Twice now I’ve missed the anniversary of this blog. My inaugural post appeared on June 17, 2007. (That’s one day after Bloomsday. Maybe I can use that to remember my own blog’s birthday.) Last year, I didn’t post about the anniversary until July 4. I just forgot. This year I had an excuse. I was away and my access to a computer was limited to a few minutes twice a week, but I missed it just the same. And though this time I’m not writing about it as late as July 4, I’m close.
When I inaugurated the blog in 2007, I had only a very general idea what I would do with it. Two years later, that hasn’t changed. And you know what, I like it that way. Not everything in life has to be planned or even known. A little room for discovery and surprise are good, don’t you think?
It’s the same with novels. I started writing one in February of last year and had only a general idea what it would be about. Since then, I’ve revised and rewritten it several times. Yet it’s only now that the narrative arc is becoming clear to me. By focusing on the beginning, the rest of the story has acquired a clarity it did not have before. Long walks and long trips are very good for thinking through problems like that. Perhaps I could have avoided this had I outlined the novel before writing. Yet the idea of outlining seems to me anathema to creative writing. You wake before sunrise and sit down alone at a desk to discover something, not just to execute it. It’s thrilling when your own book becomes something you didn’t know or even expect. It’s an emotion that long outlasts the novelty of the discovery. It’s the pay-off.
I do want to thank everyone who has contributed here with comments. And through the blog, I have met and made some friends in places as far from Miami as Europe and Asia. That alone makes blogging a happy endeavor.
So here’s to another year. Who knows what will come of it.
Hurricane season starts today, which means that we can look forward to another round of dumb reporters blown away live on television, like this –
It also means that the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Climate Prediction Center (the “Center”) has released their prediction of the number of named storms, hurricanes, and major hurricanes they expect to form in the North Atlantic before the conclusion of this season on November 30, 2009.
In 2009, the Center is predicting 9-14 named storms, with 4-7 becoming hurricanes, and 1-3 of these becoming major hurricanes.
We won’t be able to tell how accurate this prediction is until the end of the year, once the season is over. But if past predictions are any indication, I choose to remain skeptical. Let’s look at the past five years, from 2004 through 2008, inclusive.
2008
In 2008, the Center predicted 12-16 named storms, with 6-9 becoming hurricanes, and 2-5 of these becoming major hurricanes.
The records for 2008 show that there were 16 named storms, with 8 becoming hurricanes, and 5 of these (Bertha, Gustav, Ike, Omar, Paloma) becoming major hurricanes.
All three categories (named storms, hurricanes, and major hurricanes) came within the margin of predicted storms, even if they did so at the upper end of that margin. OK, three out of three. Not bad.
2007
In 2007, the Center predicted “a very high likelihood of an above-normal hurricane season,” with 13-17 named storms, 7-10 becoming hurricanes, and 3-5 of these becoming major hurricanes.
The records for 2007 show that there were 15 named storms, with 6 becoming hurricanes, and 2 of these (Dean, Felix) becoming major hurricanes.
While the number of named storms came perfectly within the margin, the number of hurricanes was less than the lowest number predicted, as was the number of major hurricanes. One out of three is not good.
2006
In 2006, the Center predicted a “very active 2006 season,” with 13-16 named storms, 8-10 of these becoming hurricanes, and 4-6 of these becoming major hurricanes.
The records for 2006 show that there were 9 “named storms” (10 tropical storms), with 5 becoming hurricanes, and 2 of these (Gordon, Helene) becoming major hurricanes.
Here, the Center over-predicted the number of all three categories by a substantial margin. Zero out of three is even worse.
2005
In 2005, the Center predicted 12-15 tropical storms, with 7-9 becoming hurricanes, and 3-5 of these becoming major hurricanes.
The records for 2005 show that there were 27 tropical storms, with 15 becoming hurricanes, and 6 of these (Dennis, Emily, Katrina, Maria, Rita, Wilma) becoming major hurricanes.
It’s pretty obvious that 2005 was likely the Center’s worst year for the accuracy of their predictions. The number of tropical storms was 180% of the predicted number, the number of hurricanes 167%, and the number of major hurricanes 120%. Zero out of three.
