Tuesday, November 01, 2016

Worldbuilding From Reality - Part 5 Realistic Happily Ever After by Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Worldbuilding From Reality
Part 5
Realistic Happily Ever After
by
Jacqueline Lichtenberg 

The previous parts to Worldbuilding From Reality are here:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/03/worldbuilding-from-reality-part-4.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/07/worldbuilding-from-reality-part-3.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/02/worldbuilding-from-reality-part-2.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/worldbuilding-from-reality.html

Reality is a tricky thing to define. Take any pair of humans and they will disagree on the "reality" of at least one broad topic of life.

Marry those two people to each other and they'll fight cats-n-dogs over that one issue, no matter how much fun they have making up afterwards.

Yet, ultimately, "reality" (whatever it is) is the substance from which fiction is woven.

A fiction writer must study "reality" as closely as any non-fiction writer, more closely than most journalists today.

A fiction writer doesn't need to "know the truth" to set her imagination free, and in fact "truth" probably won't help the WIP get finished.

But if you are a Romance Writer, you need to know what your readers feel is true.

Here is an article about the beliefs of successful people -- if you are writing for successful people, you should incorporate these beliefs into your Characters.  Note #1 on this list is READ.

http://www.businessinsider.com/beliefs-of-rich-people-2016-7

And here is the Source.
http://richhabits.net/rich-habits-study-background-on-methodology/

Knowing what your readers feel is true (as contrasted with what they think is true) is also vital for a science fiction romance novel writer.

What we feel is true does not always line up with what we think is true.

Men differ from women in the area of thinking about emotions.

Nailing that elusive difference on that one topic lets a writer depict a Character as male or female in a way that the reader will recognize without the Character being just another thin cardboard cutout cliche.  But it has to be "off the nose" -- see Save The Cat! If you articulate and delineate that difference, it won't seem "realistic" to many readers.

So today we have 3 separate topics to blend into one seamless artistic whole called a "world" we have "built" -- Realistic - Happiness - Ever-After.

That's a Love Triangle: the Practical Guy - the Idealistic Woman - the Visionary Guy.

One thing Romance genre readers have in common is a subliminal, sometimes elusive, feeling that there really exists a Happily Ever After lifestyle and state of being.

Readers feel that truth even if they have never, personally, observed a couple living a Happily Ever After life.

Why is it that we believe in the Happily Ever After, not as just fantasy but as reality, without ever seeing it with our own eyes?  Believing it is real and then failing to achieve the ideal state is a source of much larger than life, dramatic, angst Romance novels focus on.  "Get a different man, and everything will be fine!"  Is that true?  How could it not be true?

I've collected a few answers to that question that could be used as Story Springboards.

Here's Part 4 of Story Springboards:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/11/story-springboards-part-3-art-of.html

And here's an index to a few:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2013/11/index-post-to-art-and-craft-of-story.html

Remember, most often the Story Idea precedes the building of the world in which the story is a plausible (maybe inevitable) Event.

Not all writers (or not every project of any given writer) begin with Story or Character, but it is vastly common among the most prolific Romance writers.  Romance is about the Characters and how they Relate to each other.  Well, for that matter, so is "War" -- and that is another reason science fiction and romance genres are such a natural fit.

My collection of answers to the question of why WE believe in the HEA (while so many others just don't) includes examinations of fictional Worlds and their structures, the nature of Reality, the nature of Happiness, and perhaps most important the concept of "ever after."

We've been working on how to create a Romance between a Human and an Alien that is plausible to readers who disbelieve the HEA for some while.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/09/theme-worldbuilding-integration-part-16.html

Previous parts of Theme-Worldbuilding Integration are indexed here:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2014/04/index-to-theme-worldbuilding.html

We have discussed, under Theme-Symbolism Integration, why it is that we cry at weddings.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2015/08/theme-symbolism-integration-part-3-why.html

That entry has links to the two previous parts of that series on symbolism.

So we've been assembling the tools to discuss the vast schism in our real world between those who expect "life" to have a Happily Ever After and those who know for a fact that there is no such thing as an HEA.

Now we have to survey our everyday real world and the prevailing beliefs guiding thinking and the prevailing thinking shaping beliefs.

Remember the theory that in every Man there is a Hidden Woman, and in every Woman there is a Hidden Man.  In other words, both polarities are available to every human (might not be true of Aliens).

And remember the occult theory that Gender is a property of Soul -- Souls come in masculine and feminine, and as the Soul descends into the body in stages (from conception, through 12 or 13 years or so of growth) the Soul shapes the body.  These two theories of "what" a human is generate a vast number of themes and their attending conflicts, all pre-packaged to become perfect Romance Novels.

If the human social schisms were cleanly divided along gender lines, all women would be on one side of the HEA battle and all men on the other.  Since that is not the way it is, what is actually going on?

Why do some people believe that what they've never observed nevertheless exists, and some people believe that if they can't observe it, it does not exist.  Worse, that if they can't see it, then it is impossible.

We see humans divide themselves on every issue right along that idea of what is real and what is not  -- religion vs science, HEA vs HFN, Freedom of Speech vs Don't Offend Me, Freedom to Bear Arms vs. You Must Be Prevented From Attacking Me Because Of Course You Would If Armed.

How many have observed Science discarding settled scientific theories, yet believe the latest is the last, firm and absolutely true truth?  How many have observed Religions splitting, reforming, founding new branches?  How many have been the target of a madman/woman with a gun?   You may see it on YouTube or TV but how do you know its "real?"

YouTube videos that go viral are often professionally shot and edited, a secret that few know.  Also few know the secret that "demonstrators" who show up with signs and rotten tomatoes to "protest" something actually are recruited and paid for the job.

We do not live in a what-you-see-is-what-you-get world.

Just look at the Political Candidates who hire image consultants and speech writers, makeup artists, (Botox is making a fortune) and even a specialist to go buy clothing and get it altered to fit, to be worn only once.  The package presented for voters to choose does not resemble what's inside the package. You can't see what's inside the package, but you are supposed to "believe" it is what you want or prefer.  You are supposed to believe that the packaging is Reality because it is "realistic."

Note how Belief In The UnObserved appears as the rationalization for an attitude on both sides of the schism, the side that believes what can not be proven and the side that flatly refuses to believe anything is real if they have not observed it.  Any given individual human (not Alien) can be on different sides of this schism on different issues and not feel any lack of intellectual integrity.

One very important schism of the 21st Century is over whether what can't be observed is real.

For example Global Warming.  There are those who accept the numbers as observations and "settled science" and thus the phenomenon as Real (because science is never wrong), and those to whom numbers are way too easily concocted out of imagination, forged, or misinterpreted and so are not proof of Reality.

This is the schism that divides us on the issue of belief and knowledge.

One depiction of Reality attributes Knowledge to the Masculine and Belief to the Feminine.  So the schism besetting our National and International politics is the old Battle of the Sexes issue of "what is reality?"

"My feelings are Real!" vs "I know what I'm talking about!"

Do modern men today believe in the HEA as a real goal in life?

It's obvious from the burgeoning Romance field that a huge fraction of women do, and a lot of men as well.

So why doesn't everyone know (not believe but know) that "life" well lived leads to a long stretch of Happily Ever After years -- despite the size of the challenges before you during youth (18-30 are the peak years of peak challenge usually).  After 30, people tend to confront challenges (Conflict of a novel) using previously acquired and tested skills.  Everything that has happened, happens again, only this time you have the where-with-all to deal.

Humans on one side of the schism view the real world from the angle of, "If I just had X, Y, Z, then X, Y and Z would make me happy."  XYZ can be house, car, job, or it might be wife, kids, great vacations, or $7,000 suits, diamond cuff links and the respect I'm due.  Or alternatively, maybe "If I just had enough money, I'd be happy."  They "know" because they've seen people who have those "things" who are quite clearly "happy."

Humans on the other side of the schism view the real world from the angle of, "Wow, look at this amazing world full of glorious surprises and magnificent people! Life is such fantastic fun!"

In other words, some people deem Happiness to be a product of what happens to them, or their situation, or possessions. Other people deem Happiness to be a product of what they do in life, or give in life, or observe in life.

Both see Happiness as real, but identify the emotion's origin differently.

Many human cultures have enshrined this wisdom in various aphorisms.  Even those who seek "things" and "wealth" expecting it to "make" them happy know with their minds that things don't make happiness.  What they don't know is that Happiness Makes Things.

Happiness is a force, a simmering and muted Joy, that comes from deep down inside a human being and emanates outwards into their environment, creating and shaping that environment.  Things don't "happen to them."  Rather, "they happen to things."

We all know the Great Novels depicting the contented, glowing satisfaction that can envelope a household ostensibly impoverished of "things" where a good marriage creates fine children who go on to do great things in the world.

That is the President Abraham Lincoln legend -- log cabin, learning to read and study law by firelight, becoming President, freeing the slaves, being assassinated.

We have had Presidential Candidates galore bragging about their poverty-stricken origins and meteoric rise.

Poverty as a badge of honor -- or poverty as an excuse never to contribute to the world.

Same schism we've been talking about - the poor, living in poor neighborhoods see nobody who has succeeded to become not-poor.  Half of them know for a fact that's because there is no way to succeed (because if there were a way, they would see it), and the other half believe there must be a way, and if there is not then they'll create one.  Some of those found drug cartels, others become tech company CEO's or Senators.  Half can't be stopped because they believe, and the other half can't be started because they know.

It is amazing how many do succeed.  Most of us know how dispiriting grinding poverty is.

http://www.nature.com/news/poverty-linked-to-epigenetic-changes-and-mental-illness-1.19972

We've all read tons of novels about the poor little rich boy - the wastrel and ne'er do well, son of a Duke who gambles away the family fortune.  It's classic for a reason - it is real, it happened, it still happens.

So starting out with the presence or absence of wealth does not correlate with productivity and stability in life.

When we talk about the "Happily Ever After" we are referring to a Steady State -- a stable condition that does not change despite events.  It's not an absence of Events that characterizes the HEA years, but the inability of Events to change the state of "Happiness."

Think about that.  The HEA is about a Happiness that is not caused BY Events, and does not prevent Events (adverse and otherwise) from occurring.  The Happiness comes from within and is stable because it is not caused by "stuff" that is possessed, status, social standing, or reputation.

The HEA is a steady state.

In Chemistry, this is called Buffering - a buffered solution contains a reserve of chemicals that will absorb any acid tossed into the solution and convert the acid to a neutral, and other chemicals that will absorb any base tossed into the solution and convert that to a neutral.  The Buffered Solution will be measured at the same pH regardless of what is tossed into it.  It APPEARS stable.  You can measure it.  You can identify the numbers precisely.  You can see for a fact that it is stable.  It isn't. Its reserves get used up neutralizing whatever is tossed into it, so eventually its pH will change.

Life is like that.  Stability is only apparent.

Viewed from outside, a stable situation may seem unchanging even though it is really Buffered.

The HEA is like that buffered solution.  With enough stress, change is required.  But because of the Happiness being sourced within, not without, the emotional resources to make those changes are available.

So a person who has little or nothing, a person going through an impoverished stage of life (college student, student-loan years) (or living a whole life in that stage, never making it to college) may look at people who have a stable-seeming suburban life/job/kids/pets/mortgage/cars/ lifestyle and deem that the lifestyle makes them Happy because it is so stable (while the impoverished always have good reasons to feel threatened).

