and you discover that your ideas and actions match your co-performers’ ideas and actions. In other words, it’s magical when you hit upon group mind. It’s double magic, wizard-style, when that group mind spreads out into the audience. You can hear audience members gasp when you gasp. You can sense that they know it’s time for a callback at a particular moment and you do, too. And when the show is over, you get a rousing round of applause because everyone, on stage and off, discovered something magical together. The show will be unforgettable for a long time.

You can apply the same idea to writing and reading. In fact, reading is an action. A person may look passive reading a book or magazine, but she’s not. Her brain is making all sorts of connections and working in overdrive to sort out meaning and context. And guess what will make that book or magazine article memorable. Yep, discovery. Actively participating in the reading process, along with the writer who is pouring out info to guide you, makes for a much more fun and enjoyable experience.

You can’t have that, though, if you’re treated like a dummy. For example, consider if William Faulkner started off The Sound and the Fury with “This is a story about the disintegration of Southern values.” That takes the fun and mind growth out of reading it. Isn’t it more interesting and more rewarding as a reader to discover that on your own, to make that connection yourself or talking it out with others?

The question is: Do you want to create content that’s memorable, or do you just want to relay information? The answer depends on who you want as your audience. As I mentioned, if you want to continue with a passive audience, that’s fine. Me, though, I’m sticking with active participants, because through discovery comes change and enlightenment. And, really, this world could use more discoverers.

(Image via Flickr: John Goodridge / Creative Commons)

Send to Kindle

Page Views and Comments Motivate Bloggers

Posted on 2012/11/212012/11/21 by Jason Hensel

This blog currently receives 30 page views a month on average. The number of comments is minuscule. It’s safe to say, then, that I write entries for my pure enjoyment and not as a sense of obligation to a huge reader base. That’s not to say I wouldn’t enjoy more page views and comments. I really would. When I see my view average go up, I get excited because I believe I’m making connections with people who enjoy reading about things that interest me. This encourages a continuation to write more.

And wouldn’t you know it, there have been studies conducted about blog writing and motivation. According to researchers from Penn State, traffic-measuring and comments are just the things that may give bloggers more motivation to write. Carmen Stavrositu, one of the researchers, says female bloggers enjoy blogging because it makes them feel empowered and part of a community.

“Women who received a high number of site visitors felt a deeper sense of agency about blogging compared to those who received fewer visitors, ultimately leading to a greater sense of influence,” Stavrositu said. “Also, women who received many comments felt more empowered than those who received very few comments, due to a strong perceived sense of community.”

S. Shyam Sundar, who worked with Stavrositu, says that comments indicate connections and page view stats indicate influence.

To test their theory, the researchers surveyed 340 female blog writers about their blog activities and feelings of empowerment.

The survey of bloggers, who were drawn at random from a Web directory of blogs written predominantly by women, showed that those who blogged for personal reasons felt a greater sense of community in the blogosphere, whereas bloggers who wrote about external subjects believed said they felt that blogging made them competent, assertive and confident.

In a follow-up experiment, researchers asked 106 female college students to create a blog and write over two days about a personal topic — for instance, personal relationships or their health. Another group of 108 participants were asked to write about external issues that were important to them, such as racism, science, social issues and politics.

The researchers then manipulated site metrics indicating the number of visitors to the blog to test how they affected the bloggers’ sense of agency. The site metrics were tweaked to indicate that some blogs received 50 visitors each day, while others received just 20.

To test how a sense of community affected the attitudes of bloggers, the researchers added more comments to some blogs, while leaving only a few comments on others. Even though the content of the comments did not differ, bloggers who received a greater number of comments felt a higher sense of community.

“Those women who write mostly about their personal lives and daily experiences become more empowered by developing a strong sense of community,” Stavrositu said. “That is, they connect with others who share similar experiences and feel like they are a part of the community.”

Stavrositu and Sundar chose female blog writers because they create more more blogs than men and continued them longer.

