{"id":320,"date":"2014-11-03T11:50:12","date_gmt":"2014-11-03T11:50:12","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/dave0.nfshost.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/2014\/11\/03\/write-better-watch-penn-teller-saw-your-cognitive-load-in-half-writing\/"},"modified":"2018-06-20T19:12:05","modified_gmt":"2018-06-20T23:12:05","slug":"write-better-watch-penn-teller-saw-your-cognitive-load-in-half-writing","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/2014\/11\/write-better-watch-penn-teller-saw-your-cognitive-load-in-half-writing\/","title":{"rendered":"Write Better: Watch Penn &#038; Teller Saw Your Cognitive Load in Half! #writing"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>One of the things I think about a lot when I&#8217;m writing&#8211;but have <a href=\"https:\/\/www.google.com\/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&amp;ion=1&amp;espv=2&amp;ie=UTF-8#q=%22cognitive+load%22+site:www.davideriknelson.com%2Fsbsb\">only written about a little and tangentially<\/a>&#8211;is cognitive load: The amount of data we expect readers to juggle and integrate. Readers only have so much cognitive bandwidth; writing that begins to overload this bandwidth is, at best, &#8220;challenging&#8221;&#8211;or, more frequently, simply frustrating and tiresome.<\/p>\n<h2>Managing Someone Else&#8217;s Cognitive Load<\/h2>\n<p>One way (the primary way?) of managing cognitive load is to balance the new\/interesting\/challenging items\/structures you want readers to handle by giving them very easy-to-digest formulaic frameworks. E.g., Do you have a very complicated plot? Then either give them a very constrained set of characters (e.g., very few in number&#8211;like in <i>Primer<\/i>&#8211;or highly caricatured, like in <i>The Usual Suspects<\/i>). Numerous or very psychologically complex characters? Keep the story running in real-time (Hitchcock&#8217;s <i>Rope<\/i>), or confined to a single location (<i>Reservoir Dogs<\/i>), so readers don&#8217;t have to track both shifting alliances and shifting time\/place. Very elevated language, or a challenging invented argot (<i>Clockwork Orange<\/i>, looking at you)? Keep the plot straightforward and the structure rigid (<i>Clockwork<\/i> is, at its heart, a very simple morality play broken into three equal-weighted acts, and tracing a downright medieval character trajectory).[*]<\/p>\n<p>And so on. There&#8217;s a million combinations, but it starts with realizing that your reader&#8217;s attention is finite and precious, and you need to make hard choices in directing and managing that attention.<\/p>\n<h2>The 45\/45\/10 Formula<\/h2>\n<p>My fall-back formula for managing cognitive load in a story is to break it into 45\/45\/10 by word count:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>The first 45% of the words are the <b>Setup<\/b>: Characters and situations are presented and relationships made clear.<\/li>\n<li>The next 45% of the words are the <b>Tangle<\/b>: A complication disrupts (or at least complicates) the situation laid out in the Setup.<\/li>\n<li>The last 10% of the story is the <b>Resolution<\/b>: The knot is <b>Untangle<\/b>d, for better or worse.[**]<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>45\/45\/10 stories have pretty consistently proven easier for me to place than anything else, and I believe that&#8217;s because they are much easier to <em>read<\/em>. (It&#8217;s a very common pattern&#8211;you see it all over short stories and novels&#8211;and students of creative writing will no doubt notice that it&#8217;s basically a boiled-down version of the infamous <a href=\"http:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/2014\/10\/narrative_argument_and_3part_s.html\">three-act structure I was going on about last week<\/a>. Just to make a quick point about process, though: I fall back on the 45\/45\/10 as a way to analyze things I&#8217;m revising, or to help me suss out where I should go next if I lose the thread of my narrative, but it isn&#8217;t like I use it to generate stories. It&#8217;s a formula into which I plug in characters, situations, and problems, not a handle I crank so that a black-box will poop out a salable story.)