TOFU is REAL!

My editor just sent me the first of the finished, finalized, hardcover versions of TOFU AND T.REX! It turned out great -- the cover has this nice three-dimensional effect. And, of course, the text is sublime :-).

Available in stores this July...along with the softcover of NINJAS, PIRANHAS, AND GALILEO.

Numbers game...

Number of Ph.Ds in physics awarded each year in the US: 1,350
Number of Ph.Ds in chemistry awarded each year in the US: 2,200
Number of Ph.Ds in psychology awarded each year in the US: 4,500

Total number of science and engineering Ph.Ds awarded each year in US: 25,000
Total number of non-science and engineering related Ph.Ds awarded each year in US: 15,000

Total number of Ph.Ds awarded each year in the US: 40,000

Total Number of current holders of bachelors and higher in science and engineering: 10,500,000

Total Number of NFL players: 1,700
Total Number of MLB players: 1,200
Total Number of NBA players: 410

Picture book!

Cyn and I just got the contract for a new picture book - our first joint work! Check out Cyn's blog for more info.!

Channeling your inner child

More thoughts for beginning novelists.

What distinguishes a children's or YA novel from an "adult" novel?

No, I'm not getting all metaphysical here.

But the answer to this question often underpins many questions I get at beginning writers conferences, or among non-writer laypeople: Do you have to "dumb down" the vocabulary? The plots are simpler, right? You can't actually address any kind of sophisticated theme, can you? (If there was any doubt, the answer to these questions is emphatically "no.")

To me, perhaps the fundamental definition of children's literature is that it's literature – stories -- about a child or teen character. From this fundamental (and obvious) beginning, a couple things follow.

First, the child has to solve his own problem. It is for this reason that "normal" parents are conspicuous by their absence in children's literature: if the parents solved the problem, there would be no conflict and hence no story.

Second, the child character's epiphany must evolve naturally through him and his experiences in the book. Otherwise, the character does not change and grow. If the character does not change and grow, he seems less like a real person.

A corollary to this is that the epiphany usually should not be "I guess mom and/or dad were right after all." (To me, this is only slightly less annoying than "And then I woke up.") While such a theme can be done artfully, when this is the epiphany, the reader generally feels cheated because the thing mom and/or dad were right about has usually been presented on page two – if that's all that was going on in the novel, why bother reading? Note that I am not saying that mom and/or dad cannot in fact be right (at least occasionally), just that the child's recognition of their correctness should not be the focus and/or reason for the novel.

Third, and closely related, is that children's literature is about story. It is not about The Lesson. (The Sermon on the Mount has already been written and written far better than you will ever do). While there may be things -– important things -- that the reader will learn and leave with, this should not be the focus of the novel, any more than it is for "adult" literature.

Fourth, remember that the typical child reader is not an idiot – he is not less smart than your average adult reader, he is merely inexperienced. And sometimes, that lack of experience can drive the conflict.

How to do all this? Easy. Channel your inner child. Do not channel your child (or more precisely, how you think or would like your child to behave under these circumstances. You're probably wrong, anyway.).

Your. Inner. Child.

Think of all those things you did and never told your parents about.

Think of all those things you did and don't want your kids to find out about.

That's your inner child.

Reading in the Garden

Yesterday, Cyn and I had the pleasure of speaking at Earning by Learning of Dallas's "Reading in the Garden" event at the Dallas Arboretum.

We had a great time at a great venue. The kids (and adults) were engaged and laughed in all the right places :-). Also there was a cellist from the Dallas Youth Symphony playing excerpts from the Bach Unaccompanied Cello Suites (which, of course, feature prominently in Ninjas, Piranhas, and Galileo).

"Reality" TV

Since "Angel" and "Buffy" went off the air, I haven't been watching much television. However, a couple weeks ago, I had the opportunity to watch a number of the reality TV shows. Herewith, my observations:

American Idol: Some of the singing was good; most was just passable (these are the finalists?) and the attempts to build up suspense were tedious. I can't help thinking that the show would be enormously better if they ditched all three of those annoying panelists and brought back Ed McMahon and the "spokesmodel" category.

