Mind Maps

My “mind mapping” experiences have been confined to paper and pencil, and maybe that’s all a writer needs. But a website called “Newsmap” piqued my interest. (http://www.marumushi.com/apps/newsmap/).  Strictly speaking, this isn’t “mind mapping.” Far from it. This is more “wisdom of the crowd” stuff. The creator of “Newsmap,” Marcos Weskamp, describes his creation as “A Treemap visualization algorithm.” It constantly updates Google News. He believes it accentuates news bias, which was my first reaction, but that may depend on his algorithm. Or Google’s. Or how you look at “Newsmap.” Click on “select all countries,” and while there’s a fight for computer real estate (big headlines get scrunched down to 8 pt. type), a close look demonstrates a variety of editorial viewpoints. Farewell bias; welcome comparative headlining.  May I have a larger screen, please?

For writers, visualizing information could, for instance, extend the power of outliners. Programs like Inspiration (Inspiration Software, Inc.) take a baby-step in that direction, instantly alternating between outlines, trees, split-trees, mind-maps… Tinderbox should be the contender, but ugh; writers don’t have the time to become software masters. There are just too many adjustments and fine tunings in Tinderbox to mine its powers. (Still, I haven’t given up; inch by inch…)

In reality, writers need to be able to import (dump!) information into their software or, alternatively, to accrete information as they do with a good database or spreadsheet. Then they can let the software do the heavy lifting: revealing unexpected relationships, discovering new contexts, sussing out hidden associations. Yes, I realize Microsoft Excel has a sharp learning curve, but too many complex programs can send a writer around the bend. The hope would be for programs to evolve new capabilities. DEVONthink is a candidate. Use it, learn it, make it grow new capabilities. Users have been goading the DT people to add visualization to their product. But so far, DT has not been encouraging. Still, the ability of DT to collect information, count words, and produce concordances may be a step in the right direction. The information is already there, now make the software capable of picturing it. Visualization could be a breath away. Or not. 

Then, there’s “Many Eyes.” (http://services.alphaworks.ibm.com/manyeyes/home) It’s a creature of  IBM that’s at the root of “Newsmap.” It’s worth the time to study and possibly another blog. There’s always data to be crunched, and a better way to crunch it. I think there’s a bumper sticker here for writers who are heavy software users: Crunch Before Writing.  My thanks to my friend Adam Blumenthal for making me aware of “Newsmap” and for introducing me to Christopher Perrien, who led me to “Many Eyes.” Here’s looking at you, guys.   

Some quick housekeeping:

Item 1. Great article accidentally written about writing in yesterday’s NY Times Book Review, by P.J. O’Rourke (16 December 2007), reviewing Starbucked, by Taylor Clark. In sum, O’Rourke hated the book, loved the writer and turned out to be a generous reader. What interested this writer was O’Rourke’s explanation about how he approaches book reviews: collecting items and notes into a general folder, then working those bits into his actual notations on the book, which produces his writing outline. By the way, he did not say he used a “software outliner” in his review. No computer talk. I suppose that a  writer with his chops doesn’t need software. Not only does he have perfect diction (as musicians have perfect pitch), he can afford to hire slaves if he wants to. Here’s the URL to the article: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/16/books/