How to Capture an Idea

falero.jpg

Falero. Departure of the Witches, 1878 (via.)

One of the best things about living in this era is that there are countless options available to capture ideas, digital or otherwise. You may have a moleskine in your pocket, but you still jot an idea down on your iphone, depending on what the idea is, the rhythm of it, and what you plan to do with it.

The decision to type or handwrite usually boils down to how fast do I need something captured and searchable? If I know I’m immediately going to use an idea, I usually write it as an email to myself. I delete the email as soon as the text is integrated in the intended project, whether it is an article or blog post or short story I’m writing.

When I come up with a somewhat poetic turn of phrase, I usually write it out on a paper notebook I always have with me. For years, I carried kraft brown Moleskine Cahiers, but now I’m obsessed with and never without Muji’s recycled paper note sets. (I also have the Chronotebook with me always, but mostly use it for mind mapping, rather than scheduling.)

muji.jpg

I title these notebooks something obscure (”Are you a sling shot or a snake charmer?) and date them with silver sharpie. It has to be silver sharpie or I really will not use the notebook. There’s probably a deeper rationalization for why I need silver titles on recycled brown paper covers — like how most of my work is about where the organic meets the inorganic, nature and technology at odds — but in any case that’s one area I’m uncompromisingly neurotic.

Attending a lecture, I would much prefer to take notes on my iPhone, but because that action is so often misconstrued, I usually write things down on whatever pamphlet was handed out before the event.

I could never type a journal. I always write them in ink, partly because my handwriting is so terrible, it may as well be in cyrillic. Handwritten, the secrets in my journal are safe from others, sometimes indecipherable even to myself just a few years later.

When I do type out my ideas, it’s because I need it fast. If I’ve got a story beginning to end in my head I will cancel anything to get straight to my laptop because otherwise key elements will escape from my brain between the time I’m going about my day and the time my fingers are typing it out.

Lately, I’m experimented with voice recognition like the DragonNaturallySpeaking iPhone app, and I’ll explain that in an upcoming post. I get a lot of use out of Simplenote on the go, but because typing on an iPhone presents hiccups, I dont ever bother with articles or conjunctions. Usually these notes result in lists of scattered nouns and verbs, to remind me of the original idea.olivetti_lettera.jpg

Reading about Cormac McCarthy’s Olivetti and knowing JG Ballard only used a typewriter, made me think about getting one. Just to mix things up and see what kind of writing might result from the introduction of a new tool to deliver it.

When I have a rough idea I need time to stretch out, I create a file and type a loosely structured outline. I use TextEdit, Google Reader, MarsEdit, or something else, depending on how much time I have to type it, whether it is going on the blog or to an editor, and a bunch of other deciding factors. And Ommwriter is a dream come true for the book of essays I’m writing.

I’ve got this blog, a tumblr, a twitter, a posterous account. The choice I make over what goes where is based on similar kids of decision — whether it’s social, private, a first draft, etc. I also have a long file in Google Wave, I’m using as a project timeline.

When it comes to preserving facts, quotes, reference material, it’s just as much a matter of how this information is being used.

For a while, when I was working on a novel, I would cut out relevant articles and put them in labeled green folders in a wire sided cabinet on casters (again, really particular about colors for some reason.) I’m afraid the last time I filed something was about a year ago, as I read fewer and fewer print publications, and don’t print out articles as often as I did in the past. That’s not to say, I wouldn’t start doing it again if a new project called on it.

I use del.icio.us is spurts, either tagging several things a day or ignoring it for three months at a time, instead saving links in text files with full quotes.

Search is really the key reason I feel digital storage is the best place to save other people’s ideas I want to build on. However well I label paper folders, I still can’t plug in “beijing” and “shoe design” or whatever and come up with several results in a snap.

It’s also partly why I subscribe to as many blogs as I do. I can search for “Tiger Woods” and the results come from my little globe of blogs and publications I like, rather than, well, what happens when you search for “Tiger Woods” in Google.

I hadn’t realized my number of subscriptions (now 752) was at all unusual until the Bygone Bureau’s Best New Blogs post went up. And Nav at Scrawled in Wax responded with a post, How Many Feeds is Not Enough?

Robin at Snarkmarket commented:

[William Gibson] said it’s like dip­ping a fin­ger into the zeit­geist. It this river roar­ing past, and you’re just tak­ing its tem­per­a­ture. The rea­son to go for scale—to sub­scribe to 700 feeds, not just 70—is to increase the chance of weird com­bi­na­tions, of unex­pected col­li­sions that reveal some­thing new & inter­est­ing. To pile it all into your brain and wait for inter­est­ing things to hap­pen, not nec­es­sar­ily on the con­scious level! War­ren Ellis talks about this too: about throw­ing it all in the brain-pot and let­ting mys­te­ri­ous things happen

And it’s not just the odd combinations that result; it’s essential for trend spotting. When all of a sudden everyone is talking about Rodarte, not just the fashion bloggers, but the design bloggers, even the boy bloggers, well, then you know it’s happened: it’s tipped.

Farhad Manjoo once wrote:

RSS started to bring me down. You know that sinking feeling you get when you open your e-mail and discover hundreds of messages you need to respond to—that realization that e-mail has become another merciless chore in your day? That’s how I began to feel about my reader. RSS readers encourage you to oversubscribe to news. Every time you encounter an interesting new blog post, you’ve got an incentive to sign up to all the posts from that blog—after all, you don’t want to miss anything. Eventually you find yourself subscribed to hundreds of blogs, many of which, you later notice, are completely useless. It’s like having an inbox stuffed with e-mail from overactive listservs you no longer care to read.

But…it’s not email. It’s not directed at you. You don’t have to read it all or respond to any of it.