“In general, it seems that, unlike in a lot of technology areas, women have widely adopted blogging and social networks,” Sundar said. “However, there’s no reason to think that these results would be restricted just to women.”

If you write blog entries, and money isn’t a reason, what keeps you writing?

(Story materials from Penn State. Image via Flickr: Adam Tinworth / Creative Commons.)

Send to Kindle

E.L. James Predicted to Win Nobel Prize in Literature

Posted on 2012/10/082012/10/09 by Jason Hensel

I don’t know why, but I always get excited during Nobel Prize in Literature season. Awards really shouldn’t mean anything in the long run, and many great writers have never been awarded a Nobel Prize. Still, I can’t help it. I like guessing who’s going to win, and once a winner is selected, finding all the author’s works and reading as much as I can by him or her.

Every year I hope that W.S. Merwin wins the award. His poetry is excellent, but it’s his translation work that should guarantee him the prize. He and Robert Bly have introduced me to so many writers through their translations that I would have never known. In fact, let’s give the prize to both Bly and Merwin.

As usual, the U.K. odds maker Ladbrokes has been regularly releasing the latest odds on who will win. As of this blog entry, it’s Haruki Murakami at 2/1 odds. Another favorite of mine, Cormac McCarthy, is at 16/1 odds. The writer who is last on its list, though, is the most perplexing. At 500/1 odds, E.L. James of Fifty Shades of Gray fame is predicted to win the Nobel Prize in Literature.

I took a screenshot of that listing just to remind myself of how silly awards can be. But still, Merwin should totally win.

Send to Kindle

New Month, New Blog Layout

Posted on 2012/10/01 by Jason Hensel

It’s been awhile since I’ve written a blog entry, and the recent ones have been part of the Rewind Button project. In order for all my entries not to consist of them (because eventually they’ll run out once we hit review album number 40), I’ve decided to make myself start blogging every day. I figured after a month it will become a habit.

And since it’s the beginning of the month, I installed a new WordPress theme. New beginnings, new look, right?

For those wondering, this entry counts as part of my “at least one entry a day” plan. As most men, I’ve come to peace with not worrying about length.

(Image via Flickr: Takeshi / Creative Commons)

Send to Kindle

Shakespeare and Lehrer

Posted on 2012/08/082012/08/08 by Jason Hensel

I’ll begin by declaring that I make no excuses for Jonah Lehrer’s actions nor justify his behavior. Frankly, I’m disappointed by what has happened. What I’m proposing here, though, is a clue to why things transpired as they did.

As a fan of his writing for many years, I’ve had the opportunity to interview him twice for the publication for which I work. It was me that prodded my organization to hire him to speak at our annual conference. After three years of pushing for him as a keynote speaker, he finally gave a well-received address to our association’s members in July. It was his last major speaking engagement before his fall from grace.

If you’re reading this and you have no idea who Jonah Lehrer is or what he did, then let me recap. He’s a neuroscientist and popular science writer with three books (two of them best sellers) under his belt, a heavy speaking engagement slate, and a New Yorker staff writer. Well, he was. He was all of these things until he admitted to misquoting Bob Dylan in his recent book, Imagine: How Creativity Works. He resigned from the New Yorker, and now all his books are being thoroughly fact-checked for any other misquotes or fabrications.

Fact-checkers will determine in the coming weeks how far Lehrer has to climb out of his hole. In the meantime, I’d like to address the last chapter in Imagine, and the clues it offers as to what may have been going on in Lehrer’s mind as he wrote the book. I’m not a psychologist or doctor or anything of the sort. This is pure speculation, but something to consider when talking about Lehrer’s proposed sins.

In “The Shakespeare Paradox,” Lehrer begins by telling how Shakespeare was a genius at using others’ works and knitting them together to create is own “original” plays.

But Shakespeare didn’t just read these texts and imitate their best parts. He made them his own, seamlessly blending them together in his plays. Sometimes, this literary approach got Shakespeare into trouble. His peers repeatedly accused him of plagiarism, and he was often guilty, at least by contemporary standards. What these allegations failed to take into account, however, was that Shakespeare was pioneering a new creative method in which every conceivable source informed his art. For Shakespeare, the act of creation was inseparable from the act of connection.