2004
In 2004, the Center predicted 12-15 tropical storms, with 6-8 becoming hurricanes, and 2-4 of these becoming major hurricanes.
The records for 2004 show that there were 14 tropical storms, with 9 becoming hurricanes, and 4 of these (Charley, Frances, Ivan, Karl) becoming major hurricanes.
Not a bad year, especially when compared with 2005, but not stellar either. While the number of tropical storms was within the margin predicted, the number of hurricanes exceeded the predicted number and the number of major hurricanes fell in the margin at the upper limit. Two out of three.
What do we make of these predictions? They would be no more than a curiosity for the average person, except for the fact that insurance companies use these predictions to set premiums for any area that could be affected by a North Atlantic hurricane. If you have ever suspected that writing insurance policies is nothing more than legalized gambling, a racket where the insurer finds “objective” justifications to raise premiums before the fact and byzantine clauses to deny coverage afterward, these yearly climate predictions are something else to think about.
Image: Hurricane Wilma crosses Florida, GOES satellite (October 2005); Sources: all data obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Climate Prediction Center website and the National Hurricane Center website (accessed June 1, 2009)
William Styron, author of Lie Down in Darkness, The Confessions of Nat Turner, and Sophie’s Choice, died in 2006. His heirs have put the house in Roxbury, Connecticut where he and his wife lived for sale. The house was built in 1850. Styron and his wife bought it in 1954 and lived there for over fifty years.
The house sits on 4.7 acres, has 4,600 square feet, five bedrooms, a guest house, pool, and a pond with a waterfall. The asking price is USD 2.2 million.
The real estate agents handling the sale describe the house –
This spectacular 1850’s estate was the home of Pulitzer Prize winning author William Styron for over 55 years. Styron was best known for writing Sophie’s Choice. Roxbury is a well-known artist’s colony. The home features 5 bedrooms, a finished attic, several offices, a great room with wet bar and large fireplace and several stone terraces. The property is bordered on 2 sides by land trust and includes a guesthouse, pool, tennis court, pond with waterfall, magnificent antique trees and mature landscaping.
Photos: William Styron, House for Sale, raveis.com; Source: Sara Lin, “William Styron’s Home Offered for $2.2 Million,” Wall Street Journal (May 22, 2009), raveis.com
In an earlier post, I published a quote from Montaigne that I thought was “answered” by Yeats 300 years later, as if the two had been engaged in a conversation. Then I did the same thing, only with two writers who were contemporaries from neighboring countries and spoke the same language. The late Argentine writer, Julio Cortázar, seemed to be wondering aloud about a writer’s obligation to be a social or political activist, followed by Chilean writer and filmmaker, Alberto Fuguet’s “answer” that it was no longer the case for younger writers.
This time, I’ve once again chosen two writers who are contemporaries, both born in 1938, in different countries and who work in two different languages. Yet when they talk about the source of novels, that place where “long narratives” are born, they seem to be in agreement, even using language that is uncannily alike. First up is Peruvian writer, Mario Vargas Llosa [the translation to English is mine, though I have re-arranged the order of his answers for the sake of clarity] –
Al empezar una obra, tengo “una inquietud, un desasosiego respecto de un personaje o una situación.” Tomo “pequeñas” notas, esquelas y trayectorias “sin estar seguro” de qué voy a escribir. “Al inicio siempre voy a tientas. Con algunos libros me ha pasado que he trabajado uno o dos años sin tener claro cuál iba ser la historia final. […] Hasta que de pronto todo eso empieza a ponerse en marcha y empiezo a escribir, pero sin saber al principio a dónde voy.”
***
At the beginning of a work, I have “an uncertainty, a curiosity about a character or a situation.” I write “little” notes, sketches and story lines “without being sure” what I am going to write about. “At the beginning I always feel my way around. I have worked one or two years on some books without being clear about the final story. […] Until, suddenly, everything clicks together and I start to write, but without knowing at first where I am going.”
Here’s DeLillo –
“That’s how you write novels actually. You suddenly hit upon something and you realize this is the path you were meant to take. You’d be a fool if you didn’t follow it. Perhaps it’s like solving a difficult question in pure mathematics. There must be a moment when the solution is so simple and evident that you wonder why you hadn’t come upon it before. When you do come upon it, you know it in the deepest part of your being. It carries its own logic.”
