Search Results

Introduction One of the most common pieces of writing advice is deceptively simple: Write what you know. For many writers, that means drawing from real life. We borrow mannerisms from friends. We "steal" snippets of conversation overheard in coffee shops. We build characters from old teachers, former coworkers, difficult relatives, and people we met exactly once but never forgot. Reality is often where fiction begins. The problem is that reality doesn't always stay in the background. At some point, nearly every writer hears a version of the same question: "Is this storyline about [redacted person]?" In Euphoria Season 2, Episode 7 ("The Theater and Its Double"), Lexi Howard directs a provocative, highly unauthorized autobiographical play called Our Life. The production famously causes explosive drama among her friends when they realize it satirizes their personal lives. Sometimes the answer is no. Sometimes it's complicated. Sometimes the writer suddenly realizes that the character they thought was fictional may be far more recognizable than they intended. This is where discussions of libel usually begins. Fortunately, most fiction writers will never face a libel claim. So I ask you, dear reader: How close is “inspired by” allowed to get before it becomes legally risky? Table of the Contents Introduction Section 1: What Libel Actually Means for Fiction Writers Section 2: Identification (or The “Invisible Name Tag” Problem) Section 3: “It’s Fiction” Is Not a Shield Section 4: The Amplifiers of Accusation Section 5: The Fiction Writer's Best Defense Conclusion Section 1: What Libel Actually Means for Fiction Writers Libel is a written false statement that harms someone's reputation. It's different from slander in that slander is about spoken false statements that harm someone's reputation. For fiction writers, three ideas matter most: Identification: Can someone reasonably identify the real person? Defamation: Does the portrayal harm reputation? Falsity: Would readers interpret the portrayal as describing real facts about that person? Notice what's missing from that list: intent. A writer can genuinely believe they have created a fictional character and still find themselves facing questions about whether a real person is recognizable on the page. Fiction is not automatically protected simply because "it is fiction." The question is not whether you intended to write about a real person. The question is whether or not readers think you did. The original "Burn Book" is a handmade prop from the 2004 teen comedy, Mean Girls, filled with rumors and insults about students and faculty. It's filled with libelous statements. Section 2: Identification (or The “Invisible Name Tag” Problem) By all means, stay true to the source. My whole brand is about getting those authentic details for your stories. The danger zone here isn't about realism. Libel for fiction writers is about traceability. Most writers assume identification requires a name. Nope! A character becomes “identifiable” and "traceable" when multiple anchors align: Job + location + timeline match a real person Unique quirks (speech patterns, habits, backstory) Social network overlap (“everyone in that circle knows”) Imagine a novel set in a small town. One character is: The only veterinarian in town Known for raising alpacas Recently divorced Ran unsuccessfully for city council Writers often focus on obvious identifiers while overlooking the cumulative effect of smaller details. A profession might not identify someone. A profession plus a location might. Then add a timeline, a personal habit, and a recognizable life event? Suddenly the character begins to point toward a specific individual. For example: "Character A": Works at a specific small-town newspaper Recently divorced Known for a specific catchphrase or behavior Even if unnamed, readers in that community may directly map it to a real journalist. And the argument of "nobody outside of my town will know" fall flat when the audience that matters is a workplace, church, school, or local community. Not the general public. "Character B": Works as the only pediatric nurse practitioner in a mid-sized suburban clinic Known for never taking lunch breaks and eating granola bars while charting Drives a distinctive bright yellow compact car with a bumper sticker about books Recently involved in a public workplace conflict over scheduling changes Even without a name, coworkers, patients, or parents in that clinic’s orbit could quickly narrow this down to one person if the combination is distinctive enough in their shared environment. "Character C": High school theater director in a small school district Famous for insisting every production include at least one “unexpected” casting choice Always ends rehearsal by clapping twice and saying the same short phrase Previously directed a regional competition-winning musical that local news covered Lives in the same town where they teach and often appears at school events outside work hours Here, identification becomes even easier because multiple public-facing touchpoints (school + media coverage + repeated behavioral pattern) reinforce the real-world mapping effect. Problems tend to arise when writers stop collecting details and start reconstructing individuals. One is inspiration. The other is replication. Think of identification less as a single clue and more as a constellation. One star means very little, but ✩₊⁺⋆₊✧ enough stars arranged in a pattern becomes an unmistakable correlation. ✩₊⁺⋆₊✧ Section 3: “It’s Fiction” Is Not a Shield Disclaimers don’t override identifiability. I dearly adore fanfic writers and YouTube essayists and all that they do but "no copyright infringement intended💚" carries quite literally no legal weight. I have some thoughts on working some witchcraft for your writing but, under no circumstances, is "Under U.S. copyright law, fair use is an exception to the exclusive rights held by a copyright owner. It allows limited use of copyrighted material without permission in certain contexts, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research. Whether a specific use qualifies as fair use is determined on a case-by-case basis by weighing several factors. These include the purpose and character of the use, such as whether it is commercial or nonprofit educational; the nature of the copyrighted work itself; the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the whole work; and the effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the original work. Importantly, the fact that a work is unpublished does not automatically prevent a finding of fair use, but it is still considered as part of the overall evaluation of these factors." a protective spell. Disclaimers can communicate intent, but they don't erase recognizability. "Any resemblance to actual persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental." is seen in many upon many books. However, if readers can reasonably identify a real person and believe the story is making unfair factual claims about them, the disclaimer is unlikely to be the deciding factor. The same principle applies outside the manuscript. Authors occasionally strengthen identification without realizing it through interviews, social media posts, newsletter updates, or conversations at events. The more a writer publicly discusses who inspired a character, the easier it may become for readers to connect the dots. There are a few well-known cases where authors have effectively “collapsed the distance” between fiction and real-life inspiration through interviews, essays, or public commentary—sometimes intentionally, sometimes not. Let's consider The Devil Wears Prada by Lauren Weisberger. While the novel is fictionalized, readers and critics quickly noticed strong parallels between the character Miranda Priestly and Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour. At first, the connection was mostly speculative, grounded in the author’s former role and the novel’s detailed depiction of a demanding fashion magazine environment. However, in interviews and public commentary, Weisberger and others associated with the story acknowledged aspects of real-life inspiration, reinforcing what audiences already suspected. Over time, those remarks (combined with widely discussed similarities between real and fictional figures) helped solidify the association in public perception, contributing to debate about how closely fictional characters can resemble real individuals without explicitly naming them. More over, the more a story is “sold” as inspired by reality, the less protective the fiction label becomes. Gossip Girl blasts from the TV Show Gossip Girl regularly published defamatory reputational claims of high schoolers and beyond. Section 4: The Amplifiers of Accusation Not every recognizable character creates problems. Even Anna Wintour can get a laugh out of her role of inspiring The Devil Wears Prada. To say, "it's fine because it's true," isn't true. Truth can be a defense against libel, but rumors, assumptions, and personal memories are not the same thing as verifiable facts. Risk generally rises when fiction attributes serious wrongdoing or serious falsities to someone that readers can identify. Examples might include: Corruption or bribery (especially in public office or corporate leadership) Sexual misconduct (beyond harassment, including coercion or assault allegations) Discrimination or hate-based behavior (racism, sexism, antisemitism, etc.) Financial crimes beyond fraud (embezzlement, money laundering, insider trading) Endangerment or negligence (causing harm through reckless professional conduct) Abuse of power or authority (misuse of institutional position for personal gain) Sabotage or intentional wrongdoing in a workplace or organization Treason or betrayal of an organization, state, or group Cover-ups or obstruction of justice (hiding wrongdoing or interfering with investigations) False medical or scientific conduct (misdiagnosis, falsified research, unethical experimentation) Blackmail or coercion Exploitation (financial, emotional, or professional exploitation of others) Criminal conspiracy or association with criminal networks Perjury or lying under oath (or implied dishonesty in formal settings) Substance abuse portrayed in a way that implies real-life irresponsibility in professional contexts Once a reader successfully maps a fictional character onto a real individual, the interpretive process can shift from “this is inspired by” to “this is revealing.” At that point, narrative details are often re-read as evidentiary rather than imaginative. Even elements that were originally intended as exaggeration, thematic symbolism, or composite construction may be retrospectively treated as disclosures about the real person’s behavior or character. This can lead to a form of “confirmation bias reading,” where readers selectively interpret ambiguous or general traits as supporting evidence of a pre-existing identification. Once the mental link is established, neutral or fictionalized behaviors in the text may be reframed as indirect admissions, while coincidences are treated as corroboration rather than chance or genre convention. In more extreme cases, readers may begin to treat the fictional work itself as a semi-documentary source, attributing higher credibility to the narrative than to any disclaimers, interviews, or authorial intent. This is especially likely when the author has discussed inspiration publicly, because even vague acknowledgments can be reinterpreted as partial confirmation of all inferred details. As a result, the boundary between narrative construction and perceived factual reporting becomes unstable: the story is no longer read purely as fiction, but as a coded account of real-world conduct, with readers effectively “upgrading” implication into perceived fact. Section 5: The Fiction Writer's Best Defense The safest and most creatively rewarding approach (preferably before publication) is often one in the same: 📣📢CHANGE IT📢📣 Get those creatives juices flowing again, friend. Edit the architecture of the character. Instead of building a character from one person, build them from two—three—five! Learn from different personalities and introduce different traits. Change their occupation. Their partner's type. Explore more of the earth and move the story setting elsewhere! Change the order of events.** **Caveat to the instructions: Your mileage will vary. If it's a workplace romance, probably don't change the job. If it's based on a historical location, keep the story there and change other things. If the timeline super duper matters, throw things off with other tactics. You'll ultimately want to ask yourself these three questions: Could someone who knows the real person recognize them in this character? Could a stranger reasonably infer this character is based on a specific real person? Does the character contain any direct real-world anchors (name, job, place, timeline, or anecdote) that point to one identifiable individual? Do multiple details combine into a traceable match to a specific real person or incident? And if the answers to all four are NO, you're generally in the clear from a recognizability standpoint. (This is where I disclose that I am not a legal advisor 😬) And look at the silver lining: a transformed character can become stronger because of this care!! A copied person is limited by reality. You spin the tale of your character and can reach no bounds. (!!) Don't hide your source material. That's not what this is about. The goal is to create something new enough that the source material no longer matters. The above photos are from Degrassi's version of Facebook called Facerange. The platform was often used to spread libel Conclusion Fiction doesn’t get into trouble for being inspired by reality. The trouble starts when reality is still intact on the page. Writers often worry that changing too much will make a story feel less authentic. In practice, the opposite is usually true: Observation creates the authority but it's the writer's transformation of what is observed that creates such lovely fiction. The details we collect from the real world are valuable because they help us understand how people speak, work, grieve, celebrate, avoid questions, tell stories, and otherwise reveal themselves. But our job as writers is not to reproduce those people exactly as we found them. We must build something new from what we've learned. You want a transformation of reality instead of a roadmap that points back to it. When a character can no longer be reliably reverse-engineered into a single person, when their traits no longer converge into a recognizable silhouette, they become fully fictional in the only way that matters for writers: independent, self-contained, and no longer dependent on their origin story. Don't disguise what's real, rebuild the reality entirely and the character becomes free. Legally safer. Narratively stronger. No longer tethered to the logic of any one life. Able to behave in ways that real people rarely can, or would. It becomes something that only exists because you rebuilt it. How thrilling, Katherine Arkady

Introduction Coming from the age of watching Gossip Girl, 90210, and The O.C. while in my formative years, I love a good tale where rich people have too much time on their hands and not enough morals to mind their business. So when Cruel Intentions was announced, I was all about it. The premise of Cruel Intentions has been rebooted, reimagined, and retooled plenty of times. This series has been in the works for a very long time. According to the 2024 series' Wikipedia page: "The series, set in a Washington, D.C., college among rich students, follows two manipulative step siblings who are ready to do anything to maintain their status. It features a cast led by Sarah Catherine Hook, Zac Burgess, and Savannah Lee Smith. Plan for a television adaptation of the film started in 1999 at Fox with a prequel series that was later retooled as the 2000 direct-to-video film Cruel Intentions 2 following its cancelation due to creative concerns. In 2015, NBC picked up a television pilot for a continuation of the film's storyline with Sarah Michelle Gellar returning but later passed on the project. Amazon announced a new project's development for Amazon Freevee in 2021, with Neal H. Moritz returning as an executive producer. It was given a series order in April 2023, and moved to Prime Video several months later. Filming took place in Toronto and began in June 2023. Cruel Intentions premiered on Amazon Prime Video on November 21, 2024, to generally mixed reviews. In March 2025, the series was canceled after one season." If you want to know how this series is similar to the other versions, this is not the post for you. However, if you want to know what made the writing of the series particularly interesting, please, read on. Because the thing is, I didn't realize it was so allusion-heavy until Episode 5, so it warranted a second watch to really gather the references together. And there are a lot! Why so many? What's the point? Did it even add to the story? Short answers: Class consciousness. Class consciousness. Yes. But first, let's give a little background on the story. Quick Links to Sections: The Series as a Whole Allusions vs References The Allusions in Question Episode 1 - Alpha Episode 2 - Beta Episode 3 - Gamma Episode 4 - Delta Episode 5 - Epsilon Episode 6 - Zeta Episode 7 - Eta Episode 8 - Theta Class Consciousness Conclusion The Series as a Whole This series is based off of the 1999 cult classic of the same name starring Reese Witherspoon, Sarah Michelle Gellar, Ryan Philippe, and Selma Blair. That 1999 film is set in New York City among rich high schoolers. According to the IMDb page: "Kathryn Merteuil and Sebastian Valmont are seductive, manipulative step-siblings who get what they want when they want it. Kathryn makes a bet with Sebastian: Sebastian must bed Annette, daughter of the headmaster at their school, before the end of summer break. Annette has stated that she would wait until love and marriage to sleep with a man. If Kathryn wins, she gets Sebastian's vintage 1956 Jaguar Roadster. If Sebastian wins, he gets Kathryn, the only girl he knows he'll never have. Also in play is Cecile, a naïve girl whose mother had enlisted Kathryn to help her fit in at her new school. However, Kathryn (with Sebastian's help) plans to ruin Cecile's reputation as revenge on Kat's ex-boyfriend, who left her for Cecile." We gotta take it a step further because the 2024 Cruel Intentions is based off of the 1999 Cruel Intentions and that's based off of Pierre Choderlos de Laclos' 1782 novel Les Liaisons dangereuses. You see how the references and retellings go deep. There's also really good 1988 film with Glenn Close and John Malkovich called Dangerous Liasons. That's set in prerevolution Paris (with some stellar costuming!) and is the closest retelling to the 1782 rendition. That's my favorite and I highly recommend watching that above all. Glenn Close and Michelle Pfeiffer are *chef's kiss* Allusions vs References Readers, I felt like Steve Rogers/Captain America in The Avengers while watching this. You know the scene: Nick Fury: I don't know about that, but it is powered by the cube. And I'd like to know how Loki used it to turn two of the sharpest men I know into his personal flying monkeys. Thor: Monkeys? I do not understand. Steve Rogers: I do! I mean, at the very least I knew there were references being made. Or...allusions? What's the difference? What is an Allusion? An allusion is a subtle or indirect nod to something outside the text—like a wink to literature, pop culture, mythology, history, etc. It's not spelled out; you have to get the vibe or know the source to fully appreciate the meaning. Purpose: Allusions add depth, irony, or commentary. They reward viewers/readers who are "in the know." Key traits: Indirect, clever, layered, sometimes blink-and-you-miss-it. Example: If a character says, “Call me Icarus,” right after doing something reckless, that’s an allusion to the Greek myth—implying pride, downfall, etc.