Tag Archives: system

Collet Tool System – In the Collection

Posted on by
Reply

Of the things I collect, tools are probably the easiest to justify to myself, as they actually serve a purpose, and having a good tool has helped me out tremendously over the years. But, while I do appreciate quality, the usefulness or sturdiness of an object doesn’t always come into play when I find something fascinating. I’ve got several “clever” tool ideas in my collection that were cheaply produced in China and never caught on (perhaps rightfully so). The one I’m looking at this time is a nameless collet-based system for attaching different tools to a single handle.

The case says YPF/Maxus, which is/are an (depending on how you look at it) energy company that put their logo on a cheap Chinese product. The case is a terrible pleather that does such an unconvincing job I just want to call it plastic, with red nylon backing on the inside. Contained behind the flimsy zipper and loose elastic is an assortment of tools: and adjustable wrench, tiny pliers, a small slotted screwdriver, a colleted handle, and 6 attachments for said handle. The dedicated slotted screwdriver is the only thing vaguely usable in the whole package. The wrench is almost laughably weak, with the adjustment knob (worm screw) and jaw rattling even at their tightest. The pliers are cast out of a cheap pot metal that one can easily feel deforming in their hands. And while the slotted screwdriver is obviously cheap, at its size one likely wouldn’t be using it for anything more heavy duty than taking apart electronics or the like.

But the best part is the colleted driver. It uses the same handle material as the smaller driver but has a brass collet and tightening knob affixed to the tip. Its six attachments have “wings” at the base of their shafts that slot into the collet, allowing for more grip when it is tightened down (it’s still loose enough to wiggle at that stage, though). These attachments are: two additional sizes of slotted screwdriver, one Phillips driver, an “awl”, what I can only describe as a “screw awl” or “screw bore”, and most hilariously of all, a claw hammer. So that adds to the uselessness with a few wobbly drivers, a fairly blunt pokey thing, a thing that might be used to start or enlarge screw holes (I really don’t understand it), and a 1oz hammer that, if swung with enough force for it to be useful as a hammer, would quickly lead to something in the little device breaking.

It’s all such a strange and poorly implemented idea. If one uses tools with much frequency, they would know that there are a few standard ways to link various bits together that work just fine, and that integrating a hammer with any other tool isn’t the best idea. But still perhaps a nice little kit like this could be forgiven for having a proprietary system if it was high quality, and as it is I’d barely qualify them as play tools. I got my set essentially for free and basically unused, and it will unfortunately stay that way in my collection, not as a set of tools, but as an oddity.

Book Review – Every Writer Has a Thousand Faces (By: David Biespiel)

Posted on by
Reply

Every Writer Has a Thousand Faces is another one of those short essay-style books based on a lecture given by the author, David Biespiel, (a name I shall never spell right the first time) in 2009. The book, published in 2010, outlines and reiterates for various forms Biespiel’s personal process of creating things that require creativity (in his case poetry). In short it is “fail” again and again (ostensibly to learn) and put off doing a “first draft” until you fail into one where you can revise. And he does a much better job (albeit in many more words) explaining that in his book than I just did. But is his method clear and really “different” or just a case of semantics and psychology?

The structure of the book is a rising set of anecdotes of Biespiel’s early(er) writing career that lead to the creation of his current writing “system” and a set of falling anecdotes about other creative people Biespiel has met who share similar creative “procedures”, sandwiched with an introduction/thesis, solidification of the theory, and a conclusion. All of this done in a rather brief amount of text but with ample explanation of the various parts of this “theory” of creating that is one of those things that is simple to understand but difficult to put into words.

Before getting quite into the explanation of the “theory” for creating presented in the book, I must reveal my bias. I’m not a poetry person. I don’t like it; I don’t get it. Biespiel is a poet, and while he does take time to showcase (with other creative persons) his system’s ability to be adapted to other creative mediums, he never quite captures it. Just like I never quite “get” the poems presented during examples of his method. I have tired many times in various ways to “get” poetry and I am just unable to. But I will try my best to examine the system in the book in the way it was intended to be used: for all creative endeavors, and not let my bias against the main examples given affect my overall reading too much, as Biespiel does when he demonstrates the similarities of his system and those used by a sculptor, a sketcher, and a novelist.