I hope this serves as a lesson to all those procrastinators out there who think they must first have their novels outlined perfectly, like the final plans to an unborn city, before sitting down to write.
Photos: Mario Vargas Llosa, Don DeLillo; Sources: “Vargas Llosa dice que su obra de ficción parte de incertidumbre y desasosiego,” El nuevo Herald (Feb. 8, 2009), at 11-B, John Wilde, “The Day John Kennedy Died,” Melody Maker (Nov. 19, 1988), at 52-53 (quoting Don DeLillo on writing novels), http://www.perival.com/delillo/ddinterviews.html
In an earlier post, I published a quote from Montaigne that I thought was “answered” by Yeats 300 years later, as if the two had been engaged in a conversation. Let’s try this again, only with a shorter time span and two participants from neighboring countries who spoke the same language.
Here is the late Julio Cortázar’s protagonist in his short story, “Apocalípsis en Solentiname” (Apocalypse in Solentiname) published in 1978. The protagonist is a writer on tour, Cortázar himself, who is weary of the press asking him the same questions, one of which has to do with a writer’s commitment to politics, activism, to bringing about change in his society. [The translations from Spanish to English are mine] –
“¿Te parece que el escritor tiene que estar comprometido?”
***
“Do you think that a writer must be committed?”
Here is the “answer” by Chilean writer, Alberto Fuguet, from the Preface to the collection of stories, McOndo (1996) –
“Si hace unos años la disyuntiva del escritor joven estaba entre tomar el lápiz o la carabina, ahora parece que lo más angustiante para escribir es elegir entre Windows 95 o Macintosh.”
***
“If years ago the young writer had to choose between grabbing a pencil or a carbine, now it seems like his toughest decision before writing is choosing between Windows 95 and Macintosh.”
I take it as a sign of maturity that this generation of writers in Latin America, a group that includes Jorge Volpi of Mexico, Edmundo Paz Soldán of Bolivia, Santiago Gamboa of Colombia, and others can be full-time writers and not part-time activists. The latter, I suspect, are neither very effective as activists nor much good as writers either.
I have also written about this younger generation of Latin American writers here.
Photos: Julio Cortázar, Alberto Fuguet; Sources: Julio Cortázar, “Apocalípsis en Solentiname” in Alguien que anda por ahí (1978), at 79, Alberto Fuguet and Sergio Gómez, eds., McOndo (1996), at 13
No, not chicken…raspberries. Scientists using radio astronomy to look for amino acids (the “building blocks of life”) in a giant cloud at the center of the Milky Way detected instead the presence of ethyl formate, the chemical that gives raspberries their flavor. No word yet on whether they found any whipped cream to go with that.
If eating a scoop of raspberry-flavored star dust sounds good, you had better hurry. Another group of scientists have recalculated the speeds at which the Milky Way and our neighboring galaxy, Andromeda, are heading toward colliding with each other and it’s a lot faster than they originally thought. Scientists now calculate that the great smash up will occur in seven billion years, which is about the same time our sun will burn out of fuel and make our planet uninhabitable.
None of this matters, though, as our friends at the CERN Hadron collider have been working hard to get their machine back on line this summer. As we reported earlier, the machine is a 17-mile tunnel within which two streams of protons will be shot from opposite directions until they collide. The results of those collisions may reproduce conditions shortly after the Big Bang. A minority fear that the collisions will create infinitesimally small black holes that will balloon to swallow up the earth bringing with it the end of the world and much of our planetary neighborhood. On September 10, 2008, scientists flipped the switch on the machine. A few days later, they had to turn it off because it had a problem with the cooling system. The best estimates have it that they will not be finished with the repairs until June 2009, which is less than two months away. No one knows what it is like to be sucked through a black hole, but odds are that it won’t taste like raspberries and cream.
Sources: “Astronomers find Milky Way ‘could taste of raspberries,” The Telegraph (Apr. 21, 2009)(accessed Apr. 22, 2009) and Chris Irvine, “Milky Way and Andromeda will collide sooner than expected,” The Telegraph (Feb. 4, 2009)(accessed Apr. 22, 2009)
A Mississippi woman was shot in the forehead by her husband with a .38 caliber handgun. Although confused about what had happened, she survived and welcomed the police officer answering the call by offering to make him a cup of tea –
[Jackson County, Mississippi] Sheriff Mike Byrd said: “When the officer got there she said, ‘What’s going on?’ She was holding a rag on her head and talking. She was conscious, but she was confused about what had happened.