Could it be that Lehrer was purposely misquoting Dylan in order to connect his ideas and his ideas to his audience? Four hundred years from now, will we be declaring Lehrer a genius, as we declare Shakespeare is?

It’s argued that the biggest difference is Shakespeare dealt in fiction. Plagiarism, though, doesn’t differentiate. I’m sure some of those playwrights and authors would love a slither of Shakespeare’s fame attached to them.

Lehrer, later in the chapter, discusses how copyrights and their continuous extensions stifle creativity.

The problem with these extensions is that they discourage innovation, preventing people from remixing and remaking old forms…And that his why we should always think of young William Shakespeare stealing from Marlowe and Holinshed and Kyd. (If Shakespeare were writing today, his plays would be the subject of endless lawsuits.) It doesn’t matter if it’s a hip-hop album made up of remixes and music samples or an engineer tweaking a gadget in a San Jose garage: we have to make sure that people can be inspired by the work of others, that the commons remains a rich source of creativity.

Lehrer is a huge Dylan fan. Was Dylan’s creative process of using others’ tunes to craft his own music an inspiration to Lehrer? Is the role of remixing (accomplished with quotes, too) a way of making something more clear, a way of bringing forth a universal truth?

So many questions, I know. As mentioned, I’m a fan of Lehrer, and this situation has me questioning him, his research, and the role of the writer in today’s society. Perhaps Lehrer’s book title inspired him.

…although the imagination is inspired by the everyday world–by its flaws and beauties–we are able to see beyond our sources, to imagine things that exist only in the mind. We notice an incompleteness and we can complete it; the cracks in things become a source of light. (From the “Coda” section)

If Lehrer misquoted/remixed Dylan (or maybe other sources), if he added lines to complete a thought to help us understand our minds a little better, is that a bad thing? Do you care if it’s truth or fiction if it helps you become a better person?

What I’m ultimately asking is: What’s the big deal? I can hear a lot of you gasping and saying, “Oh my, what gall!” Does Michael Moynihan’s discovery of the Dylan misquotes change the overall message of the book? The answer is no. Does knowing Shakespeare stole from others diminish your appreciation of his plays? Once again, the answer is no. Should Lehrer had been more upfront about how he created his work? Personally, I say yes, but as we’ve seen over time, artists and writers rarely acknowledge who or from what they’re cribbing. Before we draw and quarter these creators, perhaps we should all stop for a moment and examine the stories we tell ourselves in order to live a little more fully day after day. By doing so, we’ll soon find that we’re not that much different from Shakespeare, or Jonah Lehrer.

Send to Kindle

Act One, Scene Two

Posted on 2012/05/02 by Jason Hensel

I fly to San Francisco this weekend to participate in a really cool festival produced by the Un-Scripted Theater Co. called “Act One, Scene Two.” It’s a show that’s one part scripted and nine parts improvised.

The site explains it best:

Here’s how “Act One, Scene Two” works: each performance is a collaboration with a different playwright. At the beginning of the show, we interview our featured playwright onstage to find out what makes him or her tick. Then, that evening’s actors do a cold “staged” reading of act one, scene one of the play, which was written for us by our playwright. When we finish the scripted portion, the actors continue on to finish the play — now un-scripted — starting from act one, scene two.

The goal is to finish the play as it might have been intended, continuing to honor the genre, style, and intent of the first scripted scene, creating a piece that causes everyone — playwright, audience, and actors — great delight.

And they don’t just finish the play in 20 or so minutes. It’s a full show, 90 to 120 minutes. All of that is improv. Based off my 10-page intro scene. Yeah, I know. Cool, right?

I’ll have to try out this whole mobile blogging thing and update from the road. Or maybe I’ll get so wrapped up in it all and just give a recap. Either way, I’m excited.