Biespiel’s method, created after years of using the more “standard” “draft-and-revise” method, is one of continuous “failure” where a creator has goals less along the lines of “create something that is good or that can at least can be fixed to be good” and more like “continue creating and exploring until something is arrived at that satisfies you (and then maybe can be fixed into something publishable)”. How this actually differs from our more standard terms of “practice” and “imagination” is more psychological than actual. Biespiel’s real goal seems more to be semantically twisting the definition of failure in such a way that it can be justified to the brain. Failure is no longer something to dread or fix-away as you move from a first draft, but a tool of learning and examining that allows one to grow in their endeavor (again: practice). I don’t know if it’s because Biespiel is mainly a writer, a form of creativity often linked to revision instead of simply throwing the “practice” out, or just that the linking of terms never occurred to him before (as I suppose it doesn’t in most people), but I can’t help but think when reading “isn’t that just what everyone does?” I mean, it’s ridiculous to expect and an artist with ink to create something store-worthy every time they lay it down. So they practice, and create tens to hundreds (maybe even thousands) of drawings that will never see the light of day in order to get good enough to create something “releasable” (or sell-able). In Biespiel’s language “they fail many times to learn more about themselves and their medium”.

As I read I couldn’t quite put my finger on why I wasn’t on board with the book. My recurring thought was essentially “doesn’t everyone already do this? At least, those serious about their creative endeavor?” I draw and write every day, and most of it doesn’t see the light of the outside world, but I need the “exercise”. It’s almost like the book is “art-ifying” the creation of art. That is, creating a layer of “complication” on top that must be “understood” in order to “get” it. You need to trick your brain in order to understand it. In reality Biespiel isn’t nearly so pretentious (in this book; I haven’t read his other work) but always seems to be teetering on the cusp, waiting to take the plunge into the vocabulary and processes that expel the outsider. I grasped what he was trying to say but it never felt solid, it almost seemed like he was making it too simple for me (someone one the outside).

That’s a bit of a trait with many books outlining a process or some from of “self-help” (as well as not getting to a real “point”) and I tried not to harp on it too much (fat lot of good that did me). But once I made the connection in my head it became impossible to ignore and consumed my thoughts about the book. The system presented is different than simply practice, but not enough that I feel it warrants the vocabulary change.

Still, with that taken into account, does the book succeed in doing what it set out to do? provide a system for the creation of works of “art” that can be applied to many different mediums and has been successful for the author (and hopefully you)? Yes, quite well, and it gets better toward the end. It is an understandable and viable method of creating that has been implemented by its creator and can be implemented fairly easily by others. The explanation of using the system and variations on it are enlightening and probably do more to actually explain what the author means better than his straight explanations. From Biespiel’s “word-pallets” to Jun Kaneko’s dangos, or Phil Sylvester’s many sketches (from which the book derives its name) you get a good sense of what is going on and how the different ideas presented can be applied differently to different media. It’s all conveyed rather smartly with some repetition to drill it into your head (which I don’t care for but I admit is necessary in many process books).

So would I recommend it? Yes, to creative people. But it isn’t essential reading. I’m personally a bit ho-hum about it. I’m glad I read it for its interesting perspective and it was quite brief. But I don’t think it adds enough to or solidifies the argument well enough to be of too much note. It isn’t a book for everyone, in fact it’s quite targeted and even to that target audience I won’t go around handing out copies. If you’re already interested in it or are a fan of the author’s other works I’d say go for it, otherwise I’d only get it second-hand.

Book Review – Getting Things Done (By: David Allen)

Posted on by
Reply

Getting Things Done is one of the most popular books By David Allen (not that he’s written that many) and from what I can tell one of the most popular books in the “self-help”/organization genre. I’m reviewing here the older copy (pre-2015) and I don’t know what, if anything, has been revised in the new edition.

Getting things done cover

The book is mainly a set of structures and guidelines to the “art of stress-free productivity”. Allen details how to get things out of your mind and into a medium (be it paper or electronic) and then to organize it all to be processed. The idea behind this is to allow for decisions to be made easier, and thus actions taken faster to get in control of the work you are doing, while eliminating your mind as a container for remembering, (to-do lists, shopping lists, dates, reference material, etc.) so more, if not all, of your brain power can be devoted to creative thinking and problem solving, instead of simpler tasks.