—without explaining it outright. What is a Reference? A reference, on the other hand, is more explicit. It name-drops or clearly points to something. It can be playful or on-the-nose. Purpose? Often used for humor, style, or to anchor the story in a particular cultural context. Key traits? Direct, obvious, recognizable. Example: If a character says, “This is giving Gossip Girl,” they’re referencing that show directly—you don’t need context clues or literary analysis. TL;DR: Allusion = subtle, requires interpretation Reference = direct, calls it by name But here's the twist: in pop culture (especially a show like Cruel Intentions that leans into both highbrow and lowbrow), the line between allusion and reference is super blurry. Something might start as a reference, but act like an allusion based on how it’s used. The Allusions in Question Here are the references that I was able to catch while watching 2024's Cruel Intentions. Each drop down includes the script lines surrounding the reference/allusion and an explanation. Episode 1 - Alpha 6:30 - Evolutionary Necessities / “Missing Link” / “How Darwinian” LUCIEN How drunk are you? BLAISE Well, I want you to do terrible things to me till I beg you to continue. LUCIEN So, very or not at all? BLAISE [chuckles] Say what you will, but, uh, at this point in the night, I'd argue it's an evolutionary necessity. LUCIEN How Darwinian. [CeCe approaches them] BLAISE There's our little missing link now. Allusion Type: Intellectual/Scientific Allusion Source: Charles Darwin & Evolutionary Theory Explanation: Blaise and Lucien’s banter about "evolutionary necessities" and calling CeCe the “missing link” is a mocking, pseudo-intellectual burn, alluding to Darwin’s theory of evolution. The “missing link” is often referenced in discussions of human ancestry—a dig at CeCe's supposed lack of sophistication. Why It Matters: Sets the tone for their elitist, sardonic worldview and uses “highbrow” language to insult in a “lowbrow” way. 7:40 - "If my grandma had wheels, would she be a bike?” CECE What’s this? What’s Rourke doing here with her? They watch Rourke whisper something to Gemma. She giggles. As CeCe takes off through the party, Blaise following. BLAISE Gemma Davenport. Say. Isn’t she running against your girl—? CECE He wasn’t supposed to be in town tonight, let alone here, at our victory lap, squiring around the competition like a goddamn billboard for the opposition! BLAISE Oh, we are in a little bit of a twist about this, aren’t we? CECE Did you know about this? BLAISE If my grandmother had wheels would she be a bike? CECE What? I don’t care about your grandmother. What am I supposed to tell Caroline? Reference Type: Slangy/Cultural Reference Origin: This is a popular idiomatic expression, often used to dismiss hypothetical or circular arguments. Common in Eastern European memes and speech, notably in some viral clips. Explanation: Blaise is being dismissive or sarcastic—saying “what ifs” are pointless. Why It Matters: Injects absurd humor into a highbrow setting, contrasting with their earlier Darwin reference. Shows Blaise's flair for the dramatic and ridiculous. 9:04 - “Horse’s head in his bed” CAROLINE I need to speak to Rourke. Now. Caroline walks off, single minded in her pursuit of Rourke. CeCe and Lucien trail her, talking over each other. CECE What do you think this means? Realistically? I mean, pulling something like this so close to the election? LUCIEN Good ol’ Rourke. What do we think, horse head in his bed? As they make their way through the party, the sound of the far off [SMASHES] gets more noticeable. CECE (CONT’D) Okay, hypothetically... is he cheating on you? Did you break up...? LUCIEN (CONT’D) Or a spider. A bunch of spiders. That seems infinitely worse to me than a horse’s head. CECE (CONT’D) Or are you still together but it’s just that Alpha Gamma’s backing Gemma Davenport instead of you now? LUCIEN (CONT’D) Seems like he’d be afraid of spiders. The macho guys usually are. Could do snakes though. Very phallic. CECE (CONT’D) If they’ve jumped the fence, we could have real trouble... LUCIEN (CONT’D) Right here in River City? CeCe finally registers Lucien talking— CECE (CONT’D) (to Lucien) Can you shut up? Allusion Type: Cinematic Allusion Source: The Godfather (1972) Explanation: Lucien is referencing the infamous Godfather scene where a severed horse’s head is placed in a man's bed as a warning. He’s jokingly suggesting they should intimidate Rourke with similarly dramatic mob-style tactics. Why It Matters: Adds theatrical menace and frames Lucien’s schemes as operatic or overly cinematic—very Cruel Intentions vibe. 37:45 - “One-man rendition of Stomp” Rourke is in a rage, barreling through the party ROURKE Everybody get the fuck out! If you don’t live here, I don’t wanna see you! BLAISE Okay! Way to show your dominance... Blaise leads him into the kitchen. Rourke smashes around, looking for a glass. Giving up, he just takes a swig— BLAISE (CONT’D) Why the one-man rendition of Stomp? Reference Type: Pop Culture / Performing Arts Source: Stomp, the percussion performance group known for using everyday objects as instruments (banging trash cans, etc.) Explanation: Blaise is mocking Rourke's angry outburst, comparing it to Stomp—implying he’s loud, messy, and dramatic. Why It Matters: Satirical. Uses artsy performance reference to poke fun at emotional immaturity. 42:10 - “Swan Lake” / “Von Rothbart” As Caroline’s door swings open to reveal Lucien, lounging against the door frame, looking a little worse for wear. LUCIEN I believe congratulations are in order. CAROLINE What ever are you talking about? LUCIEN You can drop the act, we’re all happy to have danced your little Swan Lake. CAROLINE And I’m free of Von Rothbart forever. Allusion Type: Classical Ballet Allusion Source: Swan Lake by Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky Explanation: This isn’t just about ballet—it’s a coded takedown of Rourke. In Swan Lake, Von Rothbart is the manipulative sorcerer who curses Odette and controls her fate. Here, Rourke is being cast as the Rothbart figure—controlling, deceptive, maybe even predatory—and Caroline is positioning herself as Odette, finally breaking free of his spell. Why It Matters: The allusion flips the power dynamic—Caroline is no longer the pawn in Rourke’s grand performance. It’s also a very Cruel Intentions move to reframe interpersonal drama through the lens of high art. 43:30 - “Oh captain, my captain” Lucien leans over Caroline's shoulder and sees the name and picture of the author—BEATRICE WORTH. Caroline looks at Lucien, an eyebrow raised. LUCIEN No such thing as bad publicity? CAROLINE Just bad news. (to Lucien) You’ll need to finish the job. Lucien salutes her with a grin. LUCIEN O Captain, my Captain. Allusion Type: Literary Allusion Source: Walt Whitman’s poem “O Captain! My Captain!”, famously re-used in Dead Poets Society Explanation: Lucien sarcastically references the poetic tribute to a fallen leader—either mocking Caroline's command or her martyrdom in their scheme. Why It Matters: Layered meaning—depending on tone, it could read as sincere, mocking, or both. Also ties to themes of rebellion and authority. Episode 2 - Beta 12:03 - “Unless the twin I absorbed in utero miraculously reappears” RY I'm not a fan of your dad's politics. ANNIE Okay. BEATRICE Ry. RY I was about to say that, even though I'm not crazy about your dad's political positions, I respect that you're your own person who has your own views. ANNIE I am. Unless the twin I absorbed in utero miraculously reappears. RY What? ANNIE Nothing. Oh, I think it was an episode of House or something. [She laughs and clears her throat] I-I do have my own views. I'm just trying to put them all together right now. RY Well, I look forward to hearing them. Reference Type: Medical Drama / Dark Humor Direct Reference: House M.D., Season 3, Episode 2 – “Cane & Able” Explanation: Annie jokes about having conflicting opinions—unless her absorbed twin returns to weigh in. This is a morbidly funny reference to a medical plotline in House where a “vanishing twin” (absorbed in utero) may be influencing a boy’s hallucinations. Why It Matters: This is high-key House humor: dry, smart, and a bit twisted. It also shows Annie’s self-awareness, and maybe her love of niche medical trivia. The joke is also a layered way of expressing internal conflict—Cruel Intentions-style—wrapped in a flippant delivery. 33:00 - “Phalaris used to burn his critics to death inside a hollowed-out bronze bull?” CAROLINE You're suddenly all out of pretty words about Lucien and my choices. BLAISE As of now. CAROLINE Did you know that Phalaris used to burn his critics to death inside a hollowed out bronze bull? BLAISE If I recall, Phalaris was burned alive inside the bull too. CAROLINE Idiot. Allusion Type: Historical Allusion with Symbolic Undertones Direct Reference: Phalaris, a tyrant from ancient Sicily, and the Brazen Bull—a torture/execution device allegedly used by him to roast people alive. Explanation: Caroline brings up the brutal image of Phalaris burning his enemies alive inside a bronze bull—a moment dripping with menace, metaphor, and a slight Greek tragedy flair. Blaise, in classic buzzkill fashion, jumps in with: “If I recall, Phalaris was burned alive inside the bull too.” He’s technically correct (legend says he was overthrown and executed the same way he killed others), but this is not a TED Talk—it’s a power play. Why It Matters: Caroline invokes historical cruelty to make a point—likely drawing a parallel to the unchecked ego or tyranny of someone nearby (cough, cough Rourke). It’s a clever burn masked as a history lesson. Blaise, instead of vibing with the metaphor, turns it into a smug trivia contest. Caroline’s muttered “idiot” is less about factual inaccuracy and more about emotional illiteracy. He missed the point, killed the mood, and proved himself an intellectual lightweight wearing a heavy vocabulary. 34:00 - “Until the fucking curtain comes down” CAROLINE Delta Phi has always promoted a culture of community, of support. And we will continue to empower the women of Manchester College. PROTESTERS It is classist! It's exclusionary! And it's violent! Racist! CAROLINE We will continue to fight to defy expectations. To stand stronger, to unite this house against the forces, the people, that try to divide us, to undermine us, and all the good we have achieved in the name of Delta Phi. PROTESTERS [Chanting] Hey, hey! ho, ho! Greek life has go to go! Hey, hey! ho, ho! Greek life has go to go! Hey, hey! ho, ho! Greek life has go to go! Hey, hey! ho, ho! [Chanting continues] CAROLINE You may think you have power. You may think you can take us down. But just know... we will be here. I will be here until the fucking curtain comes down. Allusion Type: Philosophical / Literary Possible Source: Desiderius Erasmus or general theater metaphor “What is life but a play in which everyone acts a part until the curtain comes down?” — commonly attributed to Erasmus (though similar sentiments appear in Shakespeare and later thinkers) Explanation: Caroline declares to the protesters that she’s staying “until the fucking curtain comes down”—a dramatic vow of endurance. It’s got serious “last-act energy,” echoing that old philosophical idea that life is performance and death is the final curtain. Why It Matters: Caroline’s always been theatrical, but this line injects gravity—she’s casting herself as someone committed to the role, to the bit, to the cause… until the literal end. Bonus Layer: By swearing in the line, it also modernizes the quote—think Erasmus by way of Succession. It's a reappropriated classical reference with bite. Episode 3 - Gamma 6:26 - “The girl who lived, come to die.” BLAISE If it isn't Caroline Merteuil. The girl who lived, come to die. CAROLINE Well, that's awfully tired. Allusion Type: Pop Culture Reference / Literary Echo Direct Reference: Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part Two (2011) Voldemort: “Harry Potter. The boy who lived... come to die.” Explanation: Blaise greets Caroline with a heavy-handed Voldemort line, casting himself as the dark wizard and Caroline as the resurrected target. Caroline, unimpressed, dryly responds: “Well, that’s awfully tired.” Why It Matters: Blaise’s choice of words is dramatic, theatrical, and… yeah, kind of tired. Caroline calls it out, instantly flipping the power dynamic back in her favor. It shows how this world thrives on references—but also how sharp you have to be to wield them well. Blaise quotes Voldemort; Caroline critiques the script. Furthermore, it's worth noting that Voldemort says this quote in the movie. Not even the book. So Blaise isn't even getting down to the source material. 18:30 - “She’s a look-alike... You ever seen the movie Dave?” LUCIEN The lady will be paying. ANNIE [Clicks tongue] Well, then, I guess it's on me. CASHIER ID? ANNIE Yeah. CASHIER Cassidy Featherstone? ANNIE Sir, I'm... CASHIER The vice president's daughter? LUCIEN [Applauding] Damn, Cassidy, you really are the best that they've got. She's a look-alike. CASHIER She's a what now? LUCIEN A look-alike. They have them for, like, those, uh, higher-level people. It's a thing. You ever seen the movie Dave? CASHIER Yeah, with, uh, Kevin Kline. LUCIEN Right. Based off a true story. CASHIER Okay. I guess I never really realized. LUCIEN Do you think that the vice president's daughter would be hanging around in... [phone buzzing] ...forgive me if I'm offending you, but do you really think she'd be hanging around a place like this? CASHIER So, you're being for real right now? ANNIE Completely real. Yeah, I've been with the second family for, ugh, God, it feels like lifetimes at this point. CASHIER Well, you look almost identical. ANNIE I mean, I better after what I went through. Allusion Type: Film Reference / Political Satire Direct Reference: Dave a 1993 film starring Kevin Kline and Sigourney Weaver Explanation: Lucien defuses a suspicious cashier by claiming Annie isn’t really Cassidy Featherstone (the vice president’s daughter), but a look-alike, just like in Dave. In the film, an ordinary guy impersonates the U.S. President, leading to heartfelt political chaos. Lucien sells it by calling it a “true story,” lol. Why It Matters: Lucien’s reference works on two levels: He’s bullshitting the cashier with a niche political comedy from 30 years ago. Elite mischief. He’s referencing a movie about impersonation to cover up a real case of impersonation—hella meta and sneakily brilliant. Huge bonus written in that this cashier has seen Dave. 33:30 - “Easy, Joe Friday.” CECE Miss? Excuse me. Can I offer you a serving utensil? Or a napkin? When you use your hand... BLAISE Leave them be, CeCe. CECE But there are a lot of very accessible valuables in this room we need to keep an eye on. BLAISE Easy, Joe Friday. Caroline knows what she's doing, so just for tonight, try being a normal human being. CECE I really dislike you sometimes. BLAISE Right back at you. Allusion Type: TV Reference / Character-Based Sarcasm Direct Reference: Dragnet’s Sgt. Joe Friday Explanation: CeCe is trying to keep the party under control, worrying about etiquette and valuables. Blaise cuts in with, “Easy, Joe Friday”—referencing the ultra-serious detective from the old-school police procedural Dragnet, known for his catchphrase: “Just the facts, ma’am.” Why It Matters: Blaise is mocking CeCe for being too by-the-book, like a party cop. It’s classic Blaise: using a vintage cultural reference to throw someone off their high horse. Also? He low-key gives her credit—because Joe Friday always got the job done. The insult is smart, subtle, and salty—like most of Blaise’s best jabs. Episode 4 - Delta 8:08 - “They screened Breathless in my French New Wave cinema class.” Annie knocks on the door of Beatrice's dorm room. Beatrice opens it and sighs. BEATRICE Oh. I thought you were my food. What do you want? ANNIE Nothing. Um, I like your bangs. BEATRICE They screened Breathless in my French New Wave cinema class, so... ANNIE And they look really good. They look really French. BEATRICE What do you really want? ANNIE Nothing. Seriously, I just...I-I wanted to see how you were. Allusion Type: Film Reference / Style Signal Direct Reference: Breathless (or À bout de souffle, 1960), directed by Jean-Luc Godard. Explanation: Beatrice attributes her new bangs to a screening of Breathless—the cornerstone of French New Wave cinema and of women cutting blunt bangs after watching too much existential drama. Jean Seberg’s iconic pixie-banged look in the film became shorthand for insouciant chic. Why It Matters: This isn’t just a beauty comment—it’s a vibe flex. Beatrice is announcing she’s film-literate, disaffected, and aesthetically dangerous. Annie compliments the bangs sincerely (“they look really French”), but Beatrice can smell an ulterior motive a mile away. French New Wave = stylish alienation = perfect for Cruel Intentions Gen Z edition. 36: 22 - "The heart wants what the heart wants." BLAISE Guess the heart wants what the heart wants. LUCIEN Ain't that f*cking right. Allusion Type: Common Phrase / Misattributed Quotation Direct Reference: The title is from a letter by Emily Dickinson. The saying was popularized in 1992 when it was quoted by Woody Allen in an interview about his relationship with Soon-Yi Previn. Explanation: Blaise drops the line like it’s deep, and Lucien responds with a grim, “Ain’t that f*cking right.” It sounds poetic, tragic, and timeless—but the origin? Messier than people realize. Woody Allen used this phrase in an infamous interview when defending his deeply controversial relationship with Soon-Yi Previn. Sooo...not exactly Dickinson. Why It Matters: This is a perfect example of false literary elevation—saying something you think is profound without knowing its baggage. In a show obsessed with appearances and intellectual flexing, this line reveals how easily sentimentality masks darker truths. Whether Blaise knows the origin or not, it lands with weight—just maybe not the kind they intended. If Caroline had been there, she definitely would’ve called them both idiots. Episode 5 - Epsilon 11:00 - "[His] girl Friday" BLAISE He already offered me the job. LUCIEN Oh, offered you the job as in, "negotiate your salary" kind of way, or a little pat on the back and, "Any friend of my son has a place in my administration," kind of way? BLAISE Stay out of it. LUCIEN I just want to make sure that your Scott's girl Friday is over by Monday. BLAISE Or what, Lucien? LUCIEN I guess we'll see, won't we? Allusion Type: Film & Literary Reference Direct Reference: His Girl Friday (1940), starring Cary Grant & Rosalind Russell Explanation: His Girl Friday is a classic screwball comedy about a sharp-witted female reporter caught between her ex-husband (also her boss) and her professional ambitions. The title itself turned “Girl Friday” into shorthand for a resourceful, overqualified assistant/sidekick—a term that originally comes from Robinson Crusoe (where “Man Friday” was Crusoe’s loyal servant). Lucien uses it to suggest that Blaise is just a useful political pawn in Scott’s world—someone doing the legwork rather than holding real power. And yeah, technically Annie would be the Girl Friday for Scott, but Lucien’s goal isn’t to make a perfect analogy—it’s to undermine Blaise. He hijacks the term for his own agenda, which honestly, is the Cruel Intentions way. Why It Matters: Lucien’s snarky remark is two insults in one: He’s undermining Blaise’s power—implying that this “job” is more about nepotism than competence. He’s predicting Blaise’s downfall—with “over by Monday”, he suggests this arrangement won’t last. Given that His Girl Friday is about outmaneuvering manipulative men, the irony is chef’s kiss. 23:25 - Bal á Versailles LUCIEN Sorry I'm late. ( Claudia kisses ) CLAUDIA Good to see you. LUCIEN Well, uh, someone smells nice. What is that? CAROLINE Bal á Versailles and barely concealed rage. LUCIEN Well, I'm glad I missed it. CAROLINE Let's get you a drink, so the fun can begin. CLAUDIA Oh, here. Share mine. Allusion Type: Luxury Cultural Reference / Mood Descriptor Direct Reference: Bal à Versailles – A French perfume by Jean Desprez, launched in 1962. Explanation: When Lucien off-handedly asks, “What is that scent?”, Caroline doesn’t just answer—she curates a whole mood: “Bal à Versailles” A perfume associated with old money, excess, and French aristocracy (a.k.a. exactly what she embodies). “…and barely concealed rage.” A reminder that beneath the glamour, she is seething. Essentially, Caroline frames her emotions like a luxury brand—elegant, refined, but still dangerous. This is not just a perfume; it’s a controlled weapon. Why It Matters: Bal à Versailles itself is a statement. This is the perfume of Marie Antoinette vibes: decadence, powdered wigs, and impending disaster. Bal à Versailles literally invokes the Palace of Versailles—the opulent playground of France’s doomed elite. In the original novel, the aristocrats were so out of touch that revolution became inevitable. Caroline, in referencing this scent, is aligning herself (knowingly or not) with that same aesthetic of doomed privilege. Caroline’s anger isn’t out of control—it’s bottled, aged, and applied with precision. She is both self-aware and performative. Even in her fury, she makes sure it’s delivered in the most expensive way possible. This isn’t just a throwaway line—it’s characterization in a bottle. Plus, I love the callback to the source material. 