If you’re reading this and in the San Francisco area, please come out on Saturday, May 5, to the Phoenix Theater (414 Mason St, SF – 6th floor) at 8 p.m. for the show. It’ll be fun. Afterwards, we’ll get a drink.

Send to Kindle

The Way We Read

Posted on 2011/12/062011/12/07 by Jason Hensel

If you’re anything like me, you bounce around various news and magazine sites daily on the Internet. It’s rare that I consume one site totally. I more often graze on information like a starving student at an all-you-can-eat buffet.

This is common for a majority of Internet users. According to new research from the University of Missouri, “Internet users often do not make the conscious decision to read news online, but they come across news when they are searching for other information or doing non-news related activities online, such as shopping or visiting social networking sites.”

“Incidental exposure to online news is becoming a major way for many people to receive information about news events,” said Borchuluun Yadamsuren, a post-doctoral fellow at the Reynolds Journalism Institute in the University of Missouri School of Journalism. “However, many people don’t realize how their news reading behavior is shifting to more serendipitous discovery.”

Yadamsuren surveyed almost 150 people and found that they experience online news in three different ways. The first way is specifically on news sites. The second way they’re exposed to news is via non-news sites and activities, such as social networking sites and checking email. The third way is by just happening upon news while conducting other Web searches.

Because of the many ways people come into contact with news, Yadamsuren believes organizations should have links to their stories on various Internet sites as much as possible.

Fair enough. But just having links doesn’t necessarily mean people are going to read it. For a perspective on that, we turn to an interesting piece called “The Top 5 Things That Bother Me About This Headline.”

In it, writer Alissa Walker questions how the Internet is changing the way she writes.

“…when I saw how a slight tweak to my text would make my page views skyrocket, I became a convert. Now, instead of organizing my thoughts into pithy paragraphs for readers, I engineer my words so they’re algorithmically attractive. I rewrite my headlines to make them more enticing to Google. I tag them with dozens of relevant phrases to boost my authority on specific topics. I add search terms to my text to further optimize my SEO ranking. I admit that I don’t totally understand what that last sentence even means.”

Meaning is what we writers and readers are constantly trying to find. What can I write that means something to someone? How do I find stories that mean something to me? There are no easy answers, because they rely on personal choices. You’re never going to write something meaningful if you’re creating quick-list articles. And you’re never going to read anything meaningful online if you’re always making the excuse that you don’t have time to read.

Where, then, is that middle ground? How do you find meaningful stories for yourself? What attracts you to online stories and news?

(Photo via Flickr: Mike Licht / Creative Commons)

Send to Kindle

I Won’t Hold Your Hand

Posted on 2011/09/272011/09/30 by Jason Hensel

One of blogging’s cardinal rules is to always to let a reader know the importance of an entry, to tie content together. For example, if I work in the dog-walking industry and I post an entry on our company’s official blog about, let’s say, NASA, then I should state up front why it’s important you read the blog entry and how it’s relevant to you in the dog-walking industry.

I’d like to respectfully disagree with that nonsense. You’re not a baby. You’re an intelligent reader who knows how to make connections between topics. There’s no need for me to hold your hand when you’re reading.

Think about it. Wait. That’s exactly what this content-tying rule is helping you not do. It takes away thought. It takes away the opportunity for readers to do some of the work themselves. Reading is a partnership between the writer and the reader. The content-tying rule negates that partnership.

“Oh, but people don’t have time to read much nowadays, so you need to tell them why what they’re reading is important,” I can hear you say. You know what? If they don’t have time to read and think, then I don’t want them reading my writing. I write for readers who are thinkers (this is not to suggest that I write esoteric things). I write for people who don’t need to be hand-held and overtly pointed out things. I write for people who take responsibility for their reading.

My stance is not a popular one in this day of quick reads and SEO needs. But I’m not in it for that. I’m in it for the long haul. I’m in it to get you to think for yourself.

What kind of reader are you?

(Photo credit: close to spectacular / creative commons)

Send to Kindle