The people who have all those "things" and don't feel Happy may seek to acquire more things because they know people who have more and seem (from the outside) happier. Since they can see that it is so, they therefore know that it is so.  Just get more and be happy.


People who have reached a Happily Ever After plateau in life may take such pleasure in their "things" that they deem their happiness caused by the things.

You can construct Aliens who have this same schism -- or perhaps see their world and lives from a different angle.

Even humans have another way of looking at the world, but it involves a different concept of what a human being is, what the world is, and how humans and the world fit together into such a seamless whole that we can't figure out what happiness is, where it comes from, or how to acquire our fair share.

This would be termed the Spiritual view of the world, the view of the world where a Human is an ape-body hosting a Divine Spark of a Soul not just a collection of neurons subject to epigenetic modification by Events.

Thus Romance Genre is built upon the concept of the Soul Mate.

Because science fiction romance is "romance" genre, the worlds we use are built on the concept that romance is the primary precondition to marriage -- "I love you" and "Will you marry me" are generally at or near the END of the typical Romance novel.

So if the concept of the Soul (which nobody can see or measure, so we can only believe in it) seems un-realistic to a particular reader, the concept of the Soul Mate will be nonsense, and the entire foundation of the Happily Ever After crumbles to a painful Happily For Now.  The next incoming Event will knock the couple off their Happiness pinnacle and plunge them into more angst and agony.

But science fiction and fantasy readers, especially Paranormal Fantasy readers, are accustomed to believing six impossible things before breakfast.

If you can induce suspension of disbelief in your readers, you can draw them into a world you have built where Souls do exist, and Soul Mates do find each other and live happily ever after, not in the absence of adverse Events but despite that adversity, perhaps even relishing adversity.

It is tricky to write like that because you, the writer, must know what beliefs your reader holds dear and how to get that reader to suspend disbelief.

Try this approach.

Suppose your target reader is convinced there exists no such thing as a Happily Ever After because no couple he/she has ever known seems to live that way.

Perhaps you can sell that reader on the hypothesis that the HEA state of Life can be created, perhaps magically or perhaps by Computer Dating Service, Time Travel, Dimension Travel, or some other device.

You then have to explain to this reader why he/she can't observe any real people living in the HEA state right now.

One answer is well known in an old traditional religion, and it is privacy.

Here is a 30 minute video of an explanation of Jewish marriage ceremony customs that explains how essential to Happily Ever After is the establishment of 3 Private Spaces -- the woman's personal private space, the man's personal private space, and the Couple's very well defended personal private space.

http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media_cdo/aid/3343913/jewish/Secrets-of-the-Chupah.htm

This video explains the way that personal, individual sovereignty is the bedrock necessity for the forming of stable community (where, in this case, community is the married couple).  Remember "stable" is the Characteristic most identified with the HEA.

10 minutes into the video, the lecturer uses the term soul mate.

25 minutes into the video he discusses the 3-rings I'm using as a model below.

It is a much better constructed essay than any I've ever written. It sticks to the point, where I never do.

It is a 30 minute video, but worth every minute if you are irked by how hard it is to get readers to accept the HEA as plausible.

The solution to that problem is in that video -- but the fellow speaking probably has no idea what he's said.  Here is some of how I think it can be used in a Romance novel aimed at HEA-skeptics.

The individual, personal separateness maintained during all the years of marriage is here explained not as inimical to togetherness, but as the essential component of togetherness and to unconditional love.

Unconditional love (watch the video for the explanation of it in Marriage) generates "happiness."

Happiness is the outward flowing force that shapes the couple's world.  No incoming Event can alter the state of "happiness." because happiness does not originate without, does not come in from outside, but emanates from inside.

He's talking about forming a dwelling for the Love that Conquers All.

The description of the symbols of this ceremony can be used to explain to the disbeliever in the HEA that Happiness is not dependent on finding exactly the right person to marry, or on hammering the new spouse into the desired image, but on making the person you marry your Soul's Mate.

The Soul Mate condition is a creation, the result of a mutual and arduous effort on the parts of two people, who create that condition by respecting each other's personal privacy.

Not just any random pair can make a marriage, so a great deal of high precision discrimination is necessary to find a solid match.  But humans being humans, nobody's perfect, and parts match while other parts clash.  The point of the arranged marriage is not lack-of-clashing-parts, but rather stability of the Couple and their home, to raise children well.  Stability is the point, and it rests on privacy.

The secret sauce, the ingredient that forges all human Relationships, is Privacy.

What goes on between these walls stays between these walls.  When you come inside these walls, you leave your work outside with your muddy boots.  (see House of Zeor)

Personal sovereignty and personal privacy is being eroded in modern life, and concurrently we can see the deterioration of families, of marriages.  Is there a cause-effect relationship between those observations? You can build a number of Worlds around answers to that question, each to house stories with vastly divergent themes.  Study our current Reality, rip your stories from recent Headlines.

For example, one famous incident, way back at the end of June 2016, illustrates how Public Necessity now obliterates personal privacy and personal sovereignty.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/lawsuit-disabled-woman-injured-security-airport-40283511

---------quote------------

The lawsuit says an alarm went off as she and her mother were going through a security checkpoint operated by the Memphis International Airport Police Department and the Transportation Safety Administration. Hannah Cohen became disoriented by the alarm and the security workers' attempts to search her, the lawsuit says.

"The security personnel failed to recognize that she was confused because of her obvious disability and was unable to cooperate with the search," Cohen's lawyers, Kelly Pearson and William Hardwick, wrote in the lawsuit.

Her mother, Shirley Cohen, said she tried to tell TSA agents about her daughter's disability, but she was kept away by police.

"She's trying to get away from them but in the next instant, one of them had her down on the ground and hit her head on the floor. There was blood everywhere," Shirley Cohen told WREG-TV.

The lawsuit alleges the security personnel assaulted Hannah Cohen at the checkpoint, "causing her physical and emotional injury as well as emotional injury" to her mother.

Hannah Cohen was arrested, but the charges were later dropped. ...
--------end quote-------

Why would a TSA Agent make such an error?  Of course, later in the TSA's official (lawyer written) defense, lots more comes to light.

But we're not after facts, here.  We are ripping a Headline to use for story material.

We have a society where a complete stranger can forcibly (legally) lay hands on a person without any indication that the person is guilty of a crime, in fact where indications are that she is innocent of crime (though possibly a dupe of a suicide bomber).

The theoretical concept behind TSA "screening" (search all the innocent in case there's one maybe guilty among them) is Guilty Until Proven Innocent.  In fact, Law Enforcement has moved over the last few decades from removing criminals from circulation to preventing criminals from doing crimes, therefore leaving them in circulation.

Theory was always that it's better to let some criminals get away with crimes than to inconvenience an innocent person.

The innocent miscreant who did something by accident won't do it again.  The criminal will definitely do it again, and more boldly and carelessly, and therefore be caught and removed from circulation.  Law Enforcement need not worry about missing a guilty person, but only about inconveniencing the innocent.

Society can afford to take the damage from the few that get away.  This idea is based on the feeling of solid families firmly living the HEA, experiencing many adverse Events that do not alter their Happiness.

With the disintegration of the nuclear family, the perception dominating society is completely reversed.  We get happiness from things and status, and lose it by losing things and status -- a single criminal action can destroy our country, our American Dream of the HEA.

The theory that Law Enforcement can let a few criminals get away rather than inconvenience the innocent is completely reversed now.

Now Law Enforcement only worries about missing one, not about disrupting the lives of the innocent.  Just imagine how your Alien visitor sees that.

Think about Innocent Until Proven Guilty in terms of "believe what you can not see vs. know only what you can see."

You can believe a Guilty person is Innocent, and can know Guilt only by proof you can see.  Today, Law Enforcement now knows you are Guilty even if they can't see any proof, so they have the right to search you, despite your right to be not-searched.  The rights of the individual count for nothing before the fears (imaginary or not) of the Group. We can't afford to experience even one Adverse Event because it will destroy Happiness.  We must be safe from Events that might happen.

The right of the Group, society, people, the crowd, to be sure there are no bombs on you completely sets aside your right to be not-searched.  This is true of NSA email scanning, and even CDC disease monitoring, or Obamacare mandated screening for diseases you don't have.  You must test everyone to find the few problem people.  Guilty until proven innocent.  Not only that, but the burden of proving your innocence is on you, not the accuser.

The old legal theory of "Innocent Until Proven Guilty" comes from the Ancient Greeks where logic established that it is not possible to prove a negative.

You can prove that something does exist, but you can not prove that it does not exist.

Hence the problem with proving Souls exist.

Here is another item on the Ancient Greeks and Happiness:

http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/a-better-kind-of-happiness
Nobody has figured a way to prove that souls exist, and since you can prove a positive, surely if Souls exist then we can prove it.

Because we have not proven Souls (and thus Soul Mates) do exist, probably about half of humanity is convinced that Souls do not exist.  The rest believe Souls exist without seeing them, or believe they do see them in the eyes of others.

The thesis is that you can not prove a negative, and mere lack of proof of the positive is not indicative of the negative being true.  Therefore, in a court of law, the accused does not have to prove innocence, but the prosecution must prove guilt.  At a TSA checkpoint, however, you must prove your innocence.

The schism that divides humanity between those who believe in what they can not see, and those who know only what they can see, is not always a 50/50 divide as it is today.  So you can create Aliens who have say, 10% Believers who understand humans in terms of Souls (therefore as possible mates) and 90% who know humans have no Souls because they can see from our behavior how soulless we are.

In other words, perhaps 10% of that Alien population would understand Innocent Until Proven Guilty.  They would view this TSA incident with genuine horror just as most of us do.  The woman was brain damaged, not soulless.

BTW the TSA's immediate rebuttal was that the burden of proper behavior rested with the brain impaired woman who should have called ahead to find out what the screening protocols were.  It so happened, in this one incident, the brain impaired woman (who had just had a cancerous tumor removed from her brain) was traveling with her mother (whose protestations were ignored by TSA).

But the impaired woman was 19 years old, and thus dealt with by TSA as an autonomous adult.

What has this to do with a Realistic Happily Ever After?

This incident illustrates what "realistic" means to those readers who don't believe in Souls because they are not proven to exist.  The woman's innocence was not proven, therefore her innocence did not exist.

We all are focused on preventing explosions and shootings in crowds.

We want to be certain we can go where we choose and not be murdered.  How can we not fear Terrorists?  They're very good at making people afraid, very professional at it because they get paid to instill fear in us.  These days even phoning in a bomb threat can divert a plane or cause it to gain a military escort.  So you can see, they have succeeded.  Why?  That tactic would never have worked on the USA of a hundred years ago - maybe 150 years ago.  What has changed?

The numbers clearly show an increased divorce rate, single parents, adults who were raised by single parents.

Of course, the misery of being unable to get a divorce and the even greater misery of unwanted children, has to be figured into the worldbuilding for an Alien Romance.  By targeting and solving those two problems (which admittedly desperately needed solving if we are to call ourselves human), may (or may not) have done collateral damage in unexpected ways.  What if your Aliens have evolved in such a way that solving those social problems does not destabilize their HEA?

So now we have the social problem of voters wanting to force their politicians to make them feel safe. Remember, this is an exercise in ripping story material from headlines.