The guidelines in the book are fairly robust, and seem like they would work quite well, though I feel like a complete implementation of his system would be far too cumbersome to allow you to go about your regular life or have some relaxation time. He does continue to tell you throughout the book, though, that only full implementation will yield the best results. I feel though that this is more of a tactic to get you doing any of the things at all, and it probably works on a lot of people but I personally found it redundant and slightly annoying. I’m not sure anyone could possibly fully implement this system and have a way to capture ideas close at hand and usable at all times (unless there is someone else with you in the car, nothing will be {or should be} written down).

David does balance that point out, though, with his own experiences of using his systems. He doesn’t claim to be a robot and do it all. He relates times when he was slipping in his work and keeping track of his system, or how in many cases he was doing work less to get it done and out of his mind, but more to mess around with his new digital gadget. But he does use his own system, and its core is so simple and so versatile that it can easily be rebuilt after slipping. (As one of my {Teachers, Friends, Collaborators} once said {Roughly paraphrased} “Life is just creating one system that works and then watching it slowly fall apart and burn down, then moving on to the next system”)

The central philosophy is essentially:

  • Have a way to capture ideas, projects, and actions to take with you whenever possible
  • Transfer these notes and all of the other “paper” (digital files, office supplies, etc.) and put it in to an “inbox”.
  • Process this inbox every day and sort things into things you need to do, things someone else needs to do (either through delegation or they need to get back to you with info), things that will need reviewing the future, and things that can be easily done right now.
  • Do the simple things right now (or ASAP) and then add the other items to various checklists to review at appropriate intervals.

While it is not the simplest thing ever, it is quite easy to understand and do. It just takes the startup investment time and then one could be off and running. Even if it breaks with only a few of the core elements around, the others can easily be added. Some of the ideas might even be so simple you’ve figured them out yourself and have been using them for some time. For those that this applies to, the book aims at coordinating and making these systems you’ve created more effective by integrating it with the “getting things done” method. With stress being on the point that it will take time now, but it will save you way more in the future.

That idea is hard enough to get into people’s heads already, and I’m guessing if more people figured that out we’d all be more productive. But to combat this inherent laziness and constant “mind numbing” from thinking about all the things we have to do, the “getting things done” method emphasizes breaking big tasks into little ones that can be done right away, and riding the ‘I got something done’ wave on to being more productive in the next project. With “what is the next action?” being a core part of the process. Deciding on what the next action is is getting quite a bit of the way to getting it done, and makes one feel more confident and accomplished.

For all the time the book spends hammering in the rules above and how to get things ordered on the lower, every-day level, there isn’t much talk about the larger picture. I will say this book does better than some, which focus only on the immediate or the big picture. But it has much less of a plan for how to shape your big picture plans and where to go with them. Perhaps this is a good thing, as you don’t want some random book guy telling you how to run your life, but I found the last few chapters which were dedicated to this to be a redundant slog.

And to that end the book falls into the traps that many “self-help” books do, it becomes a slog to get through. Too much information is covered in every chapter, meaning that it needs to be constantly re-gone over. Even then there are numerous callbacks to earlier parts of the book. Information is repeated again and again to ingrain it in the heads of readers who retain less information than ones like me and quite frankly I get bored of it. Fortunately for this book multiple times when I was beginning to think Mr. Allen hand run out of things to say I was proven wrong, I just wish he could have been a little more concise about it.

I don’t want to give the impression that I disliked the book. Quite the contrary, I very much liked it and have used many of the ideas presented to improve my own personal productivity. They really have helped me, and while I think a “full” implementation of the process might be impractical for me, I will be adding more of the ideas as I can until I feel the diminishing returns aren’t worth it. It’s still a lot to tackle personal productivity in your mind, though, as I proved when, even though I liked the book, it took me the better part of a year to get all of the way through it (I got ¾ of the way through and then didn’t read a page for probably half a year) (My total read time was probably only in hours, though). It has the aforementioned problem of falsely inflating itself to be worthy as a “book”, where I think it could have easily been done in far fewer pages, but people might have dismissed it then as we tend to think of bigger as better. Still, I could consider this book essential reading, along with “People Skills” on this list of “self-help books that actually have good points”.