👏👏👏 Episode 6 - Zeta 11:20 - “The Theme is Paradise Lost” CAROLINE What is all this? CECE You said to get refreshments. CAROLINE I didn't mean that kind of coke. The theme is "Paradise Lost." When you think "Paradise Lost," do you think "soda"? CECE Well, when I think "Paradise Lost," I don't really think "party" either. The themes aren't really what I'd call celebratory. I was discussing it with Professor Chadwick, and he says it's really a story about the ultimate punishment for disobedience. Allusion Type: Literary Classic – Paradise Lost by John Milton (1667) Reference Level: Direct + Thematic Commentary Explanation: Caroline is throwing a 21st birthday party for Lucien and—because this show can’t just do “Under the Sea” like the normies—the theme is Paradise Lost, John Milton’s epic poem chronicling Satan’s fall from Heaven, the corruption of mankind, and the banishment from Eden. CeCe, ever the voice of bizarre logic and inadvertent genius, points out the obvious: “The themes aren’t really what I’d call celebratory.” And she’s right! Paradise Lost is a tale of: Disobedience Exile Pride And literally losing paradise Hardly what you’d expect at a party with a bar and a cake. This party isn't about celebrating innocence—it’s about leaning into corruption. Caroline and Lucien are, in a way, casting themselves as fallen angels who chose the fall. It's giving, "Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven." Why It Matters: It’s a perfect satire of how elite kids turn high art into party aesthetics. Paradise Lost becomes a metaphor for Lucien’s arc: charming, dangerous, and self-exiled. CeCe unintentionally nails the core conflict of the show: everyone here is getting punished for disobedience—whether they know it or not. 21:20 - “Persepolis but with Less Fire” BEATRICE This is a pretty great party. It's like Persepolis but with less fire. BLAISE Don't talk to me. BEATRICE That's rude. Allusion Type: Literary & Historical Reference Level: Direct & Thematic Explanation: Persepolis was the capital of the Achaemenid Empire (550-330 BCE), located in what is now Iran. Founded by Darius I (or Darius the Great) and later expanded by his successors, it was a symbol of Persian power and wealth. The city was famous for its grandeur, featuring monumental architecture, incredible art, and grand palaces. It was a symbol of the Persian empire’s might and its ability to unify a vast and diverse collection of peoples under its rule. Persepolis was sacked and burned over the course of five months by Alexander the Great in 330 BCE, a dramatic event often symbolic of the fall of empires. This destruction is often referenced as the end of an era of Persian glory. Why It Matters: This comparison draws an ironic parallel between the grandeur of the party and the fate of Persepolis, which was destroyed by fire after becoming a symbol of opulence. It ties directly into the central themes of the show: decadence, moral collapse, and self-destruction. The party may seem extravagant now, but we know that things are bound to combust in typical Cruel Intentions fashion. Episode 7 - Eta 1:30 - "In the court of public opinion" ELLA Honestly? It's like they're playing checkers, and you're playing chess. BEATRICE You know, for the first time in a long time, I feel good. I feel like I really accomplished something. I did what needed to be done. ELLA Maybe you should call that reporter. BEATRICE No. I'm out of the limelight. Let the entire institution of Greek life hang itself in the court of public opinion. They can humiliate themselves for a change. Allusion Type: Legal and Social Commentary Reference Level: Direct (legal and social context) Explanation: Court of public opinion refers to society’s informal judgment of people, institutions, or actions. Unlike a formal courtroom, this “court” is where people are judged by public sentiment, media, and gossip. It's a reference to the judgment of society rather than a formal judicial decision. Beatrice’s comment about letting Greek life hang itself “in the court of public opinion” suggests that she’s stepping back from the drama, allowing the fraternities and sororities to face the consequences of their actions without her interference. Greek life’s actions will be scrutinized by the wider world—and the consequences may not be as formal or legal, but they’ll be just as significant. Why It Matters: This line underscores Beatrice’s cleverness and her strategic detachment. Rather than participating in the Greek system's downfall or trying to “fix” things, Beatrice knows that the weight of public opinion is often the most powerful force for punishment and accountability. It also reflects the show’s larger themes of image, power, and reputation, with Beatrice positioning herself as an observer and manipulator, understanding that the public’s judgment can be a far greater weapon than any formal legal consequences. The irony here is that Beatrice is distancing herself from the chaos, yet she is still indirectly controlling the narrative by letting others self-destruct in the court of public opinion. She’s not innocent—she’s just letting the system eat itself. 14:50 - “Two Clean-Cut Men Spreading God’s Word” + “Avon Ladies” + “Olive Branches” LUCIEN Who do we have here? Just two clean-cut men spreading God's word, or is this the Avon ladies calling? BLAISE Scott, here, wanted to say he's very sorry for fighting you. SCOTT Yeah. BLAISE Okay? He's very torn up about it, so, forgiveness would mean a lot to him. LUCIEN Well, olive branch accepted. But if you'll excuse me, I have some decorating supervising to do. SCOTT I don't like olives. They're too salty. BLAISE Keep it rolling. No more olives. This set is a triple threat of references! Allusion Type: Biblical, Cultural, and Commercial References Reference Level: Direct References + Metaphor Explanation: Lucien’s first line is a witty jab—a clever way to question their motives: are they here to spread peace and ask for forgiveness (like a missionary), or are they here to sell something (like Avon reps)? Clean-Cut Men Spreading God's Word: referring to missionaries or evangelists who often spread religious teachings, sometimes with a “clean-cut” image of purity or wholesomeness. It’s a nod to the pious and selfless. Avon Ladies: This is a pop culture reference to Avon representatives, who are door-to-door salespeople, primarily women, selling beauty and health products. The line here plays with the idea of salesmanship, comparing the sincere act of spreading religious messages with something more commercial and superficial. Olive Branch: The olive branch is a classic symbol of peace from Greek mythology and Christianity, often representing forgiveness and reconciliation. Lucien’s flippant acceptance reveals how the show often plays with superficial gestures of peace, which are common in manipulative settings. Why It Matters: Lucien’s play on words shows how these characters are constantly questioning motives. He juxtaposes two very different kinds of outreach—one that is genuine and spiritual (spreading God’s word) and another that’s commercial and manipulative (selling products). It speaks to the dual nature of their intentions—they might be offering forgiveness, but it’s a transaction rather than an authentic gesture. The olive branch reference (though accepted by Lucien) is ironic. The gesture of peace is often a sign of true reconciliation, but Lucien’s casual acceptance suggests he’s only going through the motions—he may accept the peace symbolically, but not genuinely. This also reflects the broader themes of manipulation in the show, where actions are rarely pure or sincere. 21:30 - William Blake CECE Now, all I need is proof of number 27. ANNIE (Sighs) I don't have that one. CECE The sun is descending in the west, and here you stand before me, unpierced and unproven. ANNIE Is that... Is that William Blake? CECE Some of it. Doesn't matter. All tasks must be completed. No exceptions, no exemptions. Allusion Type: Literary Allusion to William Blake's book The Marriage of Heaven and Hell Reference Level: Moderate/Indirect Reference Explanation: CeCe’s line is a deliberate allusion to themes found in the book specifically the Proverbs of Hell section. In this work, Blake explores the idea that spiritual and moral growth comes through trials and challenges. "The sun descending in the west, the evening star does arise. / To bring the night. / To bring the night." Why It Matters: The line that CeCe paraphrases references the passage of time and the inevitable judgment and testing that must occur for one to prove their worth. “The sun is descending in the west” alludes to the end of a phase or cycle, which is often tied to judgment or introspection. This could represent a moment of reckoning, where one’s actions are measured, akin to how Blake’s work often explores how individuals must pass through trials to achieve higher understanding or transformation. “Unpierced and unproven” refers to the idea that Annie has not yet undergone the necessary trials or spiritual rites of passage to be considered worthy or fully formed to join the sorority. Similar to how Blake's proverbs suggest that tests of character and inner strength are essential for spiritual or personal development. CeCe’s allusion fits well with the show’s broader themes of moral judgment, transformation, and the quest for power. Episode 8 - Theta 14:10 - "He's not Flowers for Algernon." BLAISE What's funny? BLANDSMAN No, it's just, I don't know. You fucked Scott right into this presidency and fucked yourself right out of the house. BLAISE What do you know, Blandsman? BLANDSMAN I know that I was in the meeting when Scott saw all the checks you had him sign. He's dumb. He's not Flowers for Algernon. BLAISE (chuckles) I told you it was Lucien. BLANDSMAN Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. You keep blaming him, but we both know what's gonna happen when the National Board gets that report tonight. Allusion Type: Literary Allusion to Flowers for Algernon, a 1959 short story and 1966 novel by Daniel Keyes. Reference Level: Direct Reference Explanation: In the story, the protagonist Charlie Gordon, a man with an intellectual disability, undergoes an experimental procedure to increase his intelligence. For a time, it works — he becomes a genius. But the change is temporary, and he eventually regresses to his original cognitive state, leading to a tragic and emotionally charged ending. Blandsman is dismissing any hope that Scott is some kind of latent genius or misunderstood intellect. Unlike Charlie Gordon, who briefly experiences heightened intelligence, Blandsman suggests Scott never had any hidden brilliance to begin with. He’s not “on his way up” or temporarily low-functioning — he’s just plain dumb, and always will be. This comment adds an edge of cruelty, mocking Blaise’s earlier manipulation of Scott and highlighting how little credit Scott receives, even among insiders. It also exposes how Blaise’s schemes are crumbling — she’s lost power, and even her scapegoats (Lucien, Scott) are no longer useful or credible buffers. Why It Matters: The reference to Flowers for Algernon isn't just a jab at Scott — it's a reminder of the fragility of intelligence, status, and transformation in a world where manipulation is currency. Unlike Charlie Gordon, Scott isn’t undergoing any internal journey; he’s a pawn in someone else’s game. And Blaise? She’s rapidly losing control of the board. It also subtly aligns with the show’s themes of performance, perception, and self-delusion — everyone is pretending to be smarter, nobler, or more powerful than they really are. But sooner or later, the façade slips, and what’s left behind isn’t always sympathetic. 14:50 - "Suppose I Framed Roger Rabbit, too?" SCOTT Hey, uh... ( clears throat ) ...you didn't take that money, right? Because Blaise told me you did. LUCIEN Okay, and I suppose I framed Roger Rabbit too? SCOTT No, no, I-I don't think so. LUCIEN Why the fuck would I steal the money, Scott? I'm rich. SCOTT Yeah, Blaise is rich too. LUCIEN No, man. He's poor as dirt. SCOTT Oh, come on. The guy wears Dolce & Gabbana underwear. LUCIEN They're not real. They're fake. Just like he is. Fuck. Allusion Type: Pop Culture / Film Allusion to Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (1988) Reference Level: Direct Reference Explanation: Lucien is referencing the live-action/animated noir-comedy in which a cartoon rabbit is accused of murder — and it turns out to be part of a much larger conspiracy. The title itself became shorthand for outlandish scapegoating, as the film hinges on Roger being falsely accused despite how ridiculous it seems. Lucien's comeback plays on that very absurdity. By comparing Scott’s belief to a Roger Rabbit-level conspiracy, Lucien implies that Blaise’s story is equally cartoonish and obviously false. It's also a subtle dig at how gullible Scott is — the idea that Lucien, ever the Machiavellian schemer, would stoop to such cartoonish antics is laughable to him. Why It Matters: This moment captures Cruel Intentions’ talent for weaving high and low culture. Lucien isn’t quoting Shakespeare — he’s tossing in a sardonic nod to an iconic '80s film to underscore the absurdity of the situation and deflect blame. But under the wit, there's weight: Lucien, who’s been actually scheming all season, hides in plain sight by mocking the very idea of deception. It’s the classic “the devil wears Prada” move — hide the truth behind a punchline. 20:00 - God's Rocks SCOTT Hey, did, uh, Dad tell you the good news? BLAISE Um, no. Not yet. RUSSELL He was talking so much he didn't give me a chance to tell him. I paid back everything that he owed. SCOTT Isn't it great? Look, I know you did it because you needed the money, but I decided rocks don't matter. BLAISE Rocks? SCOTT Yeah, God's rocks. Look, my dad understood. He helped me with the report. It went in, just like we messed up on the books. Just like you said. Allusion Type: Biblical Reference Level: Indirect Reference Explanation: In what might be his most wide-eyed, morally earnest moment, Scott refers to “God’s rocks” — a charmingly literal description of the Ten Commandments, the biblical laws inscribed by God on stone tablets and given to Moses on Mount Sinai. By calling them “rocks,” Scott isn’t being sacrilegious — he’s just simplifying. He’s trying to say he’s moving past guilt and legalism. Scott has accepted that the financial misdeeds he was wrapped up in (fudging numbers, signing checks, being manipulated) were wrong, but also forgivable. In his mind, he confessed, got help from his dad, and the report is in. The moral ledger of The Commandments no longer hold power over him. He’s off the hook even if he’s also (unknowingly) trivializing millennia of religious law and reducing divine commandments to inanimate objects that can be tossed aside once you’ve done your paperwork. His simplicity highlights just how little he truly grasps the weight of morality, guilt, and consequence in the world around him — especially among the schemers like Blaise and Lucien. It’s also a twist on a “grace over law” ideology — he believes in understanding, not judgment. Why It Matters: Scott’s “rocks don’t matter” line is the purest expression of how naive goodness functions in this series. In a show obsessed with schemes, manipulation, and performance, Scott stands out by being genuinely earnest. Whether you see him as a fool or a moral center, this line positions him as someone trying to make peace with wrongdoing in a world that thrives on exploiting it. It’s not just about money — it’s about forgiveness. About grace. About deciding that being good might matter more than following the rules carved in stone. 24:50 - "Why are you crying into the wall like an Amish schoolmarm?" CECE No, no. Tanya. Tanya. I don't care if you think it's a fire hazard because I will personally set you on fire myself. CAROLNE Not even your hypothetical arson can ruin this, CeCe. CECE Caroline, I'm sorry. I just want everything to be perfect, but you have no idea the insolence that I'm up against... CAROLINE CeCe, we did it. We have Annie. We won. CeCe begins to cry and walks to a corner. CAROLNE CeCe? Why are you crying into the wall like an Amish schoolmarm? CECE (inhales deeply) My mother told me I'm very unattractive when I cry. Allusion Type: Cultural & Psychological Reference Level: Moderate / Indirect Explanation: Amish communities are often depicted as embracing a lifestyle that values restraint, modesty, and discipline, particularly in emotional expression. “Crying into the wall” evokes the image of a person trying to hide their emotions, as if they are ashamed of their vulnerability. The comparison to an “Amish schoolmarm” further exaggerates the stereotype of stiff emotional control, suggesting that CeCe is embodying this repressed, overly disciplined figure who cannot openly express her sorrow without shame. This allusion is layered with irony: CeCe’s public display of emotion contrasts with the very idea of the Amish cultural norm she is compared to. The term “schoolmarm” also carries connotations of teaching authority, which further highlights CeCe’s complex character: someone trying to maintain control and hide personal vulnerability, despite her emotional breakdown. Why It Matters: The Amish schoolmarm comparison underscores CeCe’s inner conflict. She’s in a moment of profound emotional release, yet the stigma she feels about showing weakness makes her want to suppress it — which is why she hides her face against the wall. The absurdity of this cultural stereotype highlights CeCe’s attempts to balance her personal feelings with her outward stoicism in a world that rewards emotional control. Additionally, it speaks to family dynamics (as CeCe mentions her mother’s harsh judgment about her crying) and the social pressures CeCe feels as someone who is expected to be strong and composed. This allusion to Amish culture, while played for comedic effect, deepens the viewer's understanding of CeCe’s struggles with vulnerability — not just with Caroline, but with the expectations placed on her by her upbringing. Did you catch any others? Let me know in the comments. Class Consciousness It shouldn't be a surprise to anybody when I say that formal education, especially collegiate, has become somewhat of a privilege. Imagine amassing thousands upon thousands of dollars in student loans to get a degree that is essentially a key into higher society. Imagine spending thousands of dollars to join and stay in a fraternity or sorority that is also essentially an exclusive club in the exclusive parts of society. And imagine those thousands of dollars being a drop in the bucket. Hardly a thing to think about. That's the case for these characters. They've been raised in a rich echo chamber where they can even be quoted saying, DialogueExpress.com That the characters are able to say these allusions—furthermore, to casually say them, is a way to "say you're highly educated without saying you're highly educated." The characters quote modern pop culture, sure, but they also quote classical/historic/niche/etc. pieces. Things only the highly/well educated folk know. It's like they're speaking in code of "I know more because I'm richer than you." It's class consciousness with a superiority complex. Conclusion In the eighth episode, Blaise (surprisingly) hits the nail on the head when he says, "Everything's about the money, Scott...The only people with the luxury of saying it's not about the money are those who already have it...What do you think it takes, Scott, just to even step foot through the doors of a place like this? Money. It costs money. It costs money to get in, and it costs money to stay in. More and more of it every year. To fit in, to have an audience with the alumni, to have people take you seriously. Everything costs something. So, yeah, maybe it's not about the money for you, Scott. But when you don't have it, everything is about the money." So, for those where it's not about the money, the language they use to manipulate, charm, and lean into corruption might be beautiful and intelligent. But the power is being able to understand what is said between the lines. This aesthetic snobbery used as ammunition. Do you know Latin? With fourteen minutes left in the season, the sisters of Delta Phi Pi start speaking Latin. Thank you, Thestelmer on Reddit for looking further into this. "Adoro te devote" is a prayer written by Thomas Aquinas. From Wikipedia, they say this much: Does this necessarily mean anything for the moment? Does the prayer add anything other than the superior air of speaking Latin? Doesn't matter. They know it and you don't, so ... Always read between the lines, Katherine Arkady P.S. Not for nothing, Sarah Catherine Hook, who plays Caroline, is also in Season 3 of White Lotus. If I had a nickel for every time the Clintons were brought up in a scene with her, I'd have two nickels. Which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it happened twice.