Folders are key to keep from feeling overwhelmed. I have four must read folders “friends,” “daily,” “boston new&events,” and “ballardian” (pretty much every blog on Ballardian’s list of links.) I have about a dozen other folders marked by subject, but everything else is subject to “Mark All Read” depending on the time I have to scan through it.

Since I don’t have much time to read blogs during the day, I usually glance at Google Reader and star whatever looks interesting for reading later. At the end of the day, I go through whatever I starred, unstar a bunch of things that at second glance doesn’t seem interesting, and read what is left.

The best thing about Google Reader is it is so multi-use. The sharing and liking fuction isn’t really as well used as it could be, but the potential is there. If I had really thought about the question, I might have listed Zach Seward’s shared items as the best new blog this year, since he seems to read just about everything and leaves insightful notes.

This is really just what works for me. Having the information stored and searchable matters more to me more than seeing the full design of a blog or coming across it in a serendipitous way. Although, I really get what Michael Surtees has pointed out about wanting to read blogs at the original sites. Even if I already subscribe, I definitely go the URLS of my favorite sites a few times a week, whether to click on the archives, check out the comments or just view them in a more aesthetically pleasing format.

And I understand I’m in the minority here, but I really don’t like Twitter as a link aggregator. I wish more people used it for the epigrammatic rather than an arrow to elsewhere. Yeah, I miss what you had for breakfast, ok? Your “must read article on architecture” bit.ly link may be my “already saw it on Metafilter three weeks ago, and six other blogs.” For the most part, bloggers title posts relevant to the post, but there’s not much space on Twitter to explain what the link is about. I might use it more if there were sites where you could search your friends’ feeds. Again, I’d much rather search just my friends for “Tiger Woods” than all of twitter.

The funny thing about this, is just a few weeks ago I dumped a couple hundred RSS feeds and stopped following a number of Twitter accounts to clean house. I feel like I could comfortably follow twice as many blogs without feeling fatigue as the number I follow has more to do with what I enjoy reading rather than a limit to what I can control.

Google Reader just makes my life a lot easier and if there were only one
thing I’d ask of it, it would be an auto import to Instapaper.

Previousy: Survival Creativity

Posted by Joanne on Dec. 20, 2009 Tagged: , , , , , , ,

  • I think about this a lot, though I haven't taken the time to write about it (well I have, I've just scrapped the post more than a few times). It's been really interesting reading about how other people who I see as peers or admire deal with the problem (as opposed to, say, Tim Ferris or Robert Scoble, who seem to both be insane extremes).

    One thing I find really interesting is the difference in how we use Twitter. I'm definitely one of those link-sharing people though I hope that my comments offer more insight than "must read article on architecture". The good news is that if they don't you can unfollow me without me losing the ability to follow you (hooray for asymmetric following!).

    For me, Twitter is an extremely high signal to noise ratio source of new ideas. It's gotten that way through a gradual Darwinian winnowing and growing and winnowing of my following list. You follow twice as many people as I do, I wonder if that's part of it. Twitter is also a fantastic "new people" finder for me. @mbattles, @jomc, @scrawledinwax, @WillWiles, @ballardian, @mathpunk, @laurenarcher and probably a dozen or more others are people I met through Twitter.

    Huh, apparently I have a lot more to say about this. Maybe I will post an entry.

    P.S. The search within Google Reader technique is genius. Time for me to start subscribing like crazy to things.
  • I'm definitely interested in what you have to say about this and hope you do write a response. I agree with Doug that 9x in 10 I'm checking Twitter on my phone and getting to a link is sometimes more aggravating than its worth. While I have some problems with the Twitter RT feature, it is interesting that reduction of redundancy is central to its design. One of my favorite tweets this year: "You people tweeting the Souter news realize that the rest of us have the Internet, too, right?" - @daveweigel http://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1665425683

    A major complication with over/underfollowing on Twitter, is that this is "human RSS." A blog isn't exactly an identity. Twitter, as it is somewhere between Facebook and citizen journalism, has very different social dynamics---and following and unfollowing is right out in the open

    Great post about Qwitter and similar services last year: http://blog.seanbonner.com/2008/11/11/qwitter-i...

    While I agree with everything Sean Bonner writes there, I find it hard to follow in practice.
  • I absolutely agree that Twitter should not be a place to post links. I pretty much only read Twitter from my phone, and generally I don't want to browse random websites on my phone, I just want to read 140-char microblogging. Plus, all the url shorteners are also url obfuscators, so you can't tell if it's something you've seen before, or something you obviously don't care about, until you actually visit the site. And yeah, there are so many other better ways to share links.
  • Thanks for this - it really helps to hear how others deal with the issue, particularly when the results of your approach are so clearly full of awesome. I think that I'm still quite invested in some notion of 'control', or a vaguely OCD approach to 'reading everything'. It's hard to shake the feeling that you might miss something, even though you know you can't possibly capture it all.

    That's why I really like the idea of the searchable digital archive you mentioned. Both Evernote and Instapaper have become so central to my digital life (if, perhaps, I don't use them as efficiently as I might) as they form this vast repository of information, almost like a strange database/narrative of my thinking. It's kinda' cool.

    And I think you're quite right - how you organise the information is key. I'm bad at that. I still have 'tech' and 'gaming' and 'food' folders in GReader. I think it's a holdover from the earlier parts of my education.

    Oh, you probably know this, and it's less than ideal, but you can 'Send To' Instapaper from GReader. If only there was a script that would push all your starred items instead.

    Anyway, sorry for the rambly comment on a great post.
  • No, I didn't notice that before. Just added the "Send to" for Instapaper and Delicious. Thanks, Nav!
blog comments powered by Disqus