<\/p>\n<h2>Penn &amp; Teller Cut Through the Tangle<\/h2>\n<p>So, all that said, here&#8217;s Penn &amp; Teller&#8217;s version of Sawing the Lady in Half. I love P&amp;T, but not just because they are good magicians (in fact, having seen them live now and again, I can see that they <b>aren&#8217;t<\/b> always that hot, in terms of the mechanics of sleight-of-hand; they botch things just as often as any other live pros). What I love about P&amp;T is that they make the fact that magic is a <b>narrative<\/b> art front and center; it&#8217;s not about technique or gimmicks or effect, it&#8217;s about telling stories (just like good ads and good poems and good stories). And, because I&#8217;m still a post-modern comp lit student at heart, I&#8217;m tickled even further by the fact that their stories are always <em>meta<\/em>fictions, stories about the nature of stories themselves, and story telling. They are <em>meta<\/em>-magicians whose work, over the long haul, comments on and critiques their craft in a deep and loving way. I love <em>that<\/em>\u00a0meaty, rich approach, which means that even if I occasionally find the execution a little weak, I don&#8217;t care because the overall <em>narrative<\/em> of the trick is itself delightful and instructive.<\/p>\n<p><span style=\"line-height: 1.75;\">As is the case here: this trick&#8211;and oldy, but a goody&#8211;falls tidily into my best belov\u00e9d 45\/45\/10 formula: They give as a full Setup&#8211;with four characters (one of them being us, the audience, who in P&amp;T&#8217;s stories is <em>always<\/em> a character), they Tangle that Setup, and then they Resolve it in a way that implicates everyone involved (including us, the audience). it is a tight and lovely 3min35sec. Watch it, and watch the clock while you do:<\/span><\/p>\n<p><iframe loading=\"lazy\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/tah3LgoFUL8\" width=\"560\" height=\"315\" frameborder=\"0\" allowfullscreen=\"allowfullscreen\"><\/iframe><\/p>\n<p><!--more--><br \/>\n[*] Incidentally, the importance of managing cognitive load applies to non-fiction, too, from sales copy to persuasive essays and PowerPoint presentations and autobiographies of Dead White Cis-Males: If someone is reading&#8211;or watching or listening&#8211;then their attention is finite and you need to manage that attention, for their sake as much as for your own.<\/p>\n<p>[**] I first stumbled across this ratio when I was writing <a href=\"http:\/\/davideriknelson.com\/NewGuys\/\">&#8220;The New Guys Always Work Overtime&#8221;&#8211;which won the Asimov&#8217;s Readers&#8217; Award<\/a> and is basically 45\/45\/10 to the word. (Get a FREE copy at that link! Or buy it for a buck from Amazon below!)<br \/>\n<iframe loading=\"lazy\" style=\"width: 120px; height: 240px;\" src=\"\/\/ws-na.amazon-adsystem.com\/widgets\/q?ServiceVersion=20070822&amp;OneJS=1&amp;Operation=GetAdHtml&amp;MarketPlace=US&amp;source=ss&amp;ref=ss_til&amp;ad_type=product_link&amp;tracking_id=daverinel-20&amp;marketplace=amazon&amp;region=US&amp;placement=B00JA06J56&amp;asins=B00JA06J56&amp;linkId=J2L33CHTPPS73AHC&amp;show_border=true&amp;link_opens_in_new_window=true\" width=\"300\" height=\"150\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\"><br \/>\n<\/iframe><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>One of the things I think about a lot when I&#8217;m writing&#8211;but have only written about a little and tangentially&#8211;is cognitive load: The amount of data we expect readers to juggle and integrate. Readers only have so much cognitive bandwidth; writing that begins to overload this bandwidth is, at best, &#8220;challenging&#8221;&#8211;or, more frequently, simply frustrating &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/2014\/11\/write-better-watch-penn-teller-saw-your-cognitive-load-in-half-writing\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Write Better: Watch Penn &#038; Teller Saw Your Cognitive Load in Half! #writing&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_share_on_mastodon":"1"},"categories":[11,8],"tags":[325,63,55,25],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/320"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=320"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/320\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1886,"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/320\/revisions\/1886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=320"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=320"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.davideriknelson.com\/sbsb\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=320"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}