Introduction POP QUIZ: What sounds more natural? a beautiful old wooden box OR a wooden beautiful old box Keep going: Which of the following sound more natural? an old, little lovely cottage OR a lovely, little old cottage a large, red Canadian truck OR a red, large Canadian truck a silver elegant serving spoon OR an elegant silver serving spoon I know you hear it in your head. Something is off about "a wooden beautiful old box," "a lovely little old cottage," "a red, large Canadian truck," and "a silver elegant serving spoon." But why? Reader, I bring you: OSASCOMP (Gesundheit) Ah yes, OSASCOMP, an acronym given to the conventional order of adjectives in English and note that many people who follow the rule every day have never heard of. Which is why I find it so fascinating. It's not especially cool because it exists, it's especially cool because most people know it without realizing that they know it. And I bet Dollars to Donuts that you know it, too. Table of the Contents Introduction Section 1: What Is OSASCOMP? Section 2: Explicit Knowledge vs Tacit Knowledge Section 3: More Than Just Grammar Section 4: The Fiction Writer's Version of OSASCOMP Conclusion Section 1: What Is OSASCOMP? In English, multiple adjectives preceding a noun follow a strict, often subconscious order: Opinion, Size, Age, Shape, Color, Origin, Material, and Purpose Opinion: Lovely, beautiful, strange, awful, delicious Size: Big, small, tall, tiny, huge Age: Old, new, young, ancient, antique Shape: Round, square, long, flat Color: Red, blue, greenish, yellow Origin: French, American, solar, lunar Material: Cotton, wooden, silk, metal Purpose/Qualifier: Sleeping (bag), frying (pan), walking (stick) Key Rules and Usage Determiners first: Articles (a, an, the), possessives (my, your), and demonstratives (this, that) come before all descriptive adjectives. Subjective to Objective: Subjective opinions come first, while factual, essential, or permanent characteristics (like material or purpose) stay closest to the noun. Commas and "And": When adjectives are from different categories, you usually do not need commas (e.g., a big red ball). If they are from the same category (coordinate adjectives), use a comma or "and" (e.g., a long, thin, narrow road). Purpose Exception: Purpose adjectives often act as part of a compound noun (e.g., tennis racket, sleeping bag) and rarely move It helps to think of the order as moving from the most subjective description to the most objective description: What you think → How big it is → How old it is → What it looks like → Where it's from → What it's made of → What it's for Imagine you're introducing an object to someone. You start with your impression of it ("beautiful"), then describe its physical qualities, then where it came from, then what it's made of, and finally what it does. English speakers naturally move from opinion to purpose. ✨ Some Examples for You ✨ 1. A beautiful (opinion) small (size) old (age) round (shape) blue (color) French (origin) wooden (material) jewelry (purpose) box. 2. An ugly (opinion) large (size) new (age) square (shape) white (color) American (origin) plastic (material) storage container. 3. A charming (opinion) tiny (size) ancient (age) narrow (shape) green (color) Irish (origin) stone (material) cottage. 4. An elegant (opinion) long (size) modern (age) rectangular (shape) black (color) Italian (origin) leather (material) dining table. 5. A wonderful (opinion) huge (size) young (age) slender (shape) brown (color) Canadian (origin) wool (material) hunting dog. Few people (researching author not included) consciously think through this sequence before speaking or writing. This order comes from instinct developed through years of exposure to the language. You know more than you think you do! And, if you're a fan of acrostics (where the first letter of each line (or paragraph) spells out a hidden word, name, or phrase when read vertically), I have a fun one for you: Old Spiders Always Spin Colorful Orange Mittens Perfectly Just imagine lil' geriatric arachnids spinning together orange mittens for the 8,000 lil' pedipalps of their 4,000 grandchildren. Section 2: Explicit Knowledge vs Tacit Knowledge Most of us think of knowledge as something we can explain. We know the capital of a state. We know how many days are in a year. We know the definition of a word. This is explicit knowledge: information that can be easily articulated, recorded, and shared. But much of what we know doesn't work that way. Linguists, psychologists, and educators often refer to this other type of knowledge as tacit knowledge: knowledge gained through experience rather than formal instruction. Children are rarely taught OSASCOMP. Instead, they absorb it through thousands of conversations, books, television shows, classroom discussions, and everyday interactions. Over time, patterns eventually stop feeling like patterns and just become the default way things are done. OSASCOMP reminds us that, from the outside, expertise often looks like instinct. What feels automatic is frequently the result of years of accumulated experience operating just below conscious awareness. Much of what we know operates below the level of conscious awareness: We recognize when someone interrupts a conversation at the wrong moment. We know when a joke has gone too far. We can often identify a familiar face from across a crowded room before we've consciously registered who we're looking at. We can tell when a sentence sounds natural long before we could explain the grammatical rules behind it. We don't consciously sort adjectives into categories before speaking. We don't pause to consider whether "wooden" should come before "beautiful." We simply know. It's like Neature Walk's now famous "you can tell [it's an aspen] by the way that it is." After being exposed to an experience enough just below conscious awareness, you can just tell. OSASCOMP shows us what tacit knowledge looks like inside of language. But the same mechanism doesn’t stop at grammar—it shapes entire systems of behavior. Section 3: More Than Just Grammar OSASCOMP is useful on its own as a grammar pattern, but its real value shows up when you step back from language entirely. The same invisible pattern that governs adjective order governs far larger systems: professions, institutions, and cultures. We are constantly absorbing structure without being explicitly taught the structure itself. We learn social expectations without ever being handed a rulebook for them. We learn workplace norms without anyone formally outlining them. We absorb cultural customs, professional habits, and unspoken standards simply by participating in the environments where they exist. And because these patterns become automatic, they also become difficult to describe. This is why experienced practitioners in any field often sound vague when asked to explain what they do. Not because the knowledge isn’t real, but because it operates below the level of constant attention. A musician may not be able to immediately articulate why a rehearsal feels wrong, only that it does. A teacher may shift the structure of a classroom on instinct, responding to dynamics they recognize but don’t consciously itemize. A mechanic may hear an engine and register that something is off long before they can isolate the specific cause. An experienced nurse may walk into a room and sense that something is unusual before any measurable detail has been identified. In each case, perception is happening faster than explanation. This is the same mechanism OSASCOMP exposes in miniature. The more familiar a system becomes, the more it hides itself. Language simply makes the pattern visible. What once required attention becomes instinct, "how things are." Second nature, if you will. Section 4: The Fiction Writer's Version of OSASCOMP For writers, this matters because it is often exactly this invisible layer—the part practitioners can’t easily explain—that carries the most authentic detail. When writers conduct research, they often begin with facts. They ask questions like: What tools do you use? How long does training take? What does a typical day look like? What procedures do you follow? And these questions are useful. They are very necessary. But accuracy alone still leaves a world flat, because it remains external to the logic that governs it. When doing research and speaking with folk, *pay attention* to phrases like: "That's just how it's done." "Everybody knows that." "You'd never do it that way." "That feels wrong." "I never really thought about it." These comments often point toward assumptions and habits that are deeply embedded within a community. Dig deeper and ask why. Get that authenticity from understanding what people take for granted. It can be tricky to get this information. To simply ask somebody, "What has become so normal that you don't think about it?" is likely to be met with "I don't know." Because they don't think about it. Your job as a writer and researcher is to eventually get to the tacit knowledge questions. Ask the explicit knowledge questions first. Peel back those layers. Get the facts and read between those lines to find the spaces your "Why's?" can fit. The goal is to move from what they know to how they know. When someone says, "That's just how it's done." How did you learn that? Who taught you? What would happen if someone didn't do it that way? Is there ever a situation where you'd break that rule? What does a newcomer usually get wrong about this? Can you remember the first time you saw it done correctly? When someone says, "Everybody knows that." How would a beginner find that out? When do people usually learn it? What clues would tell someone that if nobody explained it to them? Has anyone ever not known that and gotten into trouble? If you had to teach it to a new hire, how would you explain it? Is it written down anywhere, or do people just pick it up? When someone says, "You'd never do it that way." Why not? What feels off about it? What problems would it cause? Have you ever seen someone try? What's the difference between the wrong way and the right way? How can you tell the difference at a glance? When someone says, "That feels wrong." What specifically feels wrong about it? What would feel right instead? Can you point to an example? How do you know when something is right before you can explain why? Is it a safety issue, an efficiency issue, a cultural issue, or something else? Would everyone in the field agree with you? When someone says, "I never really thought about it." Could you walk me through what you actually do? What's the first thing you notice? What about it are you paying attention to that a beginner might miss? How do you make that decision in the moment? What signs tell you it's working? If I followed you around for a day, what would I see you doing automatically? If you only ask for facts, you learn what people do. If you keep asking questions, you learn how they think. That comparison matters because readers are remarkably, fantastically, scarily good at sensing the difference. Readers rarely evaluate authenticity by checking facts. They instead respond to patterns. They notice when a character reacts the way a real person in that world would react. They notice when a setting seems lived in rather than assembled from a list of details. A story becomes more convincing when characters interact with their world in ways that reflect the habits and assumptions of the people who inhabit it. Just as English speakers unconsciously follow the rules of adjective order, people unconsciously follow thousands of social, professional, and cultural rules every day. They know which mistakes mark someone as an outsider. They know which shortcuts are acceptable and which are dangerous. They know what feels right, what feels wrong, and what "everybody knows." As writers, our job is not simply to collect information. It is to uncover the assumptions, habits, instincts, and unwritten rules that shape how people move through the world. Facts help us describe a world. Tacit knowledge helps us understand it. Conclusion Most English speakers use OSASCOMP correctly without ever learning its name. The rule exists beneath explanation. Things are observed rather than taught, enacted rather than stated. And that's the point! Much of what we call knowledge is not conscious at all, but absorbed until it feels "second nature." OSASCOMP is a teeny, tiny, microscopic, blink-and-you-miss-it, almost comically small fragment of the far larger tacit knowledge system. What it points to is larger: the way humans take repeated experience and turn it into instinct, until structure disappears into behavior. Every profession, every practice, every community develops its own version of this. Not rules in the formal sense, but accumulations of judgment and habit that settle so deeply they stop registering as choices. They become the air inside the system. For fiction writers, this is a structure to get in, on, and around to. Facts will give you accuracy. They will tell you what tools are used, what procedures are followed, what a day looks like when it is described from the outside. But accuracy alone still leaves a world flat, because it remains external to the logic that governs it. A character does not become convincing because they can describe their world. They become convincing because they move through it correctly—because they recognize what matters without needing to translate it into explanation. Because they flinch at the right thing. Because they ignore what an outsider would overread. Because they carry assumptions that never surface in dialogue, but nonetheless shape the story. OSASCOMP, in this sense, is not the subject. It is the reminder: every world has an order beneath its language. And the task of the writer is not only to describe that order, but to make it felt by the reader without ever naming it. Picture those elderly, overqualified-for-this, faintly bureaucratic knitting spiders one more time for me, Katherine Arkady

Introduction "When I talk with someone on background...I am not asking for the source to provide me with statements that I can quote in my story. I am just talking with someone who knows more about a topic than I do and is willing to tell me what some of the big issues are." —Dean Nelson in Talk to Me: How to Ask Better Questions, Get Better Answers, and Interview Anyone Like a Pro "On background" is a journalism term meaning the information provided by a source can be published, but not attributed to them by name. “On background, a senior official said the policy is under review.” “On background, a senior epidemiologist described challenges in collecting accurate infection data.” “On background, several government officials said the negotiations are at a standstill.” Journalists use “on background” conversations to understand the world before they publicly explain it. Fiction writers can use the same approach to understand a world before inventing what's inside it. Table of the Contents What "On Background" Means for Fiction Writers Why Fiction Writers Need "Background Thinking" What Background Reveals That Surface Research Cannot Fiction Writers and Journalists Want Different Things Books and Writers Worth Further Reading Into Conclusion What "On Background" Means for Fiction Writers The idea of background for journalists is usually in preparation for a bigger interview for a big story. Journalists use background conversations to understand: systems cultures tensions vocabulary emotional stakes contradictions No matter the genre, a percentage of all six of the above have a place in fiction stories. A fiction writer researching firefighters, divorce attorneys, ER nurses, casino workers, indie wrestlers, or city council politics don't only need accurate (Googleable) details. Beyond accuracy, writers need: what insiders joke about what they never publicly say what annoys them what they fear what everyone pretends is normal On background interviews reveal to the writer what angle the story wants to take. Talking to people about your research topic helps shape the story little by little and gives ideas you couldn't have conceived without them. Why Fiction Writers Need "Background Thinking" Can you google a nurse's daily tasks? Sure. But when you talk to a nurse, they can describe sneakers squeaking at 3am, charting while crying, and eating peanut butter crackers over a trash can. Can you ChatGPT what a detective does? Sure. But when you talk to a detective, they can describe the smell of wet drywall in abandoned houses, the silence after a raid, or how nobody finishes coffee during a homicide week. Fiction writers should research like literary journalists and write like emotional historians. Google gives data. Conversations give texture. What you tend to miss with surface-level research isn’t the data/information. Google can't tell you how people talk when they’re tired. Or what gets joked about instead of explained. Or the way institutions sound when they’re stretched too thin. The little tells that nobody writes down anywhere, but everybody inside the world immediately recognizes. What Background Reveals That Surface Research Cannot Most weak research focuses on correctness. Things like what tools there are, the terminology, chronology of the practice, certain uniforms, and applicable geography. Which...yeah you ought to be accurate but your readers aren't picking up your book because they love reading dictionaries. Fiction writers can learn from journalists in how they acquire their information. They learn to listen for friction: what frustrates insiders where systems fail what people resent what people normalize what they refuse to plainly say The above points will give your story immersive, emotional, context. Here's an example: A hospital procedural superficially researched gives writers: medical jargon triage systems realistic equipment Background-style research gives writers: nurses hiding in supply closets to cry residents forgetting what month it is cafeteria politics the soundscape of overnight shifts dark humor as emotional survival Without this kind of background thinking, fiction can end up technically correct but emotionally thin. Everything is in the right place, but nothing feels like it’s been lived in. The dialogue works, the details check out—but the world doesn’t breathe the way real ones do. Fiction Writers and Journalists Want Different Things Journalists must go through a more rigorous phase of fact-checking and verifying. And for good reason. They report facts with feelings. They owe their readers factual fidelity. Fiction writers? They get feelings from facts. They owe their readers a transformation. 80,000–120,000 words of facts alone doesn’t create a novel. 80,000–120,000 words of emotion, character drive, and human truth does. Journalists must correctly quote and organize five people into separate entities. Fiction writers can combine five real people into one character. Journalists must chronologically and accurately represent timelines. Fiction writers can compress and expand as needed for their characters. At a certain point, background research stops feeling like research. It becomes "noticing" and "observing." You begin paying more attention to what people don’t say than what they do. Once that switch flips, it changes how you listen to everything. Books and Writers Worth Further Reading Into Journalism / Interviewing Craft Talk to Me: How to Ask Better Questions, Get Better Answers, and Interview Anyone Like a Pro by Dean Nelson My core inspiration. Strong on preparation, listening, and interview psychology. The New Journalism by Tom Wolfe Essential for understanding how reporting techniques influenced literary storytelling. The movement emphasized scenes, dialogue, and immersive observation. The Art of the Interview by Lawrence Grobel Frequently recommended among longform interviewers. Good on conversational rhythm and trust-building. Telling True Stories: A Nonfiction Writers’ Guide from the Nieman Foundation at Harvard University (Edited by Mark Kramer and Wendy Call) is a 2007 anthology edited by Mark Kramer and Wendy Call. The book compiles insights from distinguished journalists and nonfiction writers on the craft and ethics of narrative journalism. Fiction Writers with Journalism/Reporting Influence Joan Didion: Observation, implication, silence, cultural reading. Gay Talese: Famous for immersive reporting and status-detail observation. Ted Conover: Participatory immersion reporting. Excellent model for fiction-world research. Jess Walter: Former journalist whose fiction retains strong observational realism. Katherine Boo: Shows how deep reporting uncovers narrative structure naturally. Conclusion Dean later says "This may sound complicated, but we let background information inform our questions even when we aren't working on a story. If you know that a friend of yours is dating someone, but the person who told you made you swear you wouldn't tell, you will probably say to your friend something like, "So are you seeing anyone?" You already know the answer because you got it on background, but now you can ask follow-up questions." Most writers already know how to gather information. We Google. We bookmark. We rabbit-hole ourselves into tabs about police procedure, horse anatomy, court systems, regional slang, train schedules, and whatever else our stories suddenly demand at 1:14 in the morning. But “on background” thinking is less about collecting facts and more about collecting human residue. (lol) The things people say without realizing they said them. The pauses. The workarounds. The exhaustion. The rituals. The strange little details nobody thinks are important because they’ve lived beside them for too long. The above is the immersive material that readers remember. Texture. Pressure. Atmosphere. Contradiction. The feeling that a world existed before the reader arrived and will keep existing after they leave. The deeper you go into conversations, the more you realize most stories are not hiding in dramatic revelations. Where are they? Hiding in side comments, evasions, workplace jokes, awkward silences, and things people assume are too ordinary to mention. Nothing is too ordinary for a fiction writer. Find the stuff that feels lived in. In Part Two of this On Background Series, I want to get practical with this approach: how to follow tangents, what to listen for, how to notice friction inside conversations, and how to build a fiction researcher’s notebook that actually helps you find stories instead of just facts. Bringing my stories to the foreground with some background, Katherine Arkady