“She had made herself some tea and offered the officer something to drink.”
The bullet passed between the left and right hemispheres without causing major damage before exiting through the back of her skull.
The woman’s husband had been on probation for domestic violence when officers tried to serve him with a court order to stay away from her and her home. Angry at the order, he went to her home, shot her square in the forehead, then shot himself. She survived. He did not.
Source: “Woman makes cup of tea after being shot in head,” The Telegraph (Apr. 19, 2009)(accessed Apr. 21, 2009)
I’m working hard, going through a last revision of the novel, so I have to put off blogging for a couple of weeks, probably until March. Wish me luck.
Update March 19, 2009: Thank you, gracias, merci, for all the good wishes! Writing a novel is like solving an algebraic equation — if you change the value of one side of the equation, you have to change the value of the other side. If you move a scene from one part of the book to another, it changes a lot of other scenes. Novels are not modular in the sense that you can move scenes around, unplug them from one place to plug them in somewhere else. The more organic the structure of the novel, the harder it is to move things around. I don’t agree with Aristotle about the necessity of reversal, but I do agree with him on one thing — the necessity of the unities. I’ll stop here before I start sounding like a zen master who has had a little too much sake.
The point is: I am close to the end of these revisions. After that, I will probably go to sleep for a week somewhere in the middle of nowhere before I return to civilization. (There is a phrase in Spanish that is roughly equivalent to “the middle of nowhere.” It is “donde el diablo dió tres gritos y nadie lo oyó” and it translates as, “where the devil yelled three times and no one heard him.” Now that’s remote.)
I do want to thank everyone for the public and private messages of support. Writing this novel is still the hardest thing I have ever done. I’ve learned a lot from doing it. And I have learned what I am not going to do when I write the next book. All of it I will report when I come back on line soon.
Update March 27, 2009: I can see the end in sight.
Update March 28, 2009:FINISHED! More on this after I sleep for a few days.
Previously, I posted about the danger of the CERN Hadron collider accidentally creating a black hole that would swallow first Switzerland, then the rest of the earth. The event, if it were to occur, could presumably look like this –
The good news is that when scientists threw the switch, back in September, there was a problem with one of the cooling units and they had to turn it off again. Instead of the machine coming on line in December 2008, oblivion was postponed until January 2009, which is when they estimated they could get a repairman to come fix it. (My previous posts on the travails of the CERN Hadron collider are here and here).
Well, there’s more good news. It seems that it will now take even longer, perhaps until June 2009, before they can fix the cooling system and throw the switch a second time. From a CERN press release about the repairs –
The initial malfunction was caused by a faulty electrical connection between two of the accelerator’s magnets. This resulted in mechanical damage and release of helium from the magnet cold mass into the tunnel. Proper safety procedures were in force, the safety systems performed as expected, and no one was put at risk.
Detailed studies of the malfunction have allowed the LHC’s engineers to identify means of preventing a similar incident from reoccurring in the future, and to design new protection systems for the machine. A total of 53 magnet units have to be removed from the tunnel for cleaning or repair, of these, 28 have already been brought to the surface and the first two replacement units have been installed in the tunnel. The current schedule foresees the final magnet being reinstalled by the end of March 2009, with the LHC being cold and ready for powering tests by the end of June 2009.
I know the CERN people mean well. I know the idea behind the press release is to tell the world that they have a handle on things, but reading it makes me wonder if they know what they are doing. An electrical short causes the cooling system to break down and their solution is to dismantle half the machine. What started as a problem with two magnets ended up requiring the replacement of 53 magnets. Everyone knows that when you have a problem with a refrigerator, you call the Maytag repairman, not some guy who looks like Dr. Evil.
versus
In any case, they won’t try to throw the switch on oblivion again for a few more months, so relax. Enjoy. Everything is under control.
Source: “LHC to restart in 2009,” CERN Press Release (Dec. 5, 2008)
versus 