Realistically, because some humans hide in crowds of humans then murder a bunch of the humans in the crowd (what if some in the crowd were visiting Aliens?), therefore we must search each and every member of that crowd to find the potential miscreants, and we'll know them by the weapons they carry.

Anyone carrying a weapon, or even just a pocket knife, is obviously a miscreant bent on murder of strangers.  So to find that one murderous person, every single person in the crowd (maybe attending a political rally or a concert) must be thoroughly searched.

Who should do the searching?  Law Enforcement -- i.e. government, crafted by politicians who have been elected on their promises to make everyone feel safe.

We discussed government and its power structures here:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/10/alien-sexuality-part-3-corporate-greed_25.html

Government used to be tasked with securing our perimeter so we can function freely within it.

But since government has been unable to secure the Nation's borders from the current pop-up threats, we have now tasked government with the job of invading our privacy to keep us safe from having our privacy invaded.  Try explaining that to your visiting Alien diplomats while a TSA agent violates the being's sexual private parts.

What has this to do with marriage?

Did you take the time to watch that video?  It is full of story springboards.

Here is the URL again:

http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media_cdo/aid/3343913/jewish/Secrets-of-the-Chupah.htm

Now back to the video.  Here is a man.  Here is a woman.  They each acknowledge each other's personal space, personal sovereignty, individual foibles.  Together, in cooperation, they CREATE a third space, the Couple.  This new composite has its own space, its privacy, (and foibles).

This marriage between distinctively imperfect people will be solid, stable, "ever after" and at the same time, as a product of that stability, it will radiate Happiness, a force which shapes the surrounding reality.

Happiness does not come from "things" -- but rather "things" come from Happiness.

Happiness is the upwelling, out-flowing force that enriches the world.  It is a creative force, the Divine Love that is Unconditional and manifests as spikes of Joy exploding from a sea of Happiness filling a vessel fabricated from contentment.

This entire Rube Goldberg device called Marriage rests on one thing and one thing only -- privacy.

Marriage rests on three separate and special zones of PRIVACY.

Listen to that video.

The implications of this are stupendous.

The whole concept of the Happily Ever After ending as a "Realistic" goal of real people depends entirely on the establishment and maintaining of Privacy.

Examine how the place that privacy has in our world has changed over the last say, 100-150 years.

Think about what changes in privacy practices (and all the computer hacking related items) has in determining the course of life in today's world if this ancient practice of establishing a zone of privacy is soundly rooted in human nature.

Human Nature might be understood as the privacy zone of the Soul, the privacy zone of the Body, and the privacy zone of the Couple, Soul-Body=Human.

Think about how all this might be viewed by Aliens.

The incident with the brain damaged young woman is a great illustration of how primal bodily privacy is.

It is easy to imagine ( imagine, without basis in the facts of the actual incident) that a person in a brain fog of confusion simply reacts on a primal level to hands intruding into her PRIVATE SPACE, her bodily privacy, reacts as if being attacked by a rapist, and reacts by trying to get away (despite debilities).

Imagine what that intrusion would feel like.

Imagine how you would feel bewildered, in pain and bleeding from falling to the hard floor, then being separated and alone (she was arrested, but we're only imagining the arrest involved separating her; as a 19 year old, she would plausibly have been separated, but this is a story, and that is reality) -- so in our fiction she's alone with strangers in a strange place and has no idea why.

Remember all the posts where we've discussed "ripped from the headlines" -- this news item about the TSA incident is a headline and we are now ripping out the facts, ignoring the truth so we can tell our own story.

Now, imagine because of this news report on her trouble, she gets invited into some experimental stem cell treatment for her brain damage, her brain issues just miraculously clear up, and she fully understands this world and remembers what happened.

If you're doing an Alien Romance, of course the stem cell treatment is donated to Earth by the visiting Aliens, and because of publicity of the incident, she is chosen as the first experimental subject.  And she probably falls for the Alien who shepherds her through the treatment process.

But now she understands what was done to her by the TSA agent, and knows it was done in a perfectly legal way by humans who were convinced they were righteous, doing Good in the name of Good, keeping the public safe, and incidentally getting paid for it.

From the safety of a marriage to an Alien, what does she do?  If she has an HEA with the Alien, does she risk losing it?  If she's miserable, does she see an action that could make her happy?

The problem is half of humanity (that schism that has a mirror image among the Aliens) does not believe in the HEA because HEA only occurs when surrounded by those 7 circles of PRIVACY.

From the outside, you can not observe an HEA in progress.

HEA can not happen where it can be observed.  It can exist only in PRIVATE.

The HEA grows into existence within the privacy of marriage, but the kind of marriage within which the complete sovereignty of the individuals is observed.

As the video defined it, marriage is about Trust - the trust that privacy will not be breached.

The TSA, FBI, CIA and other alphabet agencies have been legally empowered to breach that privacy -- maybe because voters don't think privacy is important.

Small wonder that half of humanity doesn't believe in the HEA - you can't see it because it ceases to exist when you look.  Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle applied to the Soul?

Now, Human society is composed of the nuclear family.  Families amalgamate into tribes composed of related families.  Tribes amalgamate into larger groupings, counties, states, and Nations.

National Federal government rests on the privacy of marriage -- hence a spouse can not be forced to testify against a spouse, or an individual against self.  The whole house of cards comes tumbling down without that pure and absolute Trust that Privacy is honored.

But lets look at the larger social structures (remember we're writing Alien Romance).

Humans marry each other, creating the nuclear unit.

The Units likewise "marry" each other, in that same 3-way-circle structure described in the video.

First individual privacy is guaranteed, then two of the units create a new zone of privacy around them.  The Tribe exists within a circle of privacy created by trust in each other.

The Tribes then "marry" each other -- same process, two private individuals create a third private space, perhaps a County containing them both.  Counties marry each other to form States.  States marry each other to form The United States.  Eurozone seems to be a failed marriage - maybe because privacy has been violated.

Marriage is a business contract just like cities making counties and counties making states - all under constitutions with officers and bylaws.  A single couple's marriage is a contract, a business contract with value exchanged.  The same process creates States and Nations.

That is the theoretical basis of State's Rights -- each state is a zone of PRIVACY which exists because of Trust that privacy won't be violated, and because of that Trust the State or Nation produces Happiness which has the side-effect of producing riches.

In other words, the idea behind State's rights (history books aside) can be summed up by that video explaining Marriage as a process of establishing privacy within a bond of trust.

That's why our money says In God We Trust.

Without that trust in our privacy, without a personal perimeter into which government does not go, there is no family, and thus no Nation.

With that trust in our privacy being respected (even or especially by the TSA) we generate happiness that flows into the environment and creates the love that conquers all.

Unconditional love requires privacy to conquer all.  Consider, the IRS is also a hated monster -- its mission is to invade our privacy and even the private space of a marriage (filing jointly - your spouse cheats; you can go to jail).  We likely would not hate or distrust government if it didn't invade our privacy.

There is a huge difference between privacy and secrecy.  You could make a case for the idea that they are not even related.

Criminals keep their activities secret. Normal people guard their privacy.

It's not that simple, of course, humans being human, but entire thematic structures can be built from the nuances of these two concepts, private and secret.

Just look at Hillary Clinton's FBI investigation results.  Intent made the difference since she accidentally didn't keep her private email secret enough to conform with the law.  But it is not a felony to commit a felony by accident (or we'd all be in prison).  She wanted her privacy and saw no reason the law could interfere with her legitimate need for privacy.

Secrecy vs Privacy is a huge theme source for romance.  (Do watch that video.)

Here is more on thematic structures and love.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2008/01/falling-in-love.html

And here are two in the Believing In Happily Ever After series:

Standardization vs Customization:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/10/believing-in-happily-ever-after-part-3.html

and

Nesting Huge Themes Inside Each Other:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2011/10/believing-in-happily-ever-after-part-4.html

There are now 7 parts to Believing In The Happily Ever After.

The Index post goes up on this blog Tuesday, November 8, 2016
The link will be
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/11/index-to-believing-in-happily-ever-after.html
Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Sunday, October 30, 2016

On Falsehoods

According to ZDNet, 90% of the so-called "Apple" products being sold on Amazon may be counterfeit products.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/how-to-avoid-buying-counterfeit-apple-cables-and-chargers/?ftag=TRE17cfd61&bhid=24357684409836269984444908372715

Buyer beware!

I cannot conceive of anyone launching a lawsuit against someone who gives them something for nothing, but nevertheless, the law firm of Manett Phelps & Phillips LLC has a blog well worth reading for authors contemplating making an ebook "permafree".

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=51b4ebf2-0160-4c8a-a898-950e75664ba2&utm_source=lexology+daily+newsfeed&utm_medium=html+email+-+body+-+general+section&utm_campaign=lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=lexology+daily+newsfeed+2016-10-13&utm_term=

The Manett Phelps & Phillips LLC blog is more obviously relevant to advertisements of the "Buy One Get A Second One Free" variety, especially where the advertisements do not tell the customer the original cost of one item (without the additional free one).

The bottom line: the regular price cannot be fictitious. A book should at some point have been --or be-- sold for something before the discount (to $ 0 ) is applied. For a book that has never been sold for a non-discounted price one should disclose something of the sort for example, "List price savings may not be based on actual sales".

The reason that consumer protection agencies may be increasingly interested in "sales" that last for 52 weeks or longer is because of the element of deception, the illusion of a bargain, the false sense of urgency created in the mind of the buyer.

For anyone interested in the pros and cons of "permafree" and how to fake out the system, the obvious place to check out is:

https://kdp.amazon.com/community/thread.jspa?threadID=219072&tstart=0&messageID=1053465#1053465

Above is the last page of the Amazon KDP Support forum thread.

https://kdp.amazon.com/community/thread.jspa?threadID=219072

And that is the first page.

For an older blog by Brian Cohen about permafree,
http://www.30daybooks.com/going-perma-free-my-reflections-after-100000-downloads-of-my-ebook/


Now for something completely different: beware of reTweeting or "sharing" other people's images.  A copyright owner might give a social media site permission to use an image, or perhaps they never did so. Just because it is possible to "share" something does not mean that it is legal to do so.

http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=2284dee5-438d-43d5-b81e-1b207050ecc8&utm_source=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed&utm_medium=HTML+email+-+Body+-+General+section&utm_campaign=Lexology+subscriber+daily+feed&utm_content=Lexology+Daily+Newsfeed+2016-10-24&utm_term=

Of course, the chance of getting into trouble is probably directly proportional to other people's perception of how deep your pockets might be.... but don't bank on it!

All the best,
Rowena Cherry



Thursday, October 27, 2016

Superstitions

Within the past week and a half or so, two people we were acquainted with (not closely) died. In accordance with the "bad things come in threes" rule, should I brace for hearing about another death in the near future? I don't really believe in that "rule," but. . . . How soon would it have to happen, to "count" as the last in a cluster of three? How well would we have to know the person? The human brain, being designed for pattern recognition, tends to stretch events to fit into patterns whenever feasible.

I admit I entertain superstitions that I recognize as such and don't truly believe in on an intellectual level—yet a certain degree of emotional belief lingers, even though I know it's irrational. I feel it's bad luck to talk too much about good fortune, because it might evaporate. I don't believe Divine Providence actually works like capricious deities in classical mythology. But I "knock on wood" anyway (usually on my own skull to indicate it's a joke). There are some cultures in which it's considered bad luck to praise a baby or small child, because the words might draw the attention of evil spirits or malicious fairies.