Introduction: Rejection Happens (To All of Us) If you’re a writer, you will get rejected. Hate to tell you, but I say this not to deter you from your writing dreams, but to welcome you to the club! Every published author you admire has a stack of “No, thanks” letters tucked somewhere. Some of us have entire email folders dedicated to them. I have an email specifically for submissions. It's got the occasional request, but it's otherwise heavily saturated with form rejections saying "Thank you but not for me." When I got my first form rejection, it was okay. Sure, not for them, alright, onto the next. But then more came in and I was starting to feel like a fear was coming to fruition. A fear of "I'm not good enough." Luckily, the forums I visit have assured me and many other writers that this is a regular occurrence. The changes are slim! Let me tell you in this blog post: Rejection doesn’t mean your work has no value—it means that you’re in "the arena" and doing the work. So here we are, together, in a space where we can be honest about how much it stings—and how we can recover. Section 1: The Sting is Real First things first: let’s not pretend that rejection doesn’t hurt. It 120% f*&%@ing does. It can bring disappointment, self-doubt, and that a creeping sense of burnout. Sometimes, it’s a "cold" form letter. Other times, it’s a carefully worded personal note that still says “no.” Occasionally, it’s the worst of all: silence. It’s okay (and ideal) to call rejection what it is—a kind of loss. You poured time, hope, and vulnerability into a piece, and the door closed. That deserves validation. Naming it helps us move through it instead of letting it fester. You put in the work. Full stop. Sure, now you have to put in more work, but YOU'RE IN THE ARENA. Section 2: Let Yourself Feel It Don't leap over the hurt or run away or avoid it. Self-care means making space to feel it first. Don’t rush to revise or submit elsewhere right away if your chest still aches. Ideas for processing: Journal it out. Pour your feelings onto the page—rage, sorrow, doubt. No one else needs to read it. You're a writer, this should be easy. You can burn it if you like. Or drown the pages. Or shred them. Or bury them. (You always have options) Venting session. Talk to a trusted writer friend who gets it. Or a non-writer friend who’s willing to listen. Or even your emotional support cat who didn't sign up for any of this but would listen to you for hours if it meant he got the good catnip. Take a break. Step away from the page for a bit. A walk, a nap, a weekend escape to a quiet town where some friends live—it all counts. Section 3: De-shame the Game It's a numbers game. In the publishing world, your precious Magnum Opus is transformed into a number on a long list in a group of lists on a database of folders. AspiringAuthor.com has an eye opening article: 21 Debut Author Statistics: The Real Odds of Getting Published. Read at your own risk because the reality can be jarring. But it's a reality you must be aware of as a writer! You can do all you possibly can to make your manuscript perfect. But, according to the article and Wordsrated: From the remaining 5% of high-quality manuscripts left for consideration, most are still rejected due to timing, similar books on their list, or the state of the market. From this, I'm able to feel a little better than there are just tings out of my control and I can't fixate on them. Furthermore, Lit Hub has an affirming article on 20 Famous Writers on Being Rejected. Jennifer Egan's quote in a 2010 interview with Christopher Cox stood out to me: [When I was a reader for The Paris Review,] I learned how many writers there were out there, and it was terrifying! But I also learned not to take the process too seriously. I figured that if I, a nobody in an un-airconditioned East Village apartment (batches of manuscripts were sent to me there), had the power to reject the slush pile, I couldn’t worry too much when my own stuff was rejected. It may have made me more resilient . . . and it definitely spurred me to submit to lots and lots of places at once, and not be so precious about it. Don't be so precious about it! Your writing comes from your soft heart, your squishy brain, and the deepest depths of your soul. Those are sacred places. The arena of submissions is not a sacred place. It's cut throat, the odds are against you, and you have everybody and their cousin giving an opinion. What is this "arena" I've been alluding to in this post? It has to do with a favorite speech of mine. I have a screenshot of the text as my lock screen. Theodore Roosevelt delivered this speech entitled “Citizenship in a Republic” at the Sorbonne in Paris on April 23, 1910. The speech is popularly known as “The Man in the Arena.” It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. So, reader, let me assure you that a rejection is proof that you are in the arena. Even if you fail you fail daring greatly. And you only fail when you give up! So don't give up, friend. Keep at it. Rebuild. But how? worldfuturefund.org Section 4: Rebuild Gently Now I'm not saying that all of this is just in your head. But it starts in your head! And we at Takes One to Write One always promote mental health. You may have seen folks in socials post about their rejection therapy in asking things that they normally wouldn't. While that's useful, allow me to explain something a little more peer-reviewed: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. Here’s a quick primer on the six core processes of ACT: Acceptance: You accept that you’ll have a range of thoughts or emotions that can be positive, negative or anything in between. You just got a rejection email and feel embarrassed, angry, and defeated. Instead of pushing those feelings away or pretending they don’t matter, you pause and say, “Of course I’m disappointed. I really wanted this.” You allow the emotion to be there without needing to “fix” it or shame yourself for feeling it. Cognitive defusion: You detach or distance yourself from negative thoughts and beliefs. You see a thought as a passing event instead of a truth that drives your actions. When the thought pops up—“I’m a terrible writer”—you label it: “I’m having the thought that I’m a terrible writer.” You might even say it out loud in a silly voice or write it down to break its power. That thought still exists, but you’re not treating it as fact anymore—just noise. Being present: Your focus is on how you feel in the moment. You minimize planning for future “what ifs” so you can see more of what’s happening around you. Instead of spiraling into “What if I never get published?,” you close your eyes and ground yourself: What do I hear right now? What does the chair feel like under me? What am I working on today, just for today? You return to the writing itself—this sentence, this page, etc. Self-as-context: You see yourself as a whole person with an identity. You aren’t solely defined by your experiences, thoughts or feelings. You remind yourself: “I’m not just a writer who got rejected today. I’m also a friend, a (pet) parent, a reader, a learner. I’m growing. I’ve had good writing days and I’ll have more.” You step back and see your identity as broader than this moment of pain. Values: You set your own standards that you want to live up to. These values are yours and not driven by the influence of others. You write because you care about storytelling, truth, humor, justice, imagination—or whatever else lights you up. Rejection might sting, but you ask: “Does this change what I value?” Probably not. You recommit to those values even when external validation is missing. Committed action: You make changes that help you meet your goals. These goals should align with your values. After sitting with your feelings and revisiting your “why,” you decide to revise that rejected piece—or start a new one. You set a small, doable goal for the week: “I’ll submit one story,” or “I’ll write for 20 minutes a day.” The action is gentle, but forward-moving—and it honors what matters to you. How does this help protect your confidence while staying honest? The main benefit of acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) is psychological flexibility. This means you can recognize how your emotions play a role in your life, but you don’t feel overwhelmed by them. Revisit your “why”—affirm your purpose and voice: Ask: Why did I start writing in the first place? What do I want readers to feel or know? What do I get from writing, regardless of publication? Section 5: Strategic Steps Forward Once you’ve felt the sting and given yourself space to recover, it’s time to think practically. Rejection doesn’t have to mean the end for your piece. It just means you have a decision to make about what comes next. Decide what to do with the piece: Revise: Was there feedback you want to address? Or, with fresh eyes, do you see ways to strengthen it? Resubmit: Not all rejections mean “this is bad.” Sometimes it’s just “not right for us.” Consider sending it elsewhere, maybe even without changes. Shelve for now: It’s okay to set it aside. Rest can give you distance and insight. Shelving doesn’t necessarily mean giving up. You're just letting letting things marinate. YOU ARE IN CHARGE OF WHAT HAPPENS NEXT! There’s no wrong answer here. Consider joining a writer’s group or accountability circle. Matter of fact, read my post on Self Care for Writers: Finding Other Writers. Take these strategic steps as an act of hope. By doing so, you say: I’m not done. I still believe in my work. I’m going to keep going. Conclusion: Keep the Door Open If you take only one thing from this, let it be this: rejection isn’t a verdict on your talent or your worth. It’s one editor’s “not right now.” It’s one agent’s “not for me.” It’s one journal’s “we don’t have room.” It’s never “you’re not good enough to be a writer.” The only writers who don’t get rejected are the ones who stop submitting. And you’re not going to stop. Because you have something to say. So feel the sting. Let yourself process it. Learn what you can. Then keep the door open. Open to growth. Open to new drafts. Open to new markets. Open to possibility. I invite you to share your own rejection recovery tips or stories in the comments below! Keep writing. We need your voice, Katherine Arkady

Introduction Bad date? Get out of Dodge. Toxic workplace? Get out of Dodge. Awkward family dinner? Time to get out of Dodge. "Get out of Dodge" is an American idiom meaning to leave a place or situation quickly, usually to avoid danger, trouble, or an uncomfortable situation. Sometimes it can be gussied up with additions like "Get the hell out of Dodge." But why Dodge? Why not any other car? (Get out of Lincoln? Get outta Volvo?) Why not any other town? And how did one frontier city become shorthand for escape? Table of the Contents The Real Dodge Behind the Saying Section 1: How the Phrase Became Popular Section 2: Why the Phrase Still Works Section 3: What Writers Can Learn From It Mini Writing Game Conclusion The Real Dodge Behind the Saying Idioms are so fun, aren't they? A cultural playbook of where we've been and where we're going. Sometimes, we go very fast and as means to escape. Sometimes, specifically back in the 1870s, folk hang around for a while. Like in Dodge City Kansas, a famous cattle town in the Great American Frontier. It was named after Fort Dodge which was named after General Grenville Dodge. It was originally meant to be a rancher stop for cattle operations. A bar opened up to quench the thirst of Fort Dodge soldiers. A railroad arrived to bring in business. Dodge City experienced tremendous growth from 1883-1884 when new competitors for the cattle trade came through. All the good, in adjacent thinking with Newton's Third Law of Motion, has a bad. Despite all of the above, Dodge City was possibly more known for their less than becoming aspects. Gambling halls, saloons, violence, brothels and generally rowdy energy. There was a bullfighting ring. There was a bloodless war in 1883. There was a splenic fever/anthrax epidemic in the area. Gunsmoke didn't really help with the look, either. So even in a place where the cows come home, the humans were looking to leave. Ford County Kansas Incorporated and Unincorporated areas Dodge City Highlighted Dodge City in 1878 Section 1: How the Phrase Became Popular Now, unlike sayings that originate from the people or culture of a town, "Get out of Dodge" originated through the Culture o' Pop. The widespread audiences were able to faction off and add more gumption to the spread. Check out this Google chart of when "get out of Dodge" became popular and see the below media that happened around that time. The Main Offender: Gunsmoke (1955-1975) "Cooter" (S01 E27) 00:11:46 : Because if you don't keep out of my affairs, 00:11:50 : Pate will kill you. 00:11:54 : He will? 00:12:03 : All right, Pate. 00:12:05 : Get out of Dodge. 00:12:12 : I ain't done nothing, marshal. 00:12:17 : Kill him, Pate. 00:12:35 : He's not even gonna try. 00:12:42 : I'm not some half-drunk cowboy, am I, Pate? "How to Kill a Friend" (S04 E11) 00:24:24 : Here it is. 00:24:26 : You know something... 00:24:29 : I don't care... 00:24:32 : not no more. 00:24:51 : Get out of Dodge. "The Gun" (S16 E09) 00:33:13 : Randall is, uh, neither a liar nor a coward, Mr. Pascoe. 00:33:17 : But this is hardly the, uh, time or the place. 00:33:23 : Pascoe. 00:33:30 : Get out of Dodge. Tonight. 00:33:33 : Freight boy, I'll let you know when and where. And quite literally so many more episodes than the above W. (2008) 01:38:47 : Now, I don't care what happens now. 01:38:49 : How many damn votes we do or don't get in the U.N. 01:38:53 : Come Monday morning, 10 a.m., 01:38:56 : I'm giving Saddam and his two sons 48 hours 01:38:59 : to get out of Dodge, okay? 01:39:00 : Indeed. 01:39:02 : All right. 01:39:05 : Everybody in agreement then? 01:39:07 : Yes, sir. Thelma & Louise (1991) 00:58:00 : And, get the hell out of Dodge, yeah. 00:57:48 : "You've got a great story to tell friends." 00:57:50 : "If not, well, you got a tag on your toe. You decide." 00:57:54 : It's as simple as that. 00:57:57 : Then I'd just slip on out. 00:58:00 : And, get the hell out of Dodge, yeah. 00:58:05 : My goodness. 00:58:06 : You were sure gentlemanly about it. 00:58:09 : I've always believed that done properly... 00:58:12 : ...armed robbery doesn't have to be a totally unpleasant experience. It has transformed past the original to become minced with fun additions like: Gravity Falls "Weirdmageddon: Part 1" (S02 E18) 00:14:15 : I gotta get out of Time Dodge. The Shield "Rap Payback" (2006 , S05 E06) 00:03:01: Turf's been neutral since Antwon's crew slithered out of Dodge. Side Note: Many phrases feel ancient but became mainstream through radio, film, and television: Bite the Bullet During (traumatic) battlefield surgery, soldiers were said to bite the bullet to endure the pain, a phrase that likely originated from military practices before anesthesia (super traumatic). It was later popularized through war films like The Longest Day (1962) and Western television dramas that dramatized courage in the face of hardship. Reading the Riot Act Teachers and authorities have long reprimanded misbehaving groups, a practice formalized in the British law of 1714 known as the Riot Act, giving rise to the phrase "reading the riot act." It entered mainstream language through early 20th-century radio dramas and films, including comedies like Our Gang (1922-1944) which showcased stern lectures to unruly children. [Fun Fact: the series was sold to MGM and rebranded into 1950's The Little Rascals] Cash Cow The term originally drew from farming metaphors describing a cow that reliably produces milk. It became a figurative expression for a lucrative, dependable source of profit, widely popularized in the 1980s and 1990s through television business reporting on programs such as 60 Minutes and coverage of Hollywood franchises that funded riskier projects. Section 2: Why the Phrase Still Works It's not a viral saying like "Very demure, very mindful, very cutesy" that everybody quickly becomes aware of and then suddenly nobody uses. It's been here. But why is it staying? It’s visual. A picture is immediately painted. One can see in their mind's eye a dusty street, the scrape of boots on wooden sidewalks, somebody running away, or a standoff because this town isn't big enough for the two of us. Not many of us have been to Dodge City, but the idiom is cinematic nonetheless. That's why traction has been gripped in media. The mental imagery is instant and evocative, making it easy for writers, directors, and speakers to convey “move fast” or “escape danger” in a single line. It’s flexible. While it originated in the context of danger or imminent trouble, the phrase has morphed into a broader tool of expression. You can use it to describe anything: burnout at work (“I need to get out of Dodge before another meeting”) awkward social encounters (“He started talking politics, and I knew it was time to get out of Dodge”) Its versatility keeps it alive across decades because it’s never tied to a single literal meaning. It adapts to the speaker’s needs. It sounds good. Just speak it and enjoy that mouth feel. /ɡɛt aʊt əv dɑdʒ/ in IPA (International Phonetic Alphabet) It's got a good rhythm with hard consonants and a strong stress pattern. It's "sticky" in conversation, scripts, and headlines. If you think about it: phrases that survive tend to feel good on the tongue. It implies agency. Unlike idioms that depict helplessness (“caught between a rock and a hard place”), this one puts the speaker/protagonist/MC in charge. Nobody is waiting for a rescue. They are making a choice and taking action! Trouble is left behind! Empowering idioms are always appreciated. Section 3: What Writers Can Learn From It 1. Specificity Makes Stories Memorable Naming a place, showing its quirks, and grounding your story in details gives readers something to remember. Specifics scale because one well-chosen detail can make a story feel universal. 2. Setting Shapes Voice Characters’ language and choices (even and especially in pop culture) can carry the weight of the world they inhabit. Let the setting inform how your characters think, speak, and behave. 3. Conflict Springs from Place Writers can use setting as a natural source of tension. Let location generate stakes and challenges for your characters instead of forcing conflict from nowhere. Plus, a lot of the time the place helps you create conflict you wouldn't have been able to conceive on your own. 4. Language Encodes History Phrases like “get out of Dodge” carry decades of culture, tension, and narrative in a few words. Dialogue and idioms can hint at background, social norms, or world history without the heavy exposition. 5. Small Places Can Explore Big Ideas Even a frontier town can reveal universal human truths: struggle, courage, ambition, fear, and resilience. You don’t (necessarily) need a huge, epic setting to tackle themes that matter. Mini Writing Game Conclusion “Get out of Dodge” lasted because it does more than a simple phrase usually does. It tells a mini story that gives the speaker and listener some agency. Place, danger, urgency, and escape are all packed into four syllables. It’s a reminder that even the quirkiest corners of history like an 1870's rowdy frontier town, a 1950s TV show, and a pop culture riff can teach writers and speakers something lasting. So next time you're leaving a wild west town, removing yourself from a terrible date, or avoiding a long meeting, in true frontier spirit, don’t just talk about it—get out of Dodge. Getting out of dodge myself, Katherine Arkady

Cover Art of "The Art of the Interview" with Will Bowman “I know, for me, one of my favorite things in the whole wide world is doing interviews with people and getting to hear their story, getting to hear them be passionate about what they're passionate about, be frustrated about what they're frustrated about, and really just sit and watch people get really excited.” From The Art Of The Interview: Episode 63 | How Much Should I Talk About Myself In An Interview?, Mar 12, 2024 Introduction For centuries, folk have been having chats since language was invented, and probably before then with matters of grunts and points. Humans have honed their language skills and have learned the art of conversation through some trial and error. I like to think of myself as a good conversationalist. I can chat with anybody at any event. Hell, the entire idea of "Takes One to Write One" was formed because I was chatting with folk at said parties and I was super interested in learning more. But conversation skills don't necessarily translate into interviews. Especially podcast interviews. I wanted and needed to learn more from professionals about how to conduct interviews. Sure, I could learn as I go, but that wouldn't be fair to the guest that is opening up to me about their lives. It also wouldn't be fair to my listeners because their time is also valuable and they expect valuable information. So I did what any modern woman in 2025 would do: looked up "how to interview" Apple Podcasts. And, low and behold, "The Art of the Interview" with Will Bowman was available with ✨sixty-four✨ episodes. This is excellent for folk making a production out of interviews like I am. There are episodes explaining the pre- and post-production aspects of the content creation. There are episodes exploring what it's like to talk with big personalities and small personalities. Will wants his listeners to get the full picture of what a production like this can be. Now this post is about a specific 11 episodes and the notes that stood out to me, and I hope that they'll stand out for you, too. So please: make space, prep, prep, prep, and follow the energy! Outline Who is Will Bowman? Episode 1: Intro - What is an Interview? Episode 2: Intro - Why I Care About Interviews Episode 3: Intro - Who Should Care About Interviews? Episode 4: Interviewing 101 - Five (5) Lessons I’ve Learned from Doing Hundreds of Interviews Episode 5: Interviewing 101 - 5 Ways to Prepare Before an Interview Episode 6: Interviews in Review - Engaging Introverted Interviewees and What to Do When The Interview Gets a Little Dull Episode 7: Interviewing 101 - Respect the Ask and Give Episode 18: Interviewing 101 - Six Surprising Places to Research Information on Interviewees Episode 46: Interviewing Q&A - What to Do When Your Interviewee Gets Cold Feet Episode 63: How Much Should I Talk About Myself In an Interview? Episode 64: How to Frame Your Interview Conclusion Who is William Bowman? He's an American video producer on the west side of the country. With a company called 262 Creative, he acts as Director of Productions and resident extrovert. He and a team work hard to produce promotional material for your brand through video content. Their website is quoted saying, "Craft your story, capture your unique voice, elevate your brand, and grow your client community through compelling video content that stays relevant for years, not just weeks or months." The interview podcast is promoted on their website: Want to be a better interviewer? In our podcast The Art of the Interview, you’ll learn tips, tricks, techniques, and mindsets to adopt to create safety, depth, and impact through your own interviewing. Lead producer Will Bowman shares his knowledge from doing hundreds of interviews as a news producer, online talk-show host, and now marketing-informed video producer. There's also a video with a past project explaining who he is on 262 Creative's YouTube. So, with these hundreds of interviews completed, what does he have to teach us? Episode 1: Intro - What is an Interview? Definition of an Interview: asking questions with a purpose (for an audience) Interviewing and you you become a better interviewer, you become better in a lot of different areas in your life: Better conversationalist Learn how to ask the right questions Doing An Interview/ Asking for Interview No small ask Folk get nervous Understand the gravity of what we’re asking Helps us be more intentional, compassionate, and deliberate Episode 2: Intro - Why I Care About Interviews “I found that interviewing was a simple, powerful way to get intimate with someone in a way that genuinely could have a transformative effect on them but in the container of the interview.” (24:08) They are very cost effective to produce A goal when interviewing is to create and hold for that person a space of intimacy, healing, growth, transformation, and love. And that can translate through the podcast/page/video that is created. Episode 3: Intro - Who Should Care About Interviews? Professional interviewers in news and media People in client relations Marketing, Public Relations, Small Business Owners Contractors Creatives Writers Documentary makers Mental Health Practitioners Therapists, psychologists People who want to become better conversationalists to their parents, friends, and spouses Episode 4: Interviewing 101 - Five (5) Lessons I’ve Learned from Doing Hundreds of Interviews Even if you’ve interviewed for years, there are deeper levels of interviewing that you can get to Lesson 1: Respect the Give Understand the gravity of what you’re asking somebody to do They have subconscious walls hindering them from fully opening up Your responsibility is to make a safe space for them to open up Lesson 2: Give Them Directions Before the Interview Assure folk that anything can be edited Repeat words, cut out an error, change the way something is said Ask them to repeat the question back: Q: How long have you been working here? A: I have been working here for x years Let folk know that you’re hoping to get out of the interview Goals, information, etc Pre interviews are helpful They (and you) can get the vibe Lesson 3: Take Control and Direct the Interview Don’t be relaxed about it and hope the guest gives you something. You’ll just look like you don’t know what you’re doing. They’ll get anxious and scared and the walls will go up You’re the “parent” helping the “child” do something for the first time Lesson 4: Never Tell Them What to Say It takes out