The Apprentice: I only caught the last half of this, with its trademark "You're fired!" delivered from behind this enormous conference table in a darkened chamber. This had something to do with putting together an ad campaign for Buick. Or maybe Pontiac. Again, the attempt to build up suspense was tedious. I'm also a little confused -- didn't Trump make his fortune in casinos and real estate? What does he know about automobiles?

Simple Life: I think that's its name; the one with the descendant of hotelier Conrad Hilton in it. Boy, is he rolling in his grave. Absolutely unspeakable.

The Amazing Race: Probably the only one of the above lot I'd not get up off the couch to change the channel for if, heaven forbid, it happened to be on. Visually interesting in a travelogue kind of way.

MTV's Real World/Road Rules gladiator-type whatever: A lot like Battle of the Network Stars, only instead of, well, network stars, these twenty-something folks apparently used to be on either Real World or Road Rules. Also, they all live together and wear a lot of lycra.

Extreme Makeover - Home Edition: Probably the only one that doesn't have a tawdry or mean-spirited premise. They re-build a house for some deserving family. In one week. The host really needs to cut back on the caffeine, though.

Iron Chef America: Not bad, but lacking much of the charm of the original.

The Bachelor: The unspeakable in pursuit of...well, never mind.

Supernanny: You can discipline your child, but only if someone with an English accent tells you it's okay.

Schoolhouse Rock...not made in the EU

Readers of a certain age will know the words to the Preamble of the U.S. Constitution, not because of a particularly good civics education, but because of the television program "Schoolhouse Rock," which provided various "lessons" set to music and played during Saturday morning cartoons in the 70s and 80s:


We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Various European states are in the process of considering whether to adopt a Constitution. Its Preamble follows:

HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF THE BELGIANS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF DENMARK, THE PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE HELLENIC REPUBLIC, HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF SPAIN, THE PRESIDENT OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF IRELAND, THE PRESIDENT OF THE ITALIAN REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF CYPRUS, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA, HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS THE GRAND DUKE OF LUXEMBOURG, THE PARLIAMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF HUNGARY, THE PRESIDENT OF MALTA, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE NETHERLANDS, THE FEDERAL PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF POLAND, THE PRESIDENT OF THE PORTUGUESE REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA, THE PRESIDENT OF THE SLOVAK REPUBLIC, THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF FINLAND, THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN, HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND,

Drawing inspiration from the cultural, religious and humanist inheritance of Europe, from which developed the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, democracy, equality, freedom and the rule of law, Believing that Europe, reunited after bitter experiences, intends to continue along the path of civilisation, progress and prosperity, for the good of all its inhabitants, including the weakest and most deprived; that it wishes to remain a continent open to culture, learning and social progress; and that it wishes to deepen the democratic and transparent nature of its public life, and to strive for peace, justice and solidarity throughout the world, Convinced that, while remaining proud of their own national identities and history, the peoples of Europe are determined to transcend their ancient divisions and, united ever more closely, to forge a
common destiny, Convinced that, thus "united in its diversity", Europe offers them the best chance of pursuing, with due regard for the rights of each individual and in awareness of their responsibilities towards future
generations and the Earth, the great venture which makes of it a special area of human hope, Determined to continue the work accomplished within the framework of the Treaties establishing the European Communities and the Treaty on European Union, by ensuring the continuity of the Community acquis, Grateful to the members of the European Convention for having prepared the draft of this Constitution on behalf of the citizens and States of Europe, Have designated as their plenipotentiaries:

(list...)

Who, having exchanged their full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed as follows:



I'm almost positive that no work containing the word "plenipotentiaries" has ever been set to music.

Sometimes the obvious works...

Consider the following:

A football playbook is, apparently, a volume of some complexity. (Non-sports fans, please refrain from snickering -- no, of course it's not as complex as, say, your average calculus text, but when was the last time you had to integrate a function while a metric ton worth of linemen were barreling at you?). Somewhat analagous to choreography, it (the playbook) requires the players to memorize and know by name a variety of plays, which describe actions including who needs to be where when such that the ball can most effectively be transmitted (by them) into the opposing end zone for a touchdown.

Recall now the 1985 Chicago Bears, coached by Mike Ditka. In addition to making effective use of the talents of Walter Payton, somewhere along the line, Ditka got the idea of giving the ball to the biggest guy on the field, William "The Refrigerator" Perry. For doing what everyone who has ever touched a football knows, Ditka was lauded as a genius.

They won the SuperBowl.

So, next time you have a block in your writing, whether writers' block or you can't quite figure out a logic problem in your plot, do what Ditka did. Go back to basics. Consider the obvious.

Spring cleaning.

"Have nothing in your house that is not useful or beautiful."

Thus spake (possibly a paraphrase) Gustav Stickley, he of the arts-and-crafts movement, that was a reaction against Victorian decorative excesses (in my view, justifiably).

Nevertheless, Gustav's pithy bromide could probably use a little editing or, perhaps, lawyering up. "Useful" is self-explanatory, I suppose and in perfect keeping with the arts-and-crafts philosophy. "Beautiful" is also fine, except, well, it's too big a loophole and therefore can lead to inconsistency with the Gustav philosophy and lots of stuff being left out on display or at least not behind glass. Beauty, of course, is in the eye of the beholder and it is entirely possible that someone could think that a room filled with useless trinkets and gewgaws was beautiful. Or worse, useful things used only for display – this would include, say, unread books that are used to simply occupy shelf space or a baby grand piano so covered in Precious Moments figurines that the keyboard cannot be accessed (In case you were wondering, the piano is the useful thing).

Now, the obvious thing is to edit the quote so that it reads "Have nothing in your home that is not useful and beautiful." While this closes the loophole, it perhaps raises the bar a bit too high and requires more than casual analysis.

Therefore, let me propose this, with all due respect to Gustav: Have nothing in your house that is not useful or meaningful.

Why "useful or meaningful"?

Because it implies that everything in the house that must be dusted or cleaned (or moved to provide access to something else that must be dusted or cleaned) is there for a reason unique to the homeowner, and that it has meaning beyond its intrinsic aesthetic qualities.

Further, it provides that your dwelling will look like you; it will reflect your interests, and not some design "vision" that has all the individuality of a hotel lobby.

It also provides a sensible ground rule when undertaking your spring cleaning: If you cannot identify what use an object is or what an object means to you, then it should go. Give it to the Salvation Army or sell it in a garage sale.

Am I missing something?

On one of my procrastinatory meanderings about the Internet, I came across a reference to a referendum soon to be held in Arizona. If passed, it will require that at least 65% of the operating budget of any school district be spent on "in the classroom" activities. (The national average is apparently something on the order of 61% - the difference amounts to billions that, it is said, could be spent on teacher salaries.). An organization called "First Class Education" is apparently behind this.

Since I do not intend this to be a political blog, I decline to say whether I think this specific policy implementation is a good idea. One thing, however, particularly struck me as being a bit odd. The First Class Education web site describes what it considers to be an "in the classroom activity," which they claim is based on some definition provided by the National Center for Education Statistics:

The National Center for Educational Statistics definition of “in the classroom spending” appears below. Generally, if the expenditure has to do with direct instruction of students in any form, from learning to read a book, read music, read Braille, to learning to read a football pass protection pattern, the expenditure is counted as being an “in the classroom” expense.

“In the Classroom”
Classroom Teachers, Personnel
General Instruction Supplies
Instructional Aides
Activities -- Field Trip, Athletics, Music, Arts
Tuition Paid to Out-of State Districts &
Private Institutions for Special Needs Students

"Outside the Classroom”
Administration
Plant Operations & Maintenance
Student Support -- Nurses, Counselors
Food Services
Instructional Support including Librarians
Teacher Training & Curriculum
Transportation

Note the highlighted portions.

Huh? Libraries aren't "in the classroom," but sports are?! Other than phys. ed., aren't "athletics" universally considered an extracurricular activity?