My stepmother tended to pronounce superstitious warnings on occasion, though I don't know how seriously she meant them. The one that struck me as strangest was "it's bad luck to open an umbrella in the house." Huh? You have to set up a wet umbrella in the open position, typically in a bathtub, so it can dry. I'd think a mildewed umbrella would be a worse outcome than hypothetical generalized bad luck.

In the U.S. black cats represent bad luck; in England they're good luck. So it all depends on your culture's point of view.

At the Maryland Renaissance Festival this fall, I attended a talk about early modern science, given by a man who portrayed a natural philosopher and alchemist of the sixteenth century. He told us comets were omens sent by God to warn us of coming disasters. Proof? Whenever you see a comet, something terrible happens soon afterward. Of course, terrible things happen in the world all the time, comet or no comet, so we can easily find a disaster to connect with the celestial omen. We are pattern-seeking creatures!

One thing that bugs me about lots of older science fiction set in the future is that many authors operated with the unquestioned assumption that beliefs in supernatural beings and phenomena would no longer exist. Scientific advances would cause the people of the future to outgrow that "irrational" mindset. DEEP SPACE NINE, I thought, handled the spiritual dimension much better than the original STAR TREK did. In DS9, religion played an important part in Bajoran society and in the lives of some of the characters, rather than the only "gods" being super-powerful aliens faking their divine status like Apollo in the original series. The transitions from hunter-gatherer cultures to agriculture to urbanization to the present Information Age haven't eradicated religion and superstition; why would a relatively minor innovation such as space travel (minor compared to the difference between the Paleolithic and today) cause these deep-rooted human tendencies to die out?

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Tuesday, October 25, 2016

Alien Sexuality Part 3 - Corporate Greed And The Sex Drive

Alien Sexuality
Part 3
Corporate Greed And The Sex Drive
by
Jacqueline Lichtenberg

Part 1 of this series on Alien Sexuality is
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/12/alien-sexuality-part-one-root-of-all.html

Part 1 is about the root of all conflict -- i.e. sexuality itself.

Part 2 is about the question, "What is Life?"
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/08/alien-sexuality-part-two-what-is-life.html
And this is Part Three about, "What is Power?"

A popular view of decision-makers who seem to have power over our lives and destiny is that they "give away" our jobs (or other rights or possessions) to people who do not use those assets to our advantage.  Corporate Greed, an easily observed phenomenon of everyday reality, has to be accounted for by Science Fiction Romance writers building an Alien culture.

Is every human who acquires Power necessarily Greedy?

Does Power create Greed?

Or is Greed just another innate trait of all humans?

If so, then could we say that the "impoverished workers" referred to in the quote here are not impoverished at all, certainly not by the business owners, but rather are simply Greedy themselves and "projecting" their inner trait onto prospective employers who refuse them jobs?

That would be a very dangerous thing to say, wouldn't it?

What would a powerful but non-Greedy Alien be like? Would such an Alien make a magnetic Love Interest for your Human Main Character?

How does a Powerful person react to being out-competed for a vital resource such as a job?  Are Powerful, Self-Confident people sore losers who are jealous and resentful of the winner's "good luck?"  Or is being a gracious loser the sign of a Powerful person?  What exactly is "power" when it comes to Human Personality and how does it manifest in Human society and economies?

We might view "Power" as the root of the sex drive itself.  Or we might see it as the main avenue of communication between Human and Alien, since "power" is a property of the physical universe we share with the Aliens.

We've talked a lot about how a writer can (and must) create verisimilitude in a novel's Worldbuilding or "background" as well as the "back story" of each Character -- the experiences that make the Characters see things and react emotionally to those things just exactly this way - and not that way.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2014/04/index-to-theme-worldbuilding.html
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2015/12/index-to-theme-plot-character.html
Given verisimilitude, a reader will be able to relate to the most Alien of aliens -- and even fall desperately in love with your Alien character.

The same aura of verisimilitude paints the villain or antagonist as so vile, so corrupt, so bigoted and hate-filled that the reader will become invested in watching the hero or protagonist conquer that villain, out-competing and humiliating the villain.  But what if the villain then takes that defeat (in the middle of the novel) with grace instead of jealous resentment?  Might the reader reconsider which Character is the Hero and which the Villain?

We have seen in Star Trek how a defeated Klingon warrior respects his conqueror without diminishing his own self-respect.  A job seeker out-competed by someone else who adopts the Klingon warrior's attitude might increase chances of being hired for an even better paying job where (plot twist) he/she meets a Soul Mate and lives Happily Ever After.

This dynamic of human relationships is one of the subtle aspects of our natural world that we use to draw readers into science fiction, and it works as a story springboard, too.  Story Springboards are the coiled Power beneath the opening line that propels the character into the adventure.  Defeat always reveals Character and engages reader sympathy.

Love At First Sight is a thematic element that works well as a Story Springboard.  The opening line can be something like, "The woman in the muddy wedding dress leaned against the door to my office and watched me stride down the hall toward her."

So suppose "I" am the alien version of a private detective and the office is on a Pirate Planet that hosts hundreds of space pirate operations, and "she" is a human woman who has escaped a forced marriage to some such Pirate and run for her life.

Pirate operations often grow to be giant international corporations, sometimes going legit as we have seen Organized Crime do.  Look at all the historical accounts of Robber Barons -- in USA History, we find many nefarious deeds building the fortunes of Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, et. al., - railroad fortunes, steel fortunes, - all high-tech exploits of their day.

Fortunes are rarely amassed "cleanly."  It does happen, and such stories are the source of great novels.  But it is rare in real life.

Why is that?  Why are fortunes associated with nefarious dealings or unethical use of force to "twist arms" or "buy politicians?"  Of course, also to own the police.

Is that tendency for nefarious deeds to found powerful fortunes an innate property of human nature, not to be found among Aliens?  Or is defiance of social norms necessary for economic success, thus the acquisition of the Power to deny certain people jobs?

Do humans need to see such a tendency in Aliens in order to fall in Love?  Is the Power to defy social norms sexy?  Are all great fortunes amassed by Bad Boys/Gals?

Bad-Gals are still very hot in 2016.
http://www.usanetwork.com/queenofthesouth

What is the primary substance of which Amassed Fortunes - giant corporations, multi-national banking, and shadow banking are formed?
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2014/09/reviews-10-shadow-banking-in-fantasy.html

And how can love conquer all that greed?

To find what readers need in order to immerse themselves in your fictional world, we have to look very closely at the similarities and differences between Love and Sex, between Kingship and Greed.

Yes, "Kingship" would be the opposite of Greed in the fictional worldbuilding paradigm.

We write a lot of romance novels using one or another theory of government by Aristocracy -- the "Duke" is one level of aristocracy that makes grand Romance, and there is a reason for that.

A Duke is one step below King, has a lot of power, land, money, and social influence, but not more than one man could plausibly handle.

A King has no strictures on implementing his whims, irritations, or outright hatreds.  Offend the King and it's "off with your head" if the particular man is incapable of handling Power.

"Power" of the political sort, not electrical, is one of those stripped back basic concepts that we might expect to be the same among Aliens as among humans.

What exactly is Power?

Quick Google search for "What is political power?" yields:

---------quote-----------
Political Power: Definition, Types & Sources - Video & Lesson ...
study.com/academy/lesson/political-power-definition-types-sources.html

Power is the ability to influence and direct the behavior of other people and guide the course and outcome of events. Authority means that an individual or group has the right to use power by making decisions, giving orders, and demanding obedience.
--------end quote-----------

Kingship bestows power and the authority to use it.

Dukes have power allocated by the King, and all the authority to use that power resides still with the King (of course, what the King doesn't know .... hmm).

What is Greed?

Google again yields:

---------quote--------
greed
ɡrēd/
noun
intense and selfish desire for something, especially wealth, power, or food.
synonyms: avarice, cupidity, acquisitiveness, covetousness, rapacity; More
--------end quote----------

And Google also yields:

------quote---------
Greed - definition of greed by The Free Dictionary
www.thefreedictionary.com/greed
greed. (grēd) An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth: "Many ... attach to competition the stigma of selfish greed" (Henry Fawcett).
------end quote---------

Other Google returns imply Greed is not a virtue, but a "dark" trait, explaining it as selfish (implying selfishness is "wrong" on some fundamental level.)

Would all Alien species among all the galaxies classify "greed" as "wrong" (morally wrong?)

Ayn Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged to redefine "selfish" as "Light" or as a Virtue that makes a human more valuable to a social unit by increasing the likelihood that the social unit would survive.

If the theories of evolution prevail, the traits that make social units more likely to survive are more likely to survive and become distributed.

Look around you. Do you see any lack of selfishness?  We have plenty of altruism, but we also have immense resources of selfishness.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/03/160318102101.htm
--------quote---------

Your brain might be hard-wired for altruism

Neuroscience research suggests an avenue for treating the empathically challenged

Date:
March 18, 2016
Source:
University of California - Los Angeles
Summary:
By temporarily inactivating a part of the brain involved in impulse-control, neuroscientists have discovered compelling evidence that we're hardwired for altruism. The discovery suggests possible avenues for treating the empathically challenged.
-----------end quote--------
And an older article:

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2014/08/human-altruism-traces-back-origins-humanity

Adulting is the acquisition of the judgement of when to use which trait, selfishness or altruism, to do what job.  Characterization is showing the reader which tool the Character chooses to do which job.

Humanity seems to be a breeding ground where selfishness thrives, so maybe you will also find it among Aliens.  Portraying some of your most dynamic Alien Characters as Selfish could provide your readers with a connecting point into your story.

Every society apparently needs some selfish individuals, but if all the individuals are nothing but always selfish, there will be no society at all.

Note the business owners who passed over some job applicants to take on the applicant who would work for less money were not seen as selfish by those who would work for less money.

Those business owners might have been seen as altruistic or generous by those who would work for less money, and thus the new hire would be grateful and put their heart and soul into the work.  And that might be why the business owner hired them - expecting loyalty and dedication.

As a Romance Writer, your most potent tool of Characterization is Point of View.  The same action seen from two different points of view can Characterize the Viewing Character more than it does the action or the actor.

So selfishness per se has to be an ingredient, not the dominant trait of your Aliens.  To seem human enough to be a Love Interest, the Aliens have to have some altruism, too.

What if "Greed" is not "Selfishness" so much as it is a malfunction of selfishness?

Note that the key definition quoted above uses qualitative words "excessive" "more than" and "needs or deserves."

What of the King, born and raised a Crown Prince, whose whole personality is built on the foundation of the indisputable fact that he he owns everything, even the people, that nothing he chooses to do is "excessive" and he does in fact "need" all that power because "the people" will misbehave if he allows them to have any power or self-determination?  What of the King knows for a fact that he, and only he, "deserves" this position?

That's not "selfish" but simple fact corroborated by the behavior of everyone around him, even those he abuses.  By our standards, it is abuse -- by his, it is not abuse because you can't trust people to behave properly.

Now, what if that King, who knows he deserves all he has, feels insecure?  What if he feels frightened that what he has might not be "enough?"

Or perhaps he feels "empty" inside, or any of the usual insecurities and depression that manifests (in humans) as an inability to feel pleasure from fine, subtle, quiet distinctions.  In other words, he's not happy and needs ever increasing stimuli to feel a distant twinge of pleasure.  The word for this is ennui.

Fear and/or ennui can unleash Greed, and such a King who has so very much "power" may go conquering other countries for the pleasure-hit from destroying "enemies."

The word neurosis is shunned these days, but it specifically describes this psychological condition.  Humans will grab for more and more of one thing in order to satisfy the need for something else entirely -- and then wonder why they don't get satisfaction.

For example, someone who feels unloved might eat more and more chocolate ice cream for solace, and still not feel loved and not feel relieved of that nagging need for love.  Modern psychology dislikes this explanation, but it works very well for fiction writers.  Readers understand Characters who behave this way because almost everyone has a few neuroses tucked away somewhere and live through obsessive/compulsive years now and again.

So we might redefine "greed" to be something our Aliens can relate to.

Greed builds when you want something, work hard and get it expecting acquisition or possession to produce pleasure -- and then you have it, but not the anticipated pleasure, or the pleasure lasts only a moment and ennui sets in again.

So having experienced a twinge of pleasure that faded, you go after MORE of whatever produced the twinge because it just felt so good.

See the pattern of addiction?

Pleasure producing drugs, or pain-relieving drugs, or any action or activity that produces pleasure or relieves pain can be addictive.

The familiarity with this Human tendency to be addicted to pleasure is one reason so many readers reject the plausibility of the Happily Ever After ending.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/06/theme-worldbuilding-integration-part-14.html

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/09/theme-worldbuilding-integration-part-16.html
Addiction means simply that it takes more of that thing to produce the same result.

Human pleasure nerve-responses are intensely desireable and intensely addictive.

The human nervous system is not designed to sustain pleasure at peak levels.  But that's what we imagine is the "right" condition or the ideal condition for living.  Something tells us that "happiness" is sustained peak-pleasure.  But it is not, and is not possible, therefore the Happily Ever After ending is not possible.

Yet, in truth, below peak levels of pleasure, we have contentment or even true "happily ever after."

Contentedness and happiness can be, for some people, sometimes, simply the absence of misery!

So look closely at these concepts among humans and think how they could function among Aliens.

Love and Sex: Kingship and Greed.

Remember from Astrology Just For Writers that Love is a manifestation of Venus while Romance manifests the character of Neptune.

Sex is the manifestation of Pluto (Power).  Pluto is about the power of regeneration, change, revolution (the battle across the generation gap).

Here's the index to the posts on Astrology Just For Writers
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/03/pausing-for-you-to-catch-up-with-me_30.html

Mars, the male principle, is War, and its "upper octave" is Pluto, Revolution.

Mars and Pluto represent two very different activities we lump under the heading sex.

We are seeing Pluto in today's mundane world as countries strive to redefine their borders (Brexit), whole new countries strive to form (ISIS), and political/social values contend for dominance (Pluto is dominance).

So, human society as seen through the lens of History, gives us what is called an "objective correlative" or a gateway through which readers walk into a story, put on the Main Character's suit of armor, and become the Human or Alien in the Romance.

Remember, the Romance Genre has the Master Theme that always must be acknowledged, "Love Conquers All."  That is the explanation of how and why such an absurdity as "Happily Ever After" can be plausible.

Alien Romance then has the master theme Love Conquers All Including The Species Gap.

When looking for the bridge to that species gap, search for the basic fabric of "reality" behind our modern world.  What properties of physics, math, chemistry, atoms, particles, waves, gravity -- the fabric of reality that Living Organisms organize -- what properties of reality create the human species AND the Alien species?

What do we have in common?  And in what do we differ?

One way to select a theme that can make answers to such questions plausible is to look closely at Economics (Capitalism vs. Socialism vs. Communism or some other ism) -- which is how we get food, clothing, shelter, and the excess energy to reproduce.

What is it about human nature that results in multi-national corporations? Why do such complex entities always stomp people into the ground like Kings stomped on peasants?

Also what is it about human nature that results in multi-national governments? At a certain size, governments become "multi-national" with as much concern for the vigor of other countries as for their own.  Sovereign Governments (Kingdoms) become inter-dependent.  Note how the U.N. has morphed and changed over its short lifetime.  And NAFTA and the EU might be viewed as in competition with the U.N. to gather all the Power over the world into one place.

This is mirrored in our everyday experience of modern life, as it becomes obvious that no mammoth fortune has been amassed by the efforts of just one person.

There is no way for one person, or a small group of people, to found a company, grow it to an international behemoth, and become billionaires without the infrastructure built by the blood-sweat-and-tears of thousands if not millions.

And if you think about it, the image, "We stand on the shoulders of giants," is appropriate.

It's not that modern fortunes, modern multinational corporations, were built on the blood-sweat-and-tears of you and me, of our contemporaries, of modern civilization.

Rather it is that our modern civilization was built by the lives and messy deaths of trillions of previous humans all the way back to conquering fire, creating a wheel and axil, deliberately planting food plants where you want to harvest them.

Indeed, we do stand on the shoulders of giants.  The phrase is explained here:

http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/268025.html

----------quote----------
The best-known use of this phrase was by Isaac Newton in a letter to his rival Robert Hooke, in 1676:

"What Descartes did was a good step. You have added much several ways, and especially in taking the colours of thin plates into philosophical consideration. If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants."

Newton didn't originate it though. The 12th century theologian and author John of Salisbury used a version of the phrase in a treatise on logic called Metalogicon, written in Latin in 1159. Translations of this difficult book are quite variable but the gist of what Salisbury said is:

"We are like dwarfs sitting on the shoulders of giants. We see more, and things that are more distant, than they did, not because our sight is superior or because we are taller than they, but because they raise us up, and by their great stature add to ours."

The phrase may even pre-date John of Salisbury, who was known to have adapted and refined the work of others.
-------end quote---------

Most entrepreneurs are well aware of how this process works.

This supports the idea that even if you create a civilization changing invention - Facebook,
https://www.yahoo.com/news/facebooks-political-influence-under-microscope-elections-rage-140839125--finance.html
a Smartphone, a cure for Cancer - and amass a giant fortune from the profits, that fortune is not "yours" because you made it by using the results of the work of others.

If you found  a transport company like FedEx or UPS, you don't "own" the resulting fortune because 'cars and trucks,' the fuel for the engines, the engineering, the roads they move on, the telecommunications used to arrange for things to go here and there, the  methods (RFID) of keeping track of what is where, are the only reason you were able to create that company.

Therefore, the proceeds of your creation do not all belong to you.

The reasoning is good, tight, and clear as the nose on your face.

You owe your success to 15,000 years of humans who went before, and to those now sweating for your success.

The Ph.D. degree is awarded to those who have increased Human knowledge, contributed something new.  We, each and every one of us, have to be the giants upon whose shoulders future generations will stand, produce the bits and pieces that they will assemble into something new - maybe First Contact with Aliens that does not start as a war of annihilation but a Romance.

What you owe to the work of others is as clear and obvious as the simple fact that the world is flat and if you sail off the edge, you will fall off.

We also know because it's obvious that stone is hard, matter is solid.

So any Alien species we run into among the stars will have a History of thinking that way, too.

And they will have a history of repudiating that kind of thinking.

Common sense is common, after all.  Matter is definitely solid.  Just smack your hand on the floor and see!

But we now know how matter is composed of particles, and it is mostly empty space with a certain probability that a particle might be there - or not.

Science Fiction writers make a profession of questioning common sense, finding ways around the obvious (you can't travel to the stars because it would take too long), and looking at the entirety of Creation from a non-human angle.  What if matter isn't solid?  We could walk through walls.

What if an amassed fortune actually does belong to the one who currently owns it?

This opens an entire dimension of Esoteric Wisdom that explores issues such as, "What exactly is ownership?"  But here we're looking at Greed - the overwhelming need to own, not the nature of ownership by itself.

What if certain CEO's actually do earn $10 million a year?

What if what they do is worth that much, while what you do for that corporation is actually only worth $25,000 a year.

$10 million a year isn't "wealth."

$10 million a year is not even just "Capital" as discussed here previously in Part 22 of Marketing Fiction In a Changing World on making a profit as a writer in a capitalist society:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/10/marketing-fiction-in-changing-world_11.html

 $10 million a year is "power."  A CEO or founder's profit is a nexus of Power.

A Billionaire is what used to be called a King.

Historically, a King got to be King by being the best killer in the vicinity, the best fighter, the one all the really good fighters wanted to fight with and behind.  The King-to-be was a "winner" -- a wielder of power.

When and where civilization crumbles to bits, we see the rise of "the strong man."  The tribal chieftain, the neighborhood Gang Boss, the swashbuckling Pirate Captain, the "Duke" staging a coups by marrying the Princess.  Take a look at the Balkans a few decades ago, or the Middle East today.

Aristocracy is the first structural organization you see in human society -- usually the relatives of the local King/Chief.  And then that King's appointees get to govern the areas the King conquers.

The USA was founded by people fed up with Aristocrats -- while modern France was founded by those who just beheaded all their entrenched Aristocrats.  Pretty much the same in Russia.  Our modern world is proud of having overthrown Aristocracy and become Democracy.  We are perhaps a bit too proud and too smug.

Science Fiction writers view such smug pride with askance.

What if only the titles have changed, not the distribution of Greed For Power among humans?

What if our modern CEO's commanding monstrously powerful fortunes are the same fraction of humanity that Kings were made of?

Kings often inherited their thrones -- but many Historical accounts indicate that the quality that makes a strong King (or a good King) is not inherited, of not for more than a generation or two.

Historically, and probably pre-Historically, Kings "rose" by killing their opposition (usually literally.)

Today's CEO's of giant corporations kill their way to the top with Character Assassination, stealing credit for the work of subordinates, sabotaging the work of superiors (or making them look so good that they "fail upwards.") and by out-competing them in any jousting contest in the corporate meeting room.

It is not a new thing that our "system" does not reward "goodness" or those of high moral conviction.  It is an old thing.  Very old.  Just go read the rest of the books of the Bible after Deuteronomy.

We didn't get rid of Kings and Aristocrats by getting rid of the Titles and Priveleges.

That personality type (in both male and female versions) has recreated its most comfortable world, shaped and reshaped society and industry as well as government to reward the Aristocrat and trash the rest of us.

The French Revolution was 1789-1799.

Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austin

The U.S. Book of Common Prayer

Common Sense by Thomas Paine (from loc.gov )
Published anonymously in Philadelphia in January 1776, Common Sense appeared at a time when both separation from Great Britain and reconciliation were being considered. Through simple rational arguments, Thomas Paine focused blame for colonial America’s troubles on the British king and pointed out the advantages of independence. With over half a million copies in twenty-five editions appearing throughout the colonies within the first year, this popular pamphlet helped to turn the tide of sentiment toward revolution.

It isn't the system, and it isn't the "ism" flavor of the generation - Capitalism, Socialism, Democracy or Republic - these are not imposed upon us, but rather crafted by the type of human that is "Aristocrat."

Maybe that's not true.  Framing the statement as a question to be a theme, you can generate a multitude of Aliens for various humans to fall in love with.

The commonality that these humans have with those aliens would be simply the existence of a "type" or "kind" of person who views themselves as an Aristocrat, and actually delivers the powerful counter-punches necessary to fight their way to the top, to amass so much wealth that it is raw Power.

There is the book I refer to here quite often, Rich Dad; Poor Dad.

This is the book that explains that rich families teach their children the difference between money and capital.

The assumption is that wealth only comes in Money and Capital.

Perhaps there is actually a third, completely separate, category of wealth: Power.

Power would be a vast multiple of Capital -- as instead of a gigabyte, we now measure Power of computers in Terabytes or Petabytes.

The Aristocratic family teaches their children the difference between Capital and Power.

If Aliens share the phenomenon of having a part of their population be Aristocrats, the Aliens, would understand that Aristocrats come in Good Guys and Bad Guys.

We generally define "Good Guys" as those who do not use their Power to infringe on the soveign Will of another Person.

Bad Guys amass Power to use Power to control the behavior of others, because "We know what's best for you!"

Good Guys know what's best for themselves, and consequently assume everyone else knows what's best for themselves, too.

Bad Guys know that what's best for themselves is not what's best for others but Bad Gys also know that others just don't know what's best because the others aren't "smart" (or whatever trait) enough to know.

So Bad Guys have a Greed is to "be Boss."  The only source of a pleasure hit is using Power to force others to obey.

Good Guys accept Power, and control their Power as a responsibility (Capricorn, Saturn).  Good Guys get their pleasure from spouse, children, siblings, art, beauty, even Nature, not from exercising Power over others.

Note no Historical Romance about Aristocrats is complete without the Drawing Room command performance scene, or the High Tea where the Female Lead plays an instrument or sings for the gathering.  Or perhaps it is a trip to the Opera, or taking on the duties of a Patron of the Arts, commissioning embellishments for the mansion.

The Aristocrats who are Good Guys love The Arts, and find real pleasure in music, dance, horseback riding competitions, etc.  Their pleasure seems phony to non-Aristocrats, but it is fulfilling to the Good Guy/Gal Aristocrat.

The Aristocrats who are Bad Guys love Gambling, Drinking, Whoring, and whatever sorts of drugs that are around their 'circle.'  Their pleasure requires ever greater stimulation to achieve.

There is a reason for that which you can use to build your Alien society and create an Alien Character your human would definitely fall in love with.

Good Guy Aristocrats are internally happy, satisfied, and at peace with themselves, even when their external lives are exploding with High Drama, overwhelming challenges and of course, Romance.

Bad Guy Aristocrats are internally miserable, dissatisfied, gripped by ennui and desperately addicted to pleasure, severely neurotic.

Neurosis doesn't make you Bad.  Good Guys are just as neurotic, but handle it better.

It is important to understand the difference between pleasure and happiness -- they are in fact often incompatible.  The children of Good Guy Aristocrats are taught that distinction the hard way, with pain and discipline, tears, and confessions and apologies.

Upbringing, as we've seen in Historical Romance novels, does not make Guys or Gals good or bad.

As depicted in many "fall in love with the bad boy from the other side of the tracks" Romances, Bad Guys can turn into Good Guys and vice-versa, if they don't Romeo&Juliet first.

Turning a Good Guy into a Bad Guy is called "corrupting."

Turning a Bad Guy into a Good Guy is called "saving" or "salvation."

Many grand novels have been written about both processes.  There wouldn't be so many such novels if there were no examples of this in "real life."

So we have a type of human (not genetically determined) that used to set themselves up as Aristocrats (the 1%, you understand, Kings and Dukes), or as they are termed in Werewolf Romance, the Alpha Male or Alpha Female of the pack.

We all know how hot and sexy the Alphas are, and we wouldn't be reading those books if we didn't understand the connection between sex and power (Pluto).

The Aristocrat comes in two distinct types, Good and Bad.  Individuals can switch sides.

As a whole, the Aristocrat type has recreated Society and our Economy to serve their competitive Power Hungry or Power Stewardship life paths.

The Aristocrats reformed the Economy and Society after we kicked them out of Government (The American Revolution, France, Russia, etc.).

The last vestige of Aristocrats in Government is the Constitutional Monarchy -- but there, the Monarch is basically the leader of the society, not of the Government.

If you build your Alien world's history on that pattern, you will grab your human readers with something they understand from personal experience, and it will seem plausible that a Romance could develop with these Aliens, a Romance that could Conquer the All of the War of the Worlds.

So now, in the 21st Century, we live in a world of giant multi-national corporations and giant multi-national Nations (Euro zone, NAFTA, a while ago the Soviet Union which seems to want to revive itself, and ISIS which sprawls wantonly across artificially created borders trying to re-create the Caliphate).  Even China, if you study history, is composed of small Kingdoms that were swallowed by an Emperor, and India likewise has its regions.  Britain itself is a composite of Kingdoms.

These first few years of the 21st Century is a World Epoch where Pluto is transiting Capricorn.

Capricorn is the Astrological Sign symbolizing 'governing" and thus "government."  It is ruled by Saturn, the power of regulation, the power behind the throne.  Capricorn is the Natural 10th House.

Pluto rules Scorpio, the Natural 8th House - Other People's Resources - thus sexual power.  It isn't "love" but "lust."  It is Power, Transformation, Change.  Pluto magnifies anything it touches.  Pluto signifies High Drama.

Here's High Drama:
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2010/01/astrology-just-for-writers-part-9-high.html

Here's You Can't Fight City Hall - on Pluto and political power
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2014/12/theme-symbolism-integration-part-1-you.html

And here's Would Aliens Share Human Fallacy and the Religious Impulse
http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/04/theme-plot-character-worldbuilding.html

So Pluto through Capricorn has stirred the World to re-create Governments and borders.  New countries will be born, new alliances, new tax structures. But first comes destruction.

It is interesting to note that the USA Natal Chart has Pluto in Capricorn -- we are such a Pluto-formed Nation created by Revolution.

The next President will preside over our first Pluto Return.  Pluto transits have the characteristic of dividing your life's memories into 'before' and 'after" -- such as "Before I met John, I didn't know what my life was about."

So Aristocrats create Countries ( a King-to-be rides around conquering then sets himself on a throne -- think King Arthur).  Aristocrats, the 1%, need to govern.  The Bad Guys want to govern others.  The Good Guys are happily ever after if they can just govern themselves.

We kicked the Aristocrats out of Government, so they went and created multi-national corporations, and whole social orders based on Foundations, Charities, and taking over Higher Education where they can be Kings and grant Dukedoms and Baronies.

Check the dates in this Chronology of Harvard University.
http://www.harvard.edu/about-harvard/harvard-glance/history/historical-facts
Because half of the Aristocrats (the Bad Guys) crave and lust after Power, and the other half wants to be sure the Bad Guys don't gain control of any Power that matters, the Aristocrats restructured the World Order to create many collection points for Power (thrones, as it were).

A throne is a nexus of Power, a single point where decisions are made that actually get carried out and implemented.

The nexus of Power at the center of a Corporation, or Social Organization (such as a Hollywood Star Performers and Celebrity of all sorts), attracts the new, young Aristocrat types like moths to a flame.

A youth Aristocrat recognizes where he/she belongs (on the Throne of Power), must get to, must be on that Throne in order to live.  Once glimpsed, a nexus of Power becomes irresistible to the Bad Guy Aristocrat and a Fate Worse Then Death But Nevertheless My Fate to the Good Guy Aristocrat.  Again, think King Arthur.

They grow through teens and twenties, striving and struggling to get to existing Power Points.  If they fail, they create their own brand new nexus of Power.

And how do you prevent Bad Guy Aristocrats from slipping into control at such a Nexus of Power?

What kind of pleasure seeking mechanism drives these people to sacrifice everything you and I value to get to such a nexus of Power (where you and I would be miserable)?

I figured that out for myself a few years ago when analyzing the Natal Charts of a whole lot of Politicians (we have had a lot of them running in the last 4 Presidential Election cycles - enough to make a generalization that is accurate enough for fiction, but not real life.)

What I have found is that they share the peculiar Astrological Natal Chart positioning of Pluto with emphasis on several key aspects and positions of other planets.  It was discussed in depth in an 800 page (small print) work on Astrology by Noel Tyl.  It is the signature of fame.

A few of these people with that signature of fame are either constantly or intermittently but frequently driven by Pluto making aspects by transit to key points in their Natal Charts.

Pluto, like all the transiting planets, the planets of this solar system, seems to symbolize both "Good" and "Bad."  Or in the parlance of Astrology, Vice and Virtue.

In Astrology, "Vice" doesn't mean like "gambling" -- it means that the particular symbol is not working well.  It lacks its natural power.  "Virtue" means the symbol is working at its best - all of its natural power is flowing smoothly into the person's life.

So Pluto at its best is Captain Kirk (the Captain's Chair is a nexus of Power) enforcing the Prime Directive -- with a bit of original twist.

Pluto at its worst is Captain Kirk being split into Good and Bad, and the Bad Captain drinking in Uhura's quarters soliciting sexual favors, hinting at doing so by force.

So what I found is that the driving force of the Aristocrat toward a nexus of Power is sexuality (not Love, and not Romance, an act of domination).

The Corporate Structure was created so there would be a nexus of power outside Government.  The combat to grab and hold that throne is driven by Pluto type sexuality -- not "Love" and not "Romance" but "Lust."

So what do we see our Celebrities do?  Behind every Celebrity success story is some kind of Sexual power-grab or misbehavior that you and I would never want to do.  If it's not sex, it's violence, and if not violence then some other kind of dominance game.

All of this misbehavior is "hidden" -- which is another signature of Pluto, the underground, "down" to Hell.  This is not the "unseen" of Neptune, a mystic Mystery, but the unseen of the foundation of a building, the underground sewers and power conduits, the dark of a coal mine -- the unseen upon which all else stands, the shoulders of giants long dead.

From time to time when the transits coincide just so, the hidden becomes revealed as the ground is turned over to plant a new crop. That ground breaking to plow and plant is Pluto in action.  First destruction, then growth.  Pluto turns over the ground and reveals you are planting on an old battlefield strewn with bones.

Note how Star Trek revealed Vulcan Sexuality as "hidden cyclical violence" tamed by telepathic Bonding (also invisible).  No Love involved with such a Consort.  Just sex.

So to create an Alien that readers can believe a Human can fall in love with, depict the Alien world in the same kind of overall struggle that humanity is in -- trying to figure out what to do with our Aristocrats, how to identify them before they do too much damage, and how to educate and train them to handle Power like Good Guy Aristocrats.

Is it only the Bad Guy Aristocrats that give us trouble?

Does Absolute Power (which is the goal) always Corrupt Absolutely?

Do we have better luck with Aristocrats who are raised to strict Noblesse Oblige standards?

We know that merely being rich-kids doesn't necessarily produce responsible Power handlers, though they may understand the difference between Capital and Money.  But does extreme poverty (or even just ordinary poverty) guarantee a kid will grow up to respect the power of Power and handle Power as a responsibility?  If the parents didn't know how to turn Capital into Power, how could they teach their children that?

Where do we get (or how do we make) Good Guy Aristocrats?

Will we meet up with Aliens who have figured out a way to use their Aristocrats, a way to either breed or raise Good Guy Aristocrats who don't need to get their pleasure from beating others down with their Power?

The Harry Potter Series explores a lot of these questions, which could be why it's so popular with this generation.  Harry himself is an Aristocrat of his kind and was raised enduring deprivation among those who have plenty.

Power, its use and abuse, is the central theme of life in this first part of the 21st Century.

We have massive power to destroy this planet with our industrial pollution, to pollute our very orbit with space-junk, to blow ourselves up with Nuclear Bombs.  Our civilization is a bunch of drunken teens playing with a bazooka.

So, what if Corporate Greed that we see running wild, tromping on the poorest among us, is not a function of "Corporations" or of "Capitalism" at all, but actually a manifestation of having thrown the Aristocrats out of Government so they can't be Kings and Queens?

If we cultivate the existence of a nexus of power, we have to expect it to attract Bad Guy Aristocrats who will seize Power.  Making sure there is no one person whose decisions are always implemented just leads to government by committee, which may be a bigger disaster. Hidden behind committees, the Aristocrats could get away with anything.

What if Aliens landed and just told us to put the Aristocrats back into Government where they belong so we can run our Corporations as they should be run?

What if they point to the secret flow of money from Corporations to the coffers of Politicians (personal and campaign) as an attempt by the Aristocrats to grab the Throne of Government back from us peasants?

If you can't make sure there is no nexus of Power in Government, then how do you find a Good Guy Aristocrat, and make sure that Government Power doesn't corrupt him?

Yes, we do things like Term Limits, and other jiggering and tweaking, but it does not seem to help much.

How do you raise a Human to be Incorruptible by Power?

What if the Aliens land and offer to sort out our young Aristocrats and take them off to their world to raise them properly, then return them to take over every nexus of power and manage it carefully and properly?

Who among us would endorse such a move?  Who would give up a kid, this one but not his brother, that one but not her sister, kids the Aliens select, and send them off to be fostered by Aliens?

And what if such a human kid fell in love with an Alien?

What if the "Alpha Male" phenomenon, the Aristocrat, turns out to be genetic?

None of our historical record indicates that it is.  Kids go awry.  Aristocracy does not breed true.

What if the Aliens know what's gone wrong with humans that half of one percent own everything?

Maybe the fostering deal is only for one generation and the Aliens intend to tweak our genetic makeup so that our 1% Aristocrats breed true, and always turn out Good Guy Aristocrats.

Meanwhile, the genetics of the rest of us are to be altered so we never produce Aristocrats.  How long could civilization as we know it survive without any Aristocrats?  If we get our Aristocrats back and they breed true, how long until we kill them all?

Of course it would take a good while for Aliens to raise a generation for us while we no longer breed Aristocrats.  But we need good managers and innovators, we need that rare 1% .

So meanwhile humanity creates A.I. managers who can't be corrupted by the Power they manage, but of course can be hacked.

What would returning, well trained Aristocrat kids now all grown up, do about our A.I. problem?

You see?  If you understand the origin and function of Corporate Greed, and the nature of the Giants upon whose shoulders our Aristocrats stand, and the kind of sexuality that powers that Greed (and what that sexuality would be if manifested as a virtue not a vice) - then you can build a world for an Alien Romance that would be as absorbing as the Potterverse has been.

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com

Sunday, October 23, 2016

Creepy IP for Halloween, Maria P. Goes ...Bumped Into The Night

Look out for the #CreepyIP  hashtag. Anticipating Halloween, the USPTO publishes an entertaining and edifying blog about all the Intellectual Property and copyrights on display during Halloween (in the candies, costumes, decorations, tools and gadgets.

https://www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2016/10/when-patents-and-trademarks-go-bump-night

Perhaps you might like to join the conversation?

Something else, prematurely went "bump into the night" and gave some imaginative and creative people a case of the horrors.  On Friday October 21st, Maria Pallante, the Register of Copyrights who has been a courageous and outspoken advocate for creators, authors, artists and musicians, was "bumped upstairs" and allegedly deprived of internet access to the Library of Congress computer system, according to two sources who spoke with Library employees.

https://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2016/16-189.html

And
https://artistrightswatch.com/2016/10/22/google-fires-head-of-u-s-copyright-office/

Why, though? The Trichordist has some thoughts
https://thetrichordist.com/2016/10/21/google-and-public-knowledge-coup-register-of-copyrights-fired-dark-days-ahead/

According to Billboard
http://www.billboard.com/articles/business/7549978/maria-pallante-removed-us-register-of-copyrights

"US Register of Copyrights Maria Pallante was removed from her job Friday morning (Oct 21) by the Librarian of Congress, Carla Hayden, who has authority over the Copyright Office...."

It is interesting to reflect on who supports Carla Hayden. Alleged P2P Pirates!
https://thetrichordist.com/2016/02/28/former-director-of-p2p-piracy-alliance-endorses-nominee-to-oversee-copyright-office/

To this author, it seems strange that businesses that consider music, movies, books, photographs, and games "content" and that publish and distribute and monetize other peoples' intellectual property ... often without the copyright owners' affirmative consent should have any influence on the  Copyright Office and the Register of Copyrights.  But, that's the current Administration for you. It's not likely to change in the next 4 years.

Buy stock in Google and Amazon.... and get some cool and creepy disguises for Halloween and the dark days ahead.

All the best,
Rowena Cherry






Thursday, October 20, 2016

Timeless

Have you checked out the new TV series TIMELESS? So far, three episodes have aired. The intended appeal to the audience, I suppose, is that the characters visit a different point in history every week and have breathtaking adventures. The premise: The antagonist, Flynn, has stolen the prototype time machine for the purpose of changing the past—why, we don't know yet. The three heroes—a female history professor (devoted primarily to preserving the timeline as we know it), a soldier (tasked mainly with eliminating Flynn), and the engineer who's the main inventor of the time machine—pursue Flynn in a second time machine that fortunately happens to be available. The jumping to different dates in the past recalls QUANTUM LEAP, which is credited as one of the inspirations for TIMELESS. The heroes' chasing after a villain in a time machine brings to mind the movie TIME AFTER TIME, in which H. G. Wells travels to our present to catch Jack the Ripper.

What I like about the series so far is that it makes some serious attempt to deal with the risks of changing history. In QUANTUM LEAP, Sam usually had to "set right what once went wrong" in the lives of individuals, not on a broader historical level. One exception was his interference in Kennedy's assassination. From the audience's viewpoint, Sam failed; JFK still died. In the universe of the TV program, however, Sam at least succeeded in saving Jackie Kennedy, slain in their original timeline. In TIMELESS, the first three episodes take the heroes to the Hindenburg disaster, the assassination of Lincoln, and a day in 1962 in Las Vegas, where Flynn plots to steal the core of a nuclear weapon from the nearby atomic testing facility. Because one of the Hindenburg passengers who should have died survives, the history professor's ancestry changes; she returns to the present to find her dying mother in perfect health—but her sister erased from existence. In the nineteenth century, she fights the temptation to try preventing Lincoln's death. History does change, though, in that John Wilkes Booth doesn't kill the President; Flynn does. You'd think the murder of Lincoln by an unidentified assassin with an unknown model of gun would leave a conspicuous trace on the timeline, but no change in the status of the twenty-first century is mentioned when the heroes return to the present. So the show's attention to problems of altering history is selective—not surprisingly, since their main objective is suspenseful entertainment, not cerebral SF. Still, it will be interesting to see how they grapple with such problems in the future. The history professor wants to protect the timeline. The soldier wants only to eliminate the threat of Flynn by any means necessary. As for the African American inventor/pilot of the time machine, if left to his own devices he would try to change history for the better in some cases (he was in favor of saving Lincoln).

It appears that each episode will pose its own challenge for the heroes—thwarting whatever Flynn's goal for that particular visit to the past—and meanwhile contribute to the solution of the long-term story arc problem: Why is Flynn trying to change the timeline? So far, we've had only cryptic hints. What disaster could he be trying to prevent that would justify wreaking havoc on history as we know it?

The history professor plays the role held by the generic "scientist" in many TV programs and movies. Any scientist (e.g. the Professor on GILLIGAN'S ISLAND, the type TVTropes.org calls the Omnidisciplinary Scientist) is assumed for story purposes to have expertise in any field the plot requires, regardless of his nominal specialty. I'm not sure whether TIMELESS has mentioned what historical era the professor in this series specializes in, but she seems to know everything about every date they've landed in so far. And it's not as if the time travelers get long periods of respite between trips to do research. She even knows the name of one of Kennedy's mistresses who acted as a liaison between JFK and the Mafia in 1962. The audience just has to suspend disbelief in the breadth of the character's knowledge and go along for the ride (so to speak).

For a thrilling, ingenious story of an attempt to "fix" the past that makes things much worse, read Stephen King's 11-22-63, his novel about a time traveler trying to stop Kennedy's assassination. This book's theory of time travel has a twist I've never seen anywhere else: Every trip back through the portal (no matter who does it) resets the past to the default timeline. Pro, you can keep trying until you get it right; con, you have to start from scratch with every foray.

Margaret L. Carter

Carter's Crypt

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Dialogue Part 10 - The Silent Dialogue from Rude To Ridiculous

Dialogue
Part 10
The Silent Dialogue from Rude To Ridiculous 

Previous parts in the Dialogue series are indexed here:

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2012/10/dialogue-parts-1-4-listed.html

We have discussed Edward T. Hall's book on cultural anthropology titled The Silent Language which examines cultures and body language, personal "space" and many other topics, most notably how "culture" resides in the subconscious mind.

https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Language-Anchor-Books/dp/0385055498/







And more recently The Silent Language of Leaders: How Body Language Can Help--or Hurt--How You Lead Kindle Edition by Carol Kinsey Goman

This book shows how being viewed as a Leader today depends entirely on body language, and believe it or not, how you hold your hand and fingers when you gesture!

https://www.amazon.com/Silent-Language-Leaders-Help---Hurt--How-ebook/dp/B004SQS6SK/

This SILENT LANGUAGE OF LEADERS is based on neuroscience, which you'd think would be independent of Culture.  But I'd challenge that idea since it has been shown how plastic the human brain is, and how configurable the human genome is.  Traumatic and other meaningful experiences in early life can re-arrange your genes and brain synapses so you develop propensities and abilities different from your peers who did not have such experiences.

Yet, humans tend to gravitate toward and organize around a certain type of other human -- and today we call them "Leaders."  A science fiction writer can challenge that notion, too.  Some Aliens somewhere out there might call those central poles of organization Servants.  Think about that.  We look up to Leaders.  Aliens might look down on them as the British Aristocracy looked down on Tradesmen.

How you regard others, how you sort and group others by the traits you see in them is configured by your Culture.  The very definitions of "Good" and "Bad" have huge Cultural components.  And Culture is silent.  Very silent. Non-verbal.

Most people don't know they have a "culture" or think the word "Culture" means polite or upper crust or high class, or maybe taste.

"Culture" is mostly non-verbal.

Most people can't verbalize the shattering revulsion experienced when they unexpectedly meet up with someone who is extremely rude.  They merely judge that person as an intrinsically bad person, not to be associated with.

Other people will view rudeness as if the miscreant were well aware of the proper way to act, but has decided to play the buffoon, the clown, or the disruptor.

One thing most humans do, though, is judge others by their behavior, their language, body language, choice of words (such as invective or 4-syllable-jaw-breakers), and perhaps most of all tone of voice.

All of these parameters are strictly dictated by culture.

Each combination of variables conveys a non-verbal message which is nevertheless dialogue, speech, communication.

Two (or more) people communicate on many levels besides words.

Text narrative fiction writers are hampered by this, while stage and screen actors can creatively and originally invent many unique characters all speaking the same text words.

Text narrative writers can "describe" their Character's actions, but can capture the "style" and thus meaning of the body language only by offering an interpretation of the movement, telling rather than showing what the Character is silently saying.

Readers will read the interpretation and visualize different movements that mean what the writer has told them the Character means.  The reader will make up the appearance and movements of the Character according to the reader's culture, or according to the reader's notion of different cultures.

For example, the most eloquent move a Character can make is the SHRUG.

There is the Italian shrug, the Arabic shrug, the Mexican shrug, the teenage defiant shrug, the Southern shrug -- the one shoulder shrug, the both shoulders to the ears shrug, etc. etc.  All that doesn't even mention what you do with your hands while you silently deny all knowledge of the subject with a shrug or declare in no uncertain terms that the entire topic is irrelevant with a passive-aggressive assumption of superiority.

By and large, in USA cultures (there are a lot of them!) the shrug is considered rude, especially when it conveys that the topic is irrelevant or unimportant.  Teens are excoriated searingly for shrugging to wriggle out of parental interrogations.

Have you ever seen a presenter in a business meeting shrug when the boss asks a question?  Maybe after the meeting, when a peer asks, but not during a meeting when the boss asks.

Have you ever seen a Presidential Candidate at a podium before a large audience shrug?

OK, *shrug* -- we have had a lot of actors, performers of considerable skill, running for President, so maybe you've caught one or two shrugging for effect, but not when attempting to project an "image of strength."

In some USA cultures, various shrug-motions are acceptable statements, while others are rude.  In other USA cultures, all shrugs are rude.

Another form of culturally nuanced "speech" that can not be captured well in cold text (but that actors can convey in full video) is impatience.

Most of the situations where a writer wants to show a Character being impatient will read as the Character being "weak" or "temperamental" and thus not fit to lead or command, or have their opinion on anything respected.

"Impatience" is considered a Character flaw revealing the flaw of "Bad Judgement."

Judgement is the ability to process vast amounts of apparently trivial data to understand the nature of the problem and find the most efficient way to vanquish that problem, never breaking stride toward the objective.

Deciding "what to do" is just as vital to success as "when to do it."  As in comedy, timing is everything.

So those who are seen to be acting correctly, but acting too soon, are seen as "impatient" which makes them just as untrustworthy as those who act too late, or take ineffective action, "too little; too late."

How a given Character is assessed by the Reader depends as much or more on the Reader's culture as it does on how the Character is written or played.

Extend that to how a human reader of today would assess the Character of an Alien, and whether the Alien is seen as "impatient" and thus weak or ineffectual, or as "decisive" and strong.

Does America admire swift action over minimalist action?

Does America admire swift action over effective action?

"America" -- the middle-of-the-road average is the biggest audience a writer can strive to reach.  This is true in other countries, too -- the average, middle-road citizen is comprehensible to both extremes.  Where exactly that middle is varies from generation to generation and among countries and cultures.

At this time, there is no "American" or USA culture, singular and distinct with rules of Silent Dialogue uniformly distributed.  Even by geography we are not a uniform country. Some areas still retain Character, but in any area of the USA you will find individuals from elsewhere diluting the average.

We are a mixed-muddle, so no generalization will hold.

If your Alien crash lands in a backyard in Texas, he might knock on the door (if his culture would include the idea that requesting entry is polite -- it might NOT consider a knock as polite).  The Texas resident opening that door might be from New York.

You know the expression, "In a New York Minute."  People move faster in New York City -- not so much upstate.

So are New Yorkers "impatient?"  Slow-speaking Southerners think so, and many consider it a character flaw to be racing around so fast all the time.

But New Yorkers see their lives as a race.  Early bird gets the worm.  Whoever is first in line, gets, and others do not.  You want the job? Get to the interview early.  Even doctor's offices have been known to post signs that if you are 15 minutes late, you will be charged for the visit but will not see the doctor.  

The USA was built on many ideas, but one most often quoted (because it's so alien to the denizens of other countries) is TIME IS MONEY.

In other words, time is a commodity.

See the post on Capitalism and how Money can be a commodity just like copyrights can be a commodity.

http://aliendjinnromances.blogspot.com/2016/10/marketing-fiction-in-changing-world_11.html
Time is another property of reality that can be regarded as a commodity and commoditized.

Perhaps Capitalism should not be called Capitalism -- as noted, that is a misnomer -- but rather Commoditism, a process of turning the characteristic properties of reality into trade-goods.

We are seeing physics breach the frontiers of the space-time-continuum, discovering the Higgs Boson and chasing "gravity waves."  Black Holes and Dark Matter  all trying to get a handle on the nature of Time.

Is Time Travel possible?  Is Interstellar travel (or intergalactic) possible?

These are the substance of modern science fiction while fantasy genres explore alternate universes and dimensions where "magic" works and mythical creatures are real.

In our Silent Dialogue we use Time to tell others who we are.  How fast you respond to a comment or question, how slowly you move to comply with a request or order, speaks volumes about who you are, who you think you are, and who you think you are relative to everyone else.

For example, if you keep people waiting for you -- say, the family is piling into the car to go see a movie, or guests are gathered in the living room waiting to sit down to dinner -- and you just do not show up "on time" (how early or late you can be and still be 'on time' is a mathematical formula!), you are informing all those people that you and your interests and affairs are more important than their time.

In some cultures, an explanation is due upon arrival, and it better show that your priorities are the same as the priorities of those you kept waiting.  In other cultures, any explanation is viewed as an "excuse."

The maxim is never make excuses and never apologize if you want to be respected.

In yet other cultures, following that maxim, or indeed any maxim, is viewed as indication of a weak character.

What might "time" be worth to Aliens on some other planet?

How would Aliens prioritize life-minutes?  Who keeps who waiting?

Is there some property of objective Reality that dictates cultural attitudes toward Time, or toward another individual's life-minute?

Today, the USA thinks of those who wait as less important than those who keep others waiting.

For example, a crowd gathers to hear a Presidential Candidate speak, and the Candidate is scheduled to speak at 7:30.  The TV cameras light up, the Security folks are their toes, and ten minutes after the appointed moment, a tech comes out and adjusts the microphone -- but no candidate, nothing.

Well, it must be he/she is doing something Important because being The Candidate is Important -- but the audience is not that Important.

Is this cultural value the only possible value?  Is this inherent in just being human?

Not necessarily.  Aliens might look at the entire procedure very differently, as indeed humans have, in other cultures Historically.

For example, you would think the High Priest working in the Temple in Jerusalem would have been regarded as an Important person doing Important things.

The people who gathered to watch, or to hear the High Priest read from the Torah on Yom Kippur, might be viewed by today's Americans as "less important" than the High Priest.  Yet, in that Historic time, there was a hard and fast rule saying the High Priest, no matter what, must not keep the public waiting.  Their "time" was important, too, and it was his duty to discharge his duties in the expected time-interval.

Today that translates into a set of Rules regarding the conduct of prayer services.  There are sections of Prayer which are flagged "Must Not Interrupt" -- if you are in the middle of such a section, and something happens demanding attention, you must first finish the section.  These section demarcations are carefully observed.

HOWEVER, if it should happen that the congregation has gathered and is ready for a section that is to be led by a Reader with specific skills (such as reading aloud from the Torah), or for example, the blowing of the Shofar (the ram's horn), and the ONLY member of the congregation with that skill is in the middle of such a section that must not be interrupted -- then the individual must interrupt that prayer-section and go immediately to serve the congregation with his skill.

The congregation must never be kept waiting, not a New York Minute!

The High Priest or an individual gifted with talent and skill serves the public without delay.  That "without delay" rule indicates something basic about the structure of Reality, while the "keep them waiting" rule used by public speakers today violates the strictures of Reality.  (small wonder things aren't working too smoothly)

We can only infer what that Structure of Reality might be.

We use our cultural prejudices to make that inference.

For example, we might infer that because "The High Priest" is not "more important" than "The Public" (because he can't keep the public waiting) therefore "The Public" is more important than the "High Priest."

But that would be a reasonable inference only if "important" and "more important" is part of the reality matrix.  Perhaps no ONE human is "more important" than another, so that since the High Priest is only one person, and the crowd of The Public is lots of people, the crowd is "more important?"  Or maybe "important" can not be attributed to a mortal being? Perhaps deeds can be "important" if performed at a certain time, but people don't have the attribute "important?"

Leaders, bosses, decision-makers whose decisions must be implemented, holders and wielders of "Power" are nothing but servants of The Public.  There deeds of service are important.  They, themselves, are not.

Aliens might look at it that way.

As writers, trying to create plausible Aliens, we have to be aware of all the ways different human cultures have viewed that objective Structure of Reality, the dimension of Time.

For example, the Navajo saw Time in a very different way than the settlers of the Old West, which led to a lot of scorn and uncooperativeness on both sides.  "Lazy Indians?"  Far, far from it!  But they wouldn't show up for work "on time" or get the job done by "quitting time."  Unemployable, lazy good-for-nothings -- right?

So given the panoply of views among just one species, humans, imagine how Aliens would see Time -- and consequently how they would "speak" in their "Silent Dialogue."

Music and dance are forms of communication stretched along linear Time.

Music, we define as Sound. But maybe it can be Silent?

Dance, is movement usually to a rhythm, but even a drumbeat can be silent, just a Conductor waving his/her hands.

As Media Announcers learn to speak in a "tune" and cadence that just reeks "newscaster" or whatever role they are playing, so too do humans speak in tune and accompany the articulated sound with eye-blinks, hip-shifts, shoulder-shrugs, lip-twitches, and a thousand tiny movements that others respond to.

"Friends" move together when speaking -- eye-blinks synchronize -- and thus friends acquire the feeling that the other person understands them as no one else does.

It is a well documented feature of human communication, something we do entirely unconsciously.  It is possible that the aversion some people feel to communicating even via video chat is due to a failure to synchronize body language.  It's not "real" if you can't sit with a person, face to face, and assess them by how well and quickly they synchronize with you.

But what if Aliens felt threatened by the human unconscious tendency to "mirror" twitches and fidgets?  What if, to the Aliens, this involuntary movement was not fraught with deepest meaning, as it is with humans?

Perhaps the British "upper crust" trained not to fidget in earliest youth, to keep that "stiff upper lip" were favored over Americans?  For that matter, the inscrutable Japanese and Chinese cultural facial non-expression might be preferred - but even they blink their eyes.

How do you assess (judge) a person who fails to "synchronize" with you?  Can you have a meaningful conversation with someone who zigs when you expect them to zag?

How many of your limited life-minutes would you spend/waste on who keeps you waiting, who won't synchronize eye-blinks, who can't dance with you?

What would your Main Character make of such an Alien?  How could the communications breakthrough to save Humanity be made with no words to speak?

And of course, there's assessing whether the Alien is lying to you, saying the correct words but telegraphing an opposite meaning -- not just failing to communicate but mis-communicating.  What do you report to your boss when asked what's "really" going on?

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://jacquelinelichtenberg.com