the emotion and sincerity in what guests have to say Guests will shift into “pleasing mode.” Figure out how to ask a question to get the answer you want/need: “Tell me/say that chocolatiering is an artform for you” vs “When was the time when you felt most artistically satisfied making chocolate?” Lesson 5: Prepare Rigorously and Prepare to Leave It All Behind There are some schools of thought with interviewing. Writing hundreds of questions vs letting curiosity lead you in the moment. Do both: prepare and be flexible Be ready for the unexpected paths guests will take you on There is no such thing as a stupid question, but there are insulting questions Ex. meeting with the president and asking where they went to college. If it’s Googleable, don’t ask it Talk to the guest about things you can’t find anywhere Research is for figuring out what questions need to be asked to understand and see the person in a new and interesting way Follow the energy! The above lessons are all about creating the container for a good interview. Episode 5: Interviewing 101 - 5 Ways to Prepare Before an Interview The pre-interview part is very important #1: Research, Research, Research What has a guest been asked before? Don’t ask that again–google the already knowns The questions don’t need to be new, just relevant Also, find things that are tied to the interviewee but not necessarily connected to them Organizations they belong to People they know #2: Pre-Interview Go get coffee with them or go to their office Create an energetic conversation to they get pumped to share Work to find the heart of the story/matter and follow that energy #3 Do Something Nice for the Interviewee As simple as making a drink/getting a drink for them This “disarms them” and makes them feel comfy and hospitable #4 Talk Them Through How the Interview Is Going to Go Set the tone and answer questions Ease their anxiety—this is scary for them! Show them that you’re in control and can guide them. #5: Expand Yourself Create the container Make yourself big enough to hold the information, emotions, and topic. You are more powerful than the thing is. Observe feeling and let them go Don't contract and pull in Show guest you can handle things Episode 6: Interviews in Review - Engaging Introverted Interviewees and What to Do When The Interview Gets a Little Dull Introverts Don’t force them into conversation They can fake it but you don’t want that Intuitively analyze what will add comfort towards their situation E.g. Shy mother, connect with her kids This should be done before recording Find subjects that “light them up” Find a way to indirectly get into their “inner sanctum” and respect being there When Things Get Boring or Dull You got to stay present. DO NOT CHECK OUT Usually happens when you ask the “wrong” questions that don’t engage them “Tell me a story about how you felt” This asks them about an experience directly connected to an emotion Episode 7: Interviewing 101 - Respect the Ask and Give Realize what’s going on We’re asking for an interview like we usually do. We are the position of power. The guest is giving a lot (time, effort, energy, etc) We’re getting more than they are (content, money, etc) They’re in a scary position Some interviewers take advantage of the fight, flight, or freeze response. They push guests into angry and intense responses. DON’T DO THIS. ^^^ There are healthier ways to get to the core. Some Do’s: Be thankful and grateful Be warm and respectful Offer final edit rights Respect what the guest gives and what they’re willing to give. Episode 18: Interviewing 101 - Six Surprising Places to Research Information on Interviewees The usual suspects: Social Media Their Website The Library #1: Other Local Media News Outlets Helpful because you see what has been covered in other interview You don’t repeat, and they don’t get bored #2: Their Resume See where they’ve been and what they’ve done. See the forward facing identity they’re putting out Points like: Where they went to school What they studied Therefore, look at the media of the institution and see if anything was written about guest Work history See any pivots in their career See any new skills they’ve acquired #3: Their Institutional Resume Say, if they’re CIO at a corporation or professor at a university On their website See any passions they list #4: Their Published Works If they are a scientist, teacher, poet, writer, etc Read their works! Generate questions from there #5: A Mutual Friend Not always possible but… If somebody says “you need to interview them” x3, ask why. Learn more details for research and backgrounding. Learn the guest’s vibe through this mutual contact #6: Consult Your Audience Ask ”what would you like to hear me talk to (guest) about?” Increases relevance of questions because you’ll know that’s what the audience wants to know They also do some of the research that you may not have been able to access Episode 46: Interviewing Q&A - What to Do When Your Interviewee Gets Cold Feet #1: Identify Their Concerns Don’t immediately back down from doing the interview with them Give them the option! But not right away More often than not, doing the interview is not the big problem Ask what they’re really concern about: Worried about coming off poorly? Worried about fallout? Misusing content? #2: Normalize and Legitimize Their Concerns Don’t just say, “Your concern is valid and lots of people have them.” Go deeper with the validations “You’re not the first person to have these concerns.” “I know that this is a big ask that I’m requesting of you.” “I’m going to do my best to make sure that these things you’re concerned/afraid/worried about don’t come to pass.” #3: Reaffirm Their Agency Allow them to feel more comfortable It’s a trust builder — expand the container Reaffirm that they: Can veto/control what topics are discussed If they are uncomfortable with something, we can move on. #4: Reassure Them of Your Intent You are a friendly interviewer “I’m here to put you in a good light and have you sound as good as possible.” #5: Tighten Up the Container Specific to each interviewee because different people interview differently Chill vs. anxious Open vs. shy Act in accordance to their energy More trust building Being on time/relaxed, honoring their needs #6: Fulfill on Your Commitments You Made to Them Go through with promises: First cut preview Cutting out specific part Promoting business/socials Episode 63: How Much Should I Talk About Myself In an Interview? Think About Your Audience Why do they tune in? Some folks listen because they like you and your personality Some listen just because of the guests/interviewees Is your own story part of the narrative? Does your experience help open the conversation? Or does it close out the tale? Genre Talk podcast vs documentary style Long-form vs short-form 1-on-1 vs Groups Think About Purpose of the Interview What is The Ultimate Goal? Examples: Biography of guest Talk/conversation podcast Press junket Entertainment/Behind-the-scenes Marketing/Selling Product What Kind of Host Do You Want to Be? Joe Rogan 75% about him and his experiences Guest help prove his points David Letterman Quiet curiosity Puts guests up on platform **Ultimately: will listeners/audience gain anything from your “personal” take? Episode 64: How to Frame Your Interview Emails and Correspondence Before the Interview Time and Location of Interview Discuss how to get best sound and lighting Natural vs artificial Minimal background noise without Refrigerators Coolers Traffic Washing Machine/Dryer Running Water Air Conditioning Tech Points “We’ll send you the link x time before interview” It will be through Zoom/Google Meet Duration 30-40 minutes, 1-2 hours, etc Assurances Everything is editable Not live Set them at east and give security to they can focus on interview Tools Microphones Get a microphone for quality sound Keep away from spaces with above-average noise Audio Look more into riverside.fm Be aware of internet browser compatibility/updates Video Stabilize phone with tripod Update drivers on webcams Give guests a week or so to do the above During the Interview Get ready and pretty before the interview, no primping while your guest is there Genuinely thank them What they’re doing is scary/difficult They’re courageous for opening up and sharing Tell them there may be some exploration and follow up questions Assure them this is like a conversation “You can ask me all the questions you want!” After the Interview A transition out of communication with them THANK THEM Give them a timeframe of process time for the interview to complete and post Open up the floor for any more questions On editing process On how interview and content will be used Photo Gallery If you're a visual learner like I am, behold the written notes below instead of the sterile type above. Conclusion To be loved is to be seen. Sure, these episodes are geared towards the media production of conversations. The intention under them is very clearly to be a safe place for humans to express themselves. With instructions to "create the container," find a way to indirectly get into their inner sanctum' and respect being there, "respect the give," and to address and validate their concerns, it leads the listener to a realm of empathy for the human experience. And two people can never go wrong when they approach each other with empathy. Stand in their shoes, fill their shoes, walk a mile in their shoes—whatever footwear you may find. When you approach a question with genuine interest and go about things in a respectful way, folk are more open to sharing and expressing their thoughts and feelings. Read their works, learn their history, do your due diligence on backgrounding. See them for who they are and they will respond authentically. Find the humanity, respect the humanity, and share in the human experience. Thank you, Will Bowman, for creating the container to educate ourselves on how interviews can be an important human experience as any. Follow the energy! Katherine Arkady

Introduction Gaslighting is an insidious form of manipulation and psychological control. Victims of gaslighting are deliberately and systematically fed false information that leads them to question what they know to be true, often about themselves. They may end up doubting their memory, their perception, and even their sanity. Over time, a gaslighter’s manipulations can grow more complex and potent, making it increasingly difficult for the victim to see the truth. Okay but why isn't it called covert manipulation, brainwashing, or, I don't know...psychological warfare? Because of the movies :) Are you familiar with the movie Gaslight? It was released in 1944 and psychology hasn't been the same since. How is a movie so influential? How did it change how the public views mental health? And why did Jack/John/Gregory have to flirt with poor little Angela Lansbury (as Nancy Oliver) like that? The Table of Contents The Writer and His Play The First Movie The "Original" Movie Media Meets Psychology How Does One Know That It Is Gaslighting? Response to Gaslighting Conclusion The Writer and His Play Patrick Hamilton's Victorian thriller play, Gas Light premiered at the Richmond Theater of London on the fifth of December 1938. You may know Patrick Hamilton from his 13 novels or 10 stage plays or, as it was hella popular during the time: 10 Radio Plays. He didn't really like the deck of cards he was dealt in life. He, as they say, "went through it," with recovering from a drunk driving accident in which he was dragged and disfigured by a car. Let's not even start with the influenced his father and mother cursed him with. As we writers know, getting our feelings out through writing is the way to heal. Patrick really painted a scene of contempt for motorcars in Mr. Stimpson and Mr. Gorse (1953). He did similar processing with Hangover Square (1941). It deals with both alcohol-drinking practices of the time and the underlying political context like the rise of fascism and responses to it. Anthony Walter Patrick Hamilton So with Gas Light, Patrick Hamilton was keen on getting a message across. He struggled with periods of depression and social anxiety, often feeling alienated from society. Some biographers link this to the bleakness and claustrophobia of his plays. As opposed to his other stories, the MC of Gas Light is a woman. Making Bella/Paula the protagonist lets the audience experience the manipulation and self-doubt up close, which makes the suspense stronger. Her position as a woman in that era adds vulnerability and highlights the power imbalance in her marriage. Sandgate Theatre has their rendition of the stage play available in two parts on YouTube. Here's a link to the first. The First Movie We're being gaslit ourselves with the near destruction of a near identical British movie that creators tried to remove from this physical realm. I'm talking about Angel Street, premiered in 1940. This film adheres closer to the original play than the 1944 MGM remake does. When MGM remade the film with Charles Boyer and Ingrid Bergman, the studio attempted to have all prints of this earlier version destroyed. Fortunately, several prints escaped the fire (in fact, it is believed that director Thorold Dickinson surreptitiously struck a print himself before the negative was lost). You can watch Angel Street/Gaslight on YouTube. The "Original" Movie Gaslight is a 1944 film directed by George Cukor. IMDb user Jwelch5742 gives a summary: After the death of her famous opera-singing aunt, Paula Alquist (Ingrid Bergman) is sent to study in Italy to become a great opera singer as well. While there, she falls in love with charming Gregory Anton (Charles Boyer). After the two return to London, Paula begins to notice strange goings-on: missing pictures, strange footsteps in the night, and gaslights that dim without being touched. As she fights to retain her sanity, her new husband's intentions come into question. I'll watch anything with the incomparable Ingrid Bergman of Casablanca, Notorious, Spellbound, Murder on the Orient Express (1974), AND For Whom the Bell Tolls fame. Fun fact, this was Angela Lansbury's first film role! You can watch the movie on Internet Archive. Media Meets Psychology Rome wasn't built in a day and abusers don't trick their victims like a one and done. Gaslight did an excellent job in showing how little itty bitty manipulations reach macro-unfortunate results. When the play moved to film and television, this depiction reached a wider audience, embedding the idea of emotional manipulation into popular culture. A work of entertainment became a lens through which people could understand—and name—the insidious ways minds can be twisted. It became more commonly known and what a gift that is for mental health and survivors of DV. The term “gaslighting” started appearing in articles, advice columns, and early psychological literature by the 1960s to describe similar emotional abuse in real life. For example, in the 1969 book The Gaslight Phenomenon: A Study in Psychiatric Abuse therapists used the term to describe manipulative partners who systematically undermined their spouse’s perception of reality. In short: Hamilton’s play gave the concept, the Hollywood film gave it mass visibility, and psychologists and social commentators picked up the language That's why "gaslight" sticks! How Does One Know That It Is Gaslighting? DARVO It was coined by Jennifer Joy Freyd in a 1997 paper titled Violations of power, adaptive blindness, and betrayal trauma theory. (Feminism & Psychology, 7, 22-32.) and has since been peer-reviewed many times. And it's been word-widely accepted. According to Respect Victoria, the dedicated organization for the prevention of family violence and violence against women in Victoria, Australia: DARVO stands for Deny, Attack, Reverse Victim Offender. It’s a series of actions used by a perpetrator as a defense mechanism when their unkind behavior is questioned or called out. It works to confuse you and your sense of reality. Deny Denying your memory or perception of an event is gaslighting. They could be denying an agreement, or a conversation, or even something physical – like hitting you. Denying doesn’t always mean outright saying something never happened. It can also look like creating a story to explain their actions. In the example of denying a physical attack, for example, they might say something like: “Of course I didn’t hit you on purpose, you were about to hit me, so I put my hands out in defense,” – when in reality, you hadn't moved at all. Attack After denial comes the attack that tries to break down your credibility. The abuser might go on the offensive about your motivation for questioning them, your mental health (“you’re crazy!”), your parenting ability, your intelligence, etc. Anything that fuels the voice in your head that says maybe they are right, and you are wrong. They may also add extra lies like, “This is why your family doesn’t like you,” or “Everyone agrees with me on this,” which are designed to also isolate you from your friends and family. (And raise my blood pressure) Reverse Victim Offender Next comes blame shifting. This is where the perpetrator manages to make you out as the one at fault. They try to make you feel bad for bringing it up in the first place, or say that it was only because of something you did first. Response to Gaslighting Recognizing what is going on with DARVO is Step One. The Next Step is to trust your own perception. Keep a record of events, lean on supportive friends or professionals, and set clear boundaries with the abuser. Techniques like Grey Rock Method (responding in neutral, unemotional ways) can help reduce conflict and limit the manipulator’s power, while you focus on protecting your mental health and reclaiming control over your reality. Remember, you don’t have to convince the abuser or win an argument; your goal is self-preservation and clarity. Over time, consistently validating your own experiences and limiting engagement can weaken the manipulator’s influence and help you regain confidence in your own judgment. Disclaimer: I’m not a mental health professional—just a writer sharing research and insights. If you’re dealing with emotional abuse or gaslighting, consider reaching out to a qualified therapist or support organization for guidance. Conclusion Patrick Hamilton probably never imagined that his 1938 play Gas Light would do more than thrill audiences with suspense, but it did something far bigger. What writers always dream of, right? All the forms of Gas Light media that Patrick Hamilton had a hand in gave audiences a language to describe experiences that were often invisible or dismissed. Seeds were planted for psychologists, journalists, and everyday people to identify and discuss the behavior. In that sense, media has been more than a mirror. It has become a bridge for awareness, understanding, and, ultimately, empowerment. Have you heard about that gaslighting story? No you didn't. Katherine Arkady

Rachel Carson,   an American marine biologist, writer, and conservationist accepted the  Achievement Award of the American Association of University Women . In her acceptance speech, she is quoted saying: " Writing is a lonely occupation at best. Of course there are stimulating and even happy associations with friends and colleagues, but during the actual work of creation the writer cuts himself off from all others and confronts his subject alone. He moves into a realm where he has never been before — perhaps where no one has ever been. It is a lonely place, even a little frightening." And it's too true. In this sort of "professional loneliness," the only person who is going to write your story is you. It takes the acton of cutting yourself off from distraction to get the story written. Alternatively, once the story   is  written, one must go to the other extreme of expanding your community to share with as many people as possible. And Carson, in her infinite wisdom, rest her soul, continues this thought process in a letter written to  Dorothy Freeman: "You are wise enough to understand that being “a little lonely” is not a bad thing. A writer’s occupation is one of the loneliest in the world, even if the loneliness is only an inner solitude and isolation, for that he must have at times if he is to be truly creative. And so I believe only the person who knows and is not afraid of loneliness should aspire to be a writer. But there are also rewards that are rich and peculiarly satisfying." I've read the last quote several times and I get a lovely inspiration from it. Like, writers are going to struggle, so only certain people should be writers. But the end result makes it all worth it. That being said, using some information from Holt-Lunstad J, Robles TF, Sbarra DA.'s research titled, " Advancing social connection as a public health priority in the United States ," Dr. Vivek H. Murthy, the 19th and 21st Surgeon General of the United States, in his publication named " Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community " creates a visual approximation (on page 25) and makes the claim that " the mortality impact of being socially disconnected is similar to that caused by smoking up to 15 cigarettes a day. " And so, we are brought to ask ourselves: Is the sometimes all-consuming act of being a writer worth   that  health impact? Do I know all too well the impact that severe loneliness has had upon me? I'll carry it for a lifetime! And that's why, my fellow writers, it's so so so so so so so so so so so so so   so  important to prioritize  YOU . Because yes, the writing and the stories are important, but they mean nothing if it killed you to create them. This post is a formal invitation (read: executive order) to reach out to other writers. Yes yes, family, friends, and therapists are also important but that's another blog. I'm telling you to reach out to the other people who get   exactly  what it's like to be a writer. The people who will read Lorrie Moore's words, look you in the eye, and match you soul for soul. Do you think that's you? What does this excerpt from her story   How to Become a Writer  evoke? "The only happiness you have is writing something new, in the middle of the night, armpits damp, heart pounding, something no one has yet seen. You have only those brief, fragile, untested moments of exhilaration when you know: you are a genius. Understand what you must do." Tingles? Validation? Drive? My point is, the ones who get it get it. Don't talk to a cat about physics; don't ask a tree to explain the difference between berber and frieze carpets. Being a writer is reaching as far into reality as you can so you can understand... anything.  Being a writer is rendering yourself inhuman as you take on the spirit/energy/mana/vibes/essence of all around you in order to properly put the human experience into words. You are a genius. Understand what you must do. REACH OUT TO WRITERS I get it. You're safe in your bubble. But you're smoking 15 cigarettes a day in that bubble. "Okay then, how did you do it?" you ask. Well, first, I validated myself as a writer. I am the only opinion that has final say. So mote it be. Then I, a writer, went online. Reddit This is not a call to do a cannonball into the pool of socialization. This is a zero-entry pool method where we wet the bottom of our feet as step one. And that meant being online as a spectator. I joined the following subreddits: r/writing  - General discussions, advice, and resources for all types of writers r/writers  - A community for writers to share insights and support each other in the writing journey r/writingadvice  - Offers advice and discussions on writing techniques, genres, and more r/WritersGroup  - Connect with other writers and join discussions on various topics related to the craft r/selfpublish  - Focuses on self-publishing, including promotion, book design, and distribution advice r/CharacterDevelopment  - Helps writers create well-rounded characters with personality and depth r/BookMarketing101  - For authors looking to learn how to effectively market their books r/KeepWriting  - A motivational community that focuses on staying consistent and overcoming writer’s block r/WritingPrompts  - A great source of inspiration and practice, with daily prompts for all types of writers r/ShortStories  - Encourages writers to share and critique short stories r/PubTips  - a resourceful community offering advice on the publishing process, including querying agents and marketing strategies for writers r/WritingCircleJerk  - a humorous subreddit that satirizes writing communities and common clichés, providing a light-hearted take on writing discussions r/WritersIdeas  - a brainstorming hub where writers can post their ideas or prompts and seek inspiration and feedback from fellow members I was an observer. I learned from other people's experience. I'm grateful to have that opportunity and have posted and participated in kind. qtCritique Then I reached out to get critiques on my manuscript. This lovely website called   qtcritique.com  has an excellent set-up where writers read and critique the work (query letter, synopsis, short story, chapter, etc.) and earn points to then post their own pieces for critiquing. Fellow writers over there were above and beyond helpful in their suggestions. I recommend that website for your own works. I also recommend reaching out to fellow authors because you can form groups and be comrades in the occasionally hellish landscape that is the publishing world. (or so I hear from folks on reddit--still querying, friends!) Writing Conferences/Workshops Being online is great and all but nothing beats the rush of in-person events. They're not usernames, they're not bound inside Zoom rectangles, the writers are there! They're real! And   you're real . You're on your way, kid. Writers from around the area flock to one central location. This is the prime spot to say hi and ask what genre they write in. You all may be strangers at registration but, by the end of the day, loads of emails are exchanged, critique partners have been found, and you did 8-10 hours of socializing with other humans. You put down the pack of smokes that day. Writer-centric workshops and conferences have a wealth of information from published authors and industry experts. Just read the titles of the speakers/workshops/seminars/panels that were available to writers: But Do You NEED a Literary Agent? — Traditional vs. Self-Publishing (& What Agents Really Do) Building Your Author Brand & Marketing Plan How to Write Great Chapter Beginnings: The S.P.R.I.N.G.S. Method “Writers Got Talent” — a Page 1 Critique Fest Nonfiction Book Proposal 101: How to Sell a Nonfiction Book ASK AN AGENT ANYTHING: Open Agent Q&A Panel Polishing Your Novel: Key Points And Tips In Editing Are We There Yet? How Place Informs Writing Creating Collections Indie Publishing Panel What to Expect After the Book Deal: Everything You Need to Know Examining the Paths of Successful Authors: Best Strategies Based on Advice of Bestselling Authors and Publicists from Major Publishing Houses Amazon 101: Kindle Direct Publishing Literary Agent Panel – Meet the Agents Making Keywords Count: Increasing Your Book’s Discoverability on Amazon How to Build Your Author Platform He Said, She Said: How to Write Opposite Genders Correctly And the   LITERARY AGENTS ! Not only do they give the talks, they sit for author pitches ON THE SPOT! They're looking for writers like you and want to hear the next greatest novel. No longer are you waiting for weeks via email queries. For a changing rate depending on the conference, writers can get immediate feedback! It's a trifecta of writer goals: improve your craft, get yourself out there for publishing, and form a community of writers. Where can you find out more about these workshops and conferences? Writing Day Workshops :   https://www.writingdayworkshops.com/ They tour nationally in the United States and have both in person and online options. Poets&Writers :   https://www.pw.org/conferences_and_residencies This publication keeps up to date on conferences all over! You're able to filter the search for the event type, state, and admission price. The Write Life :   https://thewritelife.com/writers-conferences/ Is actually where I found out about Writing Day Workshops. They organize them by categories of General Interest, Fiction Conferences, Blogging, Freelancing, Children's Book Writing and Illustrating, Christian Writing, and Indie Publishing and Self-Publishing. PLUS they have international listings outside of the United States: Canada, UK and Ireland, Europe, Asia and Oceania, and Central and South America. SelfPublishing.com :   https://selfpublishing.com/top-book-conventions/ Also has an excellent list. They also have really good information on how to make a choice. Searching "Writers Conferences  + (your State or Nearest Major City)" There is no lack of information on a search to get you where you need to go. Online Conferences Speaking of going anywhere, you don't even have to leave your house! Since the panini, Zoom conferences have been popping up. See where your social media algorithm takes you! Writing Groups Joining a writing group opens the door to a support system that can keep you motivated and engaged. Not only do you have folk that can celebrate a milestone with you, but you are the folk for other writers that celebrate with them! More celebrations for everybody   because writing is not a zero-sum game! Writing groups typically fall into a few main types and each cater to different needs: Critique groups  focus on providing detailed feedback on each other's work, allowing writers to improve their craft through constructive criticism. Workshopping groups  might have a similar feedback structure but are often more collaborative, with members brainstorming plot ideas, character development, or stylistic choices together. C asual meetups  that emphasize social interaction and support, offering a space to discuss everything from writing struggles to industry news without the pressure of critiquing work. Whether in-person or virtual, writing groups can be customized to suit each member’s needs. Finding a writing group that fits your style and objectives may take some exploration, but plenty of options are out there. Online, platforms like   Scribophile ,  Critique Circle , or even forums like  Reddit’s writing subreddits  can be a good starting point. Social media platforms, especially writing communities on Twitter and Facebook, also frequently feature groups or events for writers. Locally, check library bulletin boards, bookstore event calendars, or   Meetup.com , which hosts many groups for writers of various genres. Many of these spaces offer a trial period, so you can get a feel for the group dynamics before committing. And this goes beyond logistics. Take time to find a writing group that aligns with your goals and feels like a safe, supportive space. Ask yourself what you want out of the group: Are you looking for direct critiques, general encouragement, or a mix of both? Consider group size as well; larger groups may offer diverse perspectives but may lack the intimacy of a smaller, more focused circle. Also, be aware of group dynamics. Ideally, group members should be respectful, open-minded, and constructive in their feedback. Joining a group with clear guidelines for giving and receiving feedback can ensure a positive experience, helping you grow while feeling supported. Conclusion Being a writer means you do a lot of work on your own, but it doesn't have to be lonely! These are some, but not nearly all the ways in which you can meet other writers. So take your health into consideration with your writing, put down the cigarettes, and get to know your fellow writers. Where have you found success in finding other writers? How did you reach out to your writing community? How have you benefitted rom having writer friends? Share in the comments below! It takes a writer to know a writer, Katherine Arkady

Introduction Readers, I am older than Google. It was officially launched in 1998 by Larry Page and Sergey Brin to market Google Search , which has become the most used web-based search engine . Technically, the search algorithm was first developed in 1996. That was known as "BackRub." Google is a much better name. And Google has allowed us humans to open up our world to knowledge. But how did scholars and curious readers search for this knowledge before the Google? In libraries, at least, the organization was done by the deep-rooted, the enduring, the organized ✨ Dewey Decimal System ✨ Even with Google and other preferred search engines on the internet, the Dewey Decimal System is an essential tool for every writer to keep in their back pocket. How much do you know about it? Why is it still used? And how can you use it for your own writing? Dewey in 1890 Origins: Who Was Dewey, and Why Decimal? I'm always one to say that people have their own timelines. Success can be found at any age. For Melvil Dewey, his time to shine was at the unweathered age of 25. According to his Wikipedia page , " he attended rural schools and determined early on that his destiny was to reform the education of the masses." What a guy. Just wanting to watch the world learn. Outside of the Dewey Decimal System, check out his other accomplishments: He founded the Library Bureau , which sold high-quality index-cards and filing-cabinets, and established the standard dimensions for catalog cards. He advocated spelling reform ; he changed his name from the usual "Melville" to "Melvil", without redundant letters, and for a time changed his surname to "Dui." From 1883 to 1888 he was chief librarian at the Columbia College Libraries . During his time as director of the New York State Library (1888–1906), Dewey established a program of traveling libraries. From 1888 to 1900, he served as secretary and executive officer of the University of the State of New York . Dewey became a member of the American Library Association's Hall of Fame in 1951. Back to the decimals: Dewey had a plan. After earning his undergrad at Amherst College, Dewey was hired to manage Amherst's library and reclassify its collections. He worked out a new scheme that superimposed a system of decimal numbers on a structure of knowledge first outlined by Sir Francis Bacon . He may have also found inspiration from the card system of Italian publisher Natale Battezzati as he's cited in Dewey's pamphlet prefaces as "the most fruitful source of ideas." You know how calming it is to walk through the shelves of a library? This system was created at a time when patrons of a library weren't allowed to browse through the shelves unless you were a most privileged (read: wealthy) patron. In fact, most American libraries at the time organized books based on the height of the book and when it was acquired. Come on. What a silly way to go about it. You mean that a book about dinosaurs would be right next to a book about philosophy if they were the same size and acquired at a similar time? And the dinosaur book may be next to a completely different book at a different library because they got a philosophy book later on? The big innovation of the Dewey Decimal System was to position books on the shelves in relation to other books on similar topics. This was excellent for a movement toward open access for patrons. It was much easier for folk to find the books this way. How It Works It may seem complicated at first, but, I promise you, there's a basic structure to it all. The numbers of a book land between 000 and 999. Each hundred is separated into ten (10) broad categories of knowledge: 000s  – General Knowledge (encyclopedias, information, newspapers, periodicals, computer science) 100s  – Philosophy & Psychology 200s  – Religion 300s  – Social Sciences (politics, law, education, anthropology, ) 400s  – Language 500s  – Science 600s  – Technology, Medicine 700s  – Arts & Recreation 800s  – Literature (rhetoric, prose, poetry, drama) 900s  – History & Geography And then the books go into further decimal expansions. For example: 500 = Natural Sciences 510 = Math 516 = Geometry 516.3 = Analytic Geometry Each book gets a number + cutter code (for the author/title) to determine shelf order. The deeper into the decimals you go, the more specific things get. For example, at the University of Illinois' Library , here are all the subjects that fit into Class 700 - Arts and Recreation : 700 The arts 701 Philosophy & theory 702 Miscellany 703 Dictionaries & encyclopedias 704 Special topics 705 Serial publications 706 Organizations & management 707 Education, research, related topics 708 Galleries, museums, private collections 709 Historical, areas, persons treatment 710 Civic & landscape art 711 Area planning (Civic art) 712 Landscape architecture 713 Landscape architecture of trafficways 714 Water features 715 Woody plants 716 Herbaceous plants 717 Structures 718 Landscape design of cemeteries 719 Natural landscapes 720 Architecture 721 Architectural structure 722 Architecture to circa 300 723 Architecture from circa 300 to 1399 724 Architecture from 1400 725 Public structures 726 Buildings for religious purposes 727 Buildings for education & research 728 Residential & related buildings 729 Design & decoration 730 Plastic arts Sculpture 731 Processes, forms, subjects of sculpture 732 Sculpture to circa 500 733 Greek, Etruscan, Roman sculpture 734 Sculpture from circa 500 to 1399 735 Sculpture from 1400 736 Carving & carvings 737 Numismatics & sigillography (I looked this up and Numismatics is the study of coins and other forms of currency, while Sigillography is the study of seals, particularly those used on documents. ✨ The More you Know ✨ ) 738 Ceramic arts 739 Art metalwork 740 Drawing & decorative arts 741 Drawing & drawings 742 Perspective 743 Drawing & drawings by subject 744 Not assigned or no longer used 745 Decorative arts 746 Textile arts 747 Interior decoration 748 Glass 749 Furniture & accessories 750 Painting & paintings 751 Techniques, equipment, forms 752 Color 753 Symbolism, allegory, mythology, legend 754 Genre paintings 755 Religion & religious symbolism 756 Not assigned or no longer used 757 Human figures & their parts 758 Other subjects 759 Historical, areas, persons treatment 760 Graphic arts Printmaking & prints 761 Relief processes (Block printing) 762 Not assigned or no longer used 763 Lithographic (Planographic) processes 764 Chromolithography & serigraphy 765 Metal engraving 766 Mezzotinting & related processes 767 Etching & drypoint 768 Not assigned or no longer used 769 Prints 770 Photography & photographs 771 Techniques, equipment, materials 772 Metallic salt processes 773 Pigment processes of printing 774 Holography 775 Not assigned or no longer used 776 Not assigned or no longer used 777 Not assigned or no longer used 778 Fields & kinds of photography 779 Photographs 780 Music 781 General principles & musical forms 782 Vocal music 783 Music for single voices or the voice 784 Instruments & Instrumental ensembles 785 Chamber music 786 Keyboard & other instruments 787 Stringed instruments (Chordophones) 788 Wind instruments (Aerophones) 789 Not assigned or no longer used 790 Recreational & performing arts 791 Public performances 792 Stage presentations 793 Indoor games & amusements 794 Indoor games of skill 795 Games of chance 796 Athletic & outdoor sports & games 797 Aquatic & air sports 798 Equestrian sports & animal racing 799 Fishing, hunting, shooting And it goes deeper! But this is a blog post, not a dissertation—which would fall into the 384 class representing higher education and 378.1662 specifying dissertations. Are you seeing how this works now? Tricks for Reading the Numbers Outside of becoming a librarian or library sciences volunteer, how can somebody learn the system for their researching purposes? Mnemonics can come into play! I'm working on memorizing the following: G reat P eople R ead S mart L ibrary S ections T o A ccess L ots of H istory G  = General works (000) P  = Philosophy & Psychology (100) R  = Religion (200) S  = Social Sciences (300) L  = Language (400) S  = Science (500) T  = Technology (600) A  = Arts & Recreation (700) L  = Literature (800) H  = History & Geography (900) I wish I could offer an easier trick, but the long and the short of it is that practice is what's required. For visual learners , LibraryThing.com offers a great visual representation of how things are broken down from the larger categories into the detailed niche topics. https://www.librarything.com/mds/ I highly recommend putzing around with the very helpful tool. You'll be able to learn neat niches you wouldn't otherwise have found. Think big about what you want to know, and then whittle it down from there. Trouble shooting is encouraged! Subject: Dinosaurs That's probably science right? Yeah, Class 500 And out of those choices, Biology fits dinosaurs best. Or...no wait, "fossils and prehistoric life." Out of all the fossil examples, they're cold blooded vertebrates At this level of 567, I've found the gamut on "Dinosaurs," as in ancient animals. But what if I wanted to learn about a specific reptilian type? 567.9 it is! I can search by family. I can search by land or sea types. I can get down to the very Apatosaurus I was thinking about. And, through this process, I found a great book: Apatosaurus (True Books: Dinosaurs) by Elaine Landau Subject: Tasseomancy/Tasseography (Tea Leaf Reading) That's divination. So maybe religion? I went to "Religion > Other Religions > Religions not provided for elsewhere > Religions of other origin > Modern revivals or witchcraft and paganism" 299.4 for pagan practices, but no dice. Maybe...Philosophy and Psychology? (1) Oh definitely, there's "Parapsychology and Occultism" (13) And in that, "Specific topics in Parapsychology and Occultism" (133) And just like Professor Sybill Patricia Trelawney , I'm looking for the Divinatory Arts. (133.3) Lo and behold, we have "Fortune-telling by crystals and stones; dowsing; fortune-telling by cards, tea leaves and coffee grounds, oracles and sibyls" (133.32) No specific enough! We must tack on those decimal places and go to "Fortune-telling by cards, tea leaves and coffee grounds, oracles and sibyls" (133.324) You know what I'm going to say: More! It was a fun journey to the end where I ultimately land on 133.324 4 " Fortune-telling by tea leaves and coffee grounds " And find Reading Tea Leaves (The Modern Mystic Library) by A Highland Seer And you'll also find a great book using this process! (But also consider volunteering at your library) Why It's Still Around (Nearly 150 Years Later!) Many systems have tried to replace ol' Dewey. I'm looking at you, Library of Congress Classification . But the thing is, The Dewey Decimal System is scalable, offering space to new ideas within those decimals. It's intuitive and familiar and can be universally applied—especially when technology isn't available. The system not only remains dominant in public libraries, it is also used in 135 countries! Nothing is perfect, there are existing critiques about ethnocentrism, outdated categories, and lack of inclusivity, but many libraries now adapt it with modernized overlays or signage. Dewey in Pop Culture If you're at the library, subjects regarding Pop Culture are primarily categorized under 300 - Social Sciences, specifically within 302 Social Interaction (which includes mass culture and popular culture) and 306 Culture and institutions, with further subdivisions depending on the specific aspect of pop culture.  If you're not at the library and just looking for media with mentions of the Dewey Decimal in Pop Culture, may I direct you to the following: UHF (1989) : Weird Al works at a public access station. There is a very meta advertisement for a show called "Conan the Librarian" where, after a patron asks where he can find a book on Astronomy, he lifts the guy into the air and menacingly asks: "Don't you know the Dewey Decimal System?" In Seinfeld   Season 3, Episode 5 ("The Library") , Jerry gets a notice about an overdue book from 1971. He thinks he's being punked on a radio station but, ultimately has to visit the library. While walking in, Kramer says , " The Dewey Decimal System, what a scam that was. Boy that Dewey guy really cleaned up on that deal. " Party Girl (1995) is about a 20-something, irresponsible party girl who is bailed out of jail by her librarian godmother. To repay the loan, she starts working at the library and gradually turns her life around. The Dewey Decimal System is a recurring motif of the movie. Watch for yourself on YouTube ! 9:19 : When Mary is hired as a library clerk she is sarcastically asked by another clerk, "I assume you're familiar with the Dewey Decimal System?" 30:07 : Judy, her godmother, chastises her saying, "I know it is not your life's work. But for your information, Freud's study of Dora is not a biography. It is the cornerstone of his psychoanalysis--that is psychology dear. The psychology section is, for your information, in the 100s. Along with philosophy and logic . It amazes me how you can come here every day and absorb no knowlede of the system. A trained monkey learned this system on PBS in a matter of hours. Recode it." 36:00 : Librarans rejoice! There is a literal montage about Mary learning, practicing, and executing the Dewey Decimal System. It's worth noting that she's learning from the Dewey Decimal Classification (DCC) 20. Now, in the year 2025, we're up the a DDC 23 ! 41:50 : Mary even gets protective over the system! She sees a guy putting away a book all willy nilly. "I guess you didn't know we had a system in putting books away here. Now I'm curious. You were just randomly putting that book on the shelf, is that it? You've just given us a reat idea. I mean, why are we wasting our time with the Dewey Decimal System when your system is so much easier? Much easier! We'll just put the books everywhere! You hear that everybody? Our friend here has given us a geat idea. We'll just put the books any damn place we choose! We don't care, right? Isn't that right?" She's then told to go on break. 55:30 : Mary is also such a good friend that she organizes the records of her DJ friend, Leo, by the DDC. "They're organized by the Dewey Decimal System, which s perfect for small collections like yours. Unlike the Library of Congress ." She then teaches him the system! Quiz! "If My Personality Were a Dewey Number…" In Conclusion! Turns out, reference isn’t just where we go to find something — it’s also how we decide what knowledge is worth shelving. And humans, lovable humans, just need to organize things to understand how the world works. So, next time you're at the library, thank " Melvil Dui " for setting up your writing research for success! Now identifying as 808.042 ( Literature > rhetoric & criticism > Rhetoric and collections of literary texts from more than two literatures > Rhetoric and anthologies > Handbooks for writers > English), Katherine Arkady

Introduction I was sitting on my living room couch working on editing my latest manuscript when my mother came in to offer me some tea. "Sit up straight," she said. Now reader, I was in a car accident in 2014 that fractured my L5 vertebrae. I was in a back brace for three and a half months. Worse yet, that was during Halloween, Thanksgiving, and Christmas. My posture was made PERFECT because it had to be. There was no slouching in the brace. And I have kept up with that posture—or at least, I thought I had. Turns out, in the depths of my editing process, I had slouched further and further, closer and closer to the screen of my laptop that was sitting at my lap. Oops. Maybe that's where the recent shoulder pain had come from. I wasn't able to get around without a dull pain in my shoulder blade. Maybe that's also where the hip pain has come from. Sitting in all sorts of positions, but never in the correct posture. I set my laptop aside, stood up, felt all 33 of my vertebrae click into place, and decided to go stand against a wall to do some stretches. Reader, how can something that brings my mind such joy, my heart such passion, and my eyes such beautiful things to read also make my joints weary, my spine bent, and my muscles sore? A lack of prevention. We as writers need to do our due diligence to our bodies to prepare for the work that is ahead of us. Writing is a mental workout, yes, but a part of your body of work is also the body of you . You have to amend bad habits with your body before problems start. The Writer's Body Writers have their pains, but each writer gets a different flavor of it. Some are overcome with neck strain from bad posture and looming over a laptop. (Me) Some are quick and fast with typing their words and that leaves them with tired, tired hands and wrists and starts to feel carpal tunnely. (Me) Some are so used to sitting anywhere they can and that means never having standard seating to get used to and that causes hips to get out of wack. (Me) Some have let their eye prescription lapse and are peering through old lenses and squinting over the 12pt Times New Roman text they've been editing for the last three hours to no avail. (Me) While I was stretching, I called my sister. She's an Occupational Therapist and, as she is my blood, I always have her on retainer for advice. "I have writer's pains," I said like I always do. "Did you read the articles I sent you?" Emma said like she always does. But, dear reader, you should know, these articles are full of " medicus incomprehensibilis ," something I, without a Master's Degree, cannot translate on my own. For example — and with the (sparing) use of ChatGPT: "Prolonged thoracolumbar kyphotic posturing may contribute to myofascial dysregulation and upper crossed syndrome." Translation: Sitting hunched over too long can mess up your back muscles and cause shoulder/neck pain. "Repetitive static load on the cervical musculature exacerbates tension-type cephalalgia." Translation: Holding your head in one position too long can give you a headache. "Ergonomic deviation from the neutral wrist position increases risk for median nerve entrapment." Translation: Bad wrist posture can lead to carpal tunnel. "Suboptimal workstation alignment may lead to musculoskeletal microtrauma over time." Translation: A badly set-up desk can quietly injure your body over weeks or months. This is good in the sense that I know what writer's bodies can go through. But what do I do about it??? Ergonomics 101 for Writers If you're traditionally schooled in Writing or something Language-Adjacent, I'll assume that you were told about proper sitting habits. I wouldn't know, I have a video production degree and attended YouTube University for my writer lessons. As such, I reenrolled in YouTube University to learn about ideal posture setup for desk/laptop use. Things like chair height, screen height, keyboard placement. Here are the videos I watched: What Is The Right Position To Have While Writing? by Australian Graphology This one may lean into anecdotes to get the point across, but it's a good video for noticing writing posture habits that seem innocuous at first, but can turn into a long-term problem. As for Michelangelo's eye problems? See for yourself. Why writers should care about their posture | Posture can give you a performance edge, here's how by Author Nation Melody Ann of Author nation meets with Aesha Tahir, author of Unhunched: Discover Wellness Through Posture In this video, the two discuss: How can authors create a more confident body language How posture can give us a performance edge How to be aware of your desk posture Breathing exercises to improve posture. Yoga For Writers | 30-Minute Yoga Practice by Yoga With Adriene Calming vibes. Gratitude for being a writer. Come as you are energy. Adriene has excellent instruction that not only verbally affirms what it's like to be a writer but also tailors the poses for the journey and physical demands of being a writer. The mantra at the end is worth returning to even without doing the yoga Body position for writing and other table top activities by Greg Johnston The Best Posture for Writers w/ demo! by WriteHollyDavis Sitting Posture Correction by Joel Laing An oldie but a goodie. This video is 12 years old but the advice is timeless. Joel is associated with Spine Health Physiotherapy and they specialize in the research-proven McKenzie Method . Accessible Writing Tools I have a blog post titled Building Your Writer Toolbox that discusses accessible writing tools for every need. But, since you're here: Voice-to-Text Software Have physical limitations? Dictate your thoughts and have them transcribed into text, providing an efficient and hands-free writing experience. Adaptive Keyboards You may benefit from customizable or specialized keyboards, such as those with larger keys, reduced mobility, or programmable key mapping Wrist Rests for Keyboard and Mouse A gel or memory foam wrist rest (for both keyboards and notebooks) provides comfortable support for the wrists, reducing fatigue for writers who spend a lot of time typing or journaling. Writing Desk with Adjustable Heights An adjustable standing desk can provide the flexibility to alternate between sitting and standing, promoting better posture and reducing strain during long writing sessions. Pencil Grips Adding a soft grip to your writing tool can make a huge difference in comfort, especially for writers who experience hand fatigue or have difficulty maintaining a firm grip. Vertical Mice A vertical mouse allows your hand to remain in a natural handshake position, reducing strain on the wrist and forearm during long periods of use. Posture Correctors A posture corrector brace can help writers maintain an upright posture by gently reminding them to keep their shoulders back, preventing slouching that can lead to neck and back pain. These fixes don't need to damage your wallet. Resources are available with some creativity. Here are some "dupes" for your writerly needs: Laptop & Screen Elevation Problem:  Screen too low = neck strain Changes: Stack books, board games, or sturdy shoeboxes  to raise your laptop or monitor to eye level. Use a cookie sheet or cutting board  as a makeshift platform over your lap or desk for added surface stability. Keyboard & Wrist Relief Problem:  Awkward wrist angles = carpal tunnel risk Changes: Roll up a hand towel or washcloth  as a DIY wrist rest in front of your keyboard. Use a separate keyboard  (even a cheap or old one) so you can elevate your laptop screen without straining your arms. Chair Comfort & Posture Boosts Problem:  Chair is too low, hard, or lacks back support Changes: Sit on a folded blanket, pillow, or yoga block  to raise yourself to better desk height. Tuck a small cushion, rolled towel, or sweatshirt  behind your lower back for lumbar support. If your feet don't reach the floor for proper grounding, place a thick book or yoga mat under your feet . Eye Strain & Lighting Fixes Problem:  Screen is too bright or poor lighting Changes: Use "Night Shift" or "Blue Light Filter"  mode on your devices to reduce eye strain. Angle a desk lamp with a light-weight dish towel draped over it ( safely, away from bulbs! )  for soft, diffused light. Use a mirror to bounce natural light  onto your workspace if your lighting is dim. Movement is Medicine Several thousand years ago, humans weren't sitting in one place for hours on end. They were hunting and, dog gonnit, they were grooving. I suggest you do the same for your writing: How to Hunt Your body will tell you, but hunt  down the ouches before they become chronic. Recognize the early signs of strain. 1. Wrist Pain / Carpal Tunnel Syndrome Signs : Tingling, numbness, or pain in the wrist or fingers, especially after long periods of typing. The wrist may feel stiff or sore, and you might notice it more when typing or using a mouse. Cause : Repetitive strain from typing or poor wrist positioning. 2. Neck and Shoulder Tension Signs : Tightness or soreness in the neck, upper back, or shoulders, often after sitting hunched over a desk for long periods. Cause : Poor posture, especially leaning forward or looking down at a screen or paper for extended periods. 3. Lower Back Pain Signs : Discomfort or aching in the lower back, particularly after prolonged sitting without proper lumbar support. Cause : Lack of proper support while sitting, prolonged sitting, or poor posture (slouching) 4. Eye Strain Signs : Dry eyes, blurred vision, headaches, or difficulty focusing after looking at a screen or page for long periods. Cause : Staring at a screen without taking breaks or sitting too close to a screen. 5. Tight Hips or Hamstrings Signs : Stiffness in the hips or legs after sitting for too long without movement. You might notice tightness when trying to stand up or walk around after sitting for hours. Cause : Prolonged sitting in a sedentary position. 6. Headaches Signs : Tension headaches, often felt in the forehead, temples, or base of the skull. These can occur after long writing sessions or prolonged staring at a screen. Cause : Poor posture, eye strain, or tension in the neck and shoulders. 7. Hand or Finger Numbness Signs : Numbness or tingling in the fingers, especially when writing or typing for extended periods. Cause : Repetitive stress on the hands or poor wrist positioning (like resting the wrist on hard surfaces). How do you hunt these strains down like Liam Neeson ? Pay Attention to Discomfort : This sounds obvious, but it's easy to overlook small signs. If you feel any discomfort or tightness in your wrists, back, neck, or eyes, take note. It’s easy to brush off slight pain as normal or to power through, but early recognition is key . Self-Check During Writing : Set reminders to check in with your posture and ergonomics every 30 minutes or so. Are your shoulders tense? Are you hunching over? Are your wrists at an awkward angle? Small adjustments can make a difference!! Notice Patterns : If you notice recurring pain after certain kinds of writing sessions (e.g., after hours of typing or when writing by hand for extended periods), it could be an early sign that your body is experiencing strain in that specific area. How to Groove Our ancestors weren’t chained to a chair for eight hours a day—they moved constantly. Movement was life. As writers, we can learn from that by weaving grooving —purposeful movement—into our work sessions. Think of it like a dance with your body and mind. Try using the classic Pomodoro technique : 25 minutes of focused writing, then 5-minute movement breaks. But don’t just get up for coffee. Use those five minutes to stretch your shoulders, roll your wrists, do some gentle spinal twists, or even give yourself jazz hands —seriously, splaying and shaking out your fingers reduces tension from typing. Standing desks  are another game-changer. You don’t have to stand all day, but alternating between sitting and standing keeps your body awake and your posture more natural. Even better, experiment with dictation walks —record your ideas on your phone while strolling around the block or pacing your living room. You’ll be surprised how movement can unstick your thoughts. The key is variety. Don’t stay frozen in one position. Even the simplest habit—like setting an hourly reminder to stretch for five minutes—can keep your body happier, your mind sharper, and your writing sessions more sustainable over the long haul. Conclusion If you take care of your body, it will take care of you. Your creativity and overall output will be greater and of more quality because you allowed your body to thrive in its environment with new techniques and skills. These changes don't need to be huge. I've said it once, I'll say it three thousand more times: micro changes make macro results . Just pick up one (1) new habit today, and give it a try. Do you have any body-saving hacks? I invite you to share them in the comments! In the meantime, sit up straight, Katherine Arkady

Introduction “Flowers are restful to look at. They have neither emotions nor conflicts.” —Sigmund Freud But the emotions and conflicts in getting to that bloom are the opposite of restful. Yes, gardening, the "easy-going" past time of the silver-haired neighbors in those "easy-going" Hallmark movies. Same sort of energy as the "easy-going" writers having a burp of writer's block while writing their immediate Best Seller novel. AS IF Readers, I am always one to suggest doing research for your writing. I was working on a character who worked as a gardener. I had a green thumb from my mother, but I felt I needed more knowledge on flora to properly write about my dear Helene. Where does one study gardening? There are, admittedly, many avenues. The avenue I took was through the extension program of Michigan State University. Because MSU is an agricultural college—more specifically the first agricultural college in the United States when it was originally known as the Agricultural College of the State of Michigan —it's their goal to "disseminate information from university research to communities on subjects like agriculture." I took online classes over twelve weeks. This instruction was given by my area MSU Extension Consumer Horticulture Educator with 25+ peers. We studied soil science, fruiting trees and vegetables, perennials, annuals, shoreline environments, composting, integrated pest management and a whole lot else . If you have the interest in learning more about gardening, volunteering in your community, and becoming closer with the natural world, I highly recommend you reach out to your local extension office to learn more. You learn more about the earth and, in turn, you learn more about yourself. The gardening community is generous and always willing to answer my many, many , many questions. And it's not just Michigan. There are Extension Master Gardener programs all over the United States ! After taking the course, passing the final test, and volunteering for 40 hours in my community's gardens, I became a Certified Master Gardener. After volunteering 100+ hours, I am now a Certified Advanced Master Gardener. I dare say that I know my stuff. But here's my hang up : there's a huge difference between knowing a whole bunch of stuff and knowing how to implement a whole bunch of stuff. I wanted to be a perfect gardener doing everything right on the first go. I wanted to have a perfect garden my first season. Just like I want to be a writer doing everything right on the first go with a perfect novel in my first year of writing. AND THAT WASN'T HAPPENING 😩😩😩 I had to sit myself down and ask a very annoying question: How can I cultivate the patience to complete all of this? I reached out to my fellow extension Master Gardeners to get their opinions. The Slow Magic of Growth I've gardened through many seasons with Carolyn and Darlene. Like many of the volunteer gardeners, they have become excellent mentors. They know how gardens change over the years and they know the character building work that gardens take out of you. Above all, they know about the slow magic of growth. I asked them, " Gardening requires a lot of time before you see results. What helps you stay motivated when progress isn’t visible yet?" Darlene had this to say: I’m fortunate to have plants in all different stages of growth/progress (sleep, creep & leap—and, of course, there’s always dead), so my garden is always changing & evolving. Progress to me could be no invasives in my bed this year which would only be visible to me. Sharing the joy I feel when I’m successful. Whether seeds, plants, veggies/fruits, “how-to's” that worked for me, pictures of my progress, or a slow walk through my garden with a friend/fellow gardener/grandchildren. Constantly adding something new, exciting or challenging—such an a new plant, a new method of propagation, or overwintering. Carolyn offered this: Talking to other gardeners, taking care of existing plants and educating myself about all the benefits of gardening... its a process and an experiment. Growth is slow. That's not a flaw. It's just the way that it is. Ugh, I know . You work on your drafts and work on your weeding and work on your query letter and work on your tomato plants and work some more on finding agents asking for something remotely like your story and don't see immediate results. You have to practice utmost faith that your efforts will pay off. However, without seeing results, motivation can certainly shrivel up. I know this because I've had a Menty B or two (or four)  about pitching to 40+ literary agents, making edits on my manuscripts, and trying for a social media platform. (And about my perennials coming back the next year after super sun damage because I planted it in the wrong spot the year before, but that's still a soft spot. RIP coral bells.) Carolyn and Darlene know the importance of setting the tone first. Goals can be large like a vegetable garden overhaul. They can be as manageable as ensuring there are no invasive plants in your garden. Us writers can do the same by setting the tone for our goals. The goal can be as large as finishing a manuscript in six months to as manageable as writing one (1) page each day. Darlene's advice to "take a slow walk through my garden with a friend/fellow gardener/grandchildren" cannot be overstated. As the circa-1930s proverb says, " A problem shared is a problem halved. " Having community to share your bountiful garden with is healing. Having community to share your bountiful prose with is a great way to give you more space to EXIST. You'll be able to approach your goals in a calmer way with more space to process struggles. Remember this always: gardens eventually display progress. You see the sprouts erupt from the ground and climb up a trellis to reach the sun before it fruits. Writing progress? That is a liiittle harder to see. Being published at any point isn't assured like a healthy tomato is come September. After a load of work behind you and no offers ahead, there gets to be a point when you're questioning if you've done anything at all. The progress and action starts to happen in the roots. Deep in the dirt. Where you can't see much. Writing habits need to be set. Roots need to establish. As wise Qveen Herby says in her song " Mission ": Gotta get the roots 'fore you get the fruit. I'll take this time to recommend Qveen Herby  YET AGAIN for getting yourself to the ultimate level of Bad Bitchery. Your writing progress may still be in the roots but there is still action happening there. Just like Carolyn said, "its a process and an experiment." There's no one right way to garden. There's no one right way to write — if there was, that person would be rich . Failure isn't the end, either, it's just a learning opportunity. When you know more from Experiment #1, you can use that knowledge to set yourself up better for Experiment #2. Keep track of your work with a "Done List" or a proof-of-competency list, if you will, to remind yourself of what efforts you have put into the roots. Routine Care, Not Constant Output Sometimes, it's not about the harvest. Sometimes , it's not even about the growth. Paramount to all of this is the care. I'm talking quiet, consistent tending that happens even when nothing exciting is visible. Watering. Reading. Checking leaves. Checking typos. Watching for pests. Watching for literary scams . Turning the soil. Turning the pages of a potential comp title. Adjusting a pot just slightly so it gets better light. Adjusting your query letter ever so slightly so it has more punch. Again, you're not sure anything is going to come from the results. Outcomes are really difficult to predict. Efforts can be made, but the universe may have other plans. How do you stay patient with the unpredictability of it all? I asked the gardeners:  "Has gardening taught you anything about working with (rather than against) uncertainty—like unpredictable weather or slow growth?" Carolyn: Life can be much like growing plants, you have to find out the background and needs of the plants (or project), check for optimal conditions as much as possible, trust that growth is happening although it may begin slowly. You can’t yell at a seed to hurry up. You can’t flood it with water once and expect it to thrive. Care is cumulative. So is your creativity as a writer. Soil or story—nothing thrives when it’s rushed. You c̶a̶n̶'t̶ shouldn't force yourself to create big changes when gentle tending and the completion of small tasks will also get you to a g oal. Like the Motivational/Peak Performance/Fear Elimination/High-Performance/Abundance Mindset/Empowerment Coaches always say: micro changes make macro results . Darlene:     I’m more successful & work is easier if I don’t ignore or fight Mother Nature.     For instance, using a majority of native plants — strong, deep roots that can withstand the changing weather conditions, pests, and diseases. Also, how past practices (disease, pest, invasive management, non natives…) have ruined the balance of Mother Nature.  I try to focus on one day/week at a time and one or two tasks at a time. Like pruning all the roses, fertilizing, dividing plants, or one bed/area at a time. This usually gives me a good visual of progress and allows me to cross them off my task list. Often times I break down bigger projects into more manageable steps.  To Darlene's point: strong, deep roots like I mentioned in the first segment is what will help you withstand writing's versions of "changing weather conditions, pests, and diseases." Don't fight it. Roll with it. Trust that you've done the foundational work. Writers can get caught in the mindset that if they're not producing pages or hitting word counts, they’re falling behind. But the garden reminds us that tending  is part of the work. Even if you’re "just" showing up to sit with your ideas. Even if you're "just" reading something inspiring, or "just" revisiting a messy draft. Doing any of very manageable steps, you're cultivating conditions for growth in the bigger projects. Letting Go of Control You can do everything right, and still lose a plant. Weather changes. A late frost sneaks in. A pest shows up overnight. A plant that looked healthy yesterday just wilts without explanation. Come onnnnnnnnn. I asked the gardeners, " Gardening often involves unpredictable timelines—weather, seasons, growth cycles. When you feel behind or like things aren’t progressing as planned, how do you stay on track or adjust your approach? " Darlene: Unpredictable physical setbacks can play a role in adjusting:  As I get older I tend to switch tasks during my work day so I’m not straining the same muscles all day long — prune a little, dig a little, kneel a little (pray)…and change my attitude/expectations. Adjust my working time because I can’t tolerate when temps soar above the 80s. And sometimes when I miss a “gardening window” (pruning at the right time), it’s “Well, I’ll get to that next year.” Carolyn: Flexibility is key, there is always something to do in another area or on a different project. Lists and openness to revising the lists frequently, as well as, asking for help may be required and should be expected at times. Asking for help is often hard for me personally, but if you have a network of people who share similar passions, it makes it easier. No matter how experienced you are, gardening means facing the reality that you’re not in total control — and you never were. You adapt. You replant. You take notes for next season. You mourn the failure * briefly .* You talk about it with community. And then you keep going. Writers need to hear this, too. You can plan the perfect writing schedule, set ambitious goals, and show up consistently — and still hit a block. Still get stuck in revision. Still get a “no” after pouring yourself into something. That doesn’t mean you’ve failed. It means you’re in the middle of something that is alive. This is the lesson: flexibility is not weakness, it’s wisdom. So when your writing isn’t blooming the way you hoped—adjust the light! Give it more room. Pull a few weeds. Start again, if you must. But let go of the idea that control guarantees success. Growth doesn’t follow a script. Neither should you. Conclusion Picture a seed. Any kind of seed . On the surface, it looks like nothing. Just a small, unremarkable speck. But, buried in the dark, with time, care, and the right conditions, it becomes a garden. Ideas are like that, too! Drafts. Hunches. Maybe even a writer like you . Just...you know, go outside and get sunlight every once in a while. Creative work doesn’t happen all at once and it  doesn’t flourish under pressure . It needs space. It needs consistency. It needs patience. And most of all, it needs trust. Trust that what you have planted will become something (even if you can’t see it yet) . So I encourage you: approach your writing the way a gardener approaches their work.  Tend to it. Make room for growth. Let rest be part of the process. Don’t dig up the seed just because you’re anxious it’s not sprouting fast enough. Trust yourself. Give it time. And remember: slow growth isn’t no growth. It’s the real kind. 🌼🌻🌼🌻🌼🌻🌼 What will you tend to today? Katherine Arkady Bonus:  Here's a mini-game I coded while procrastinating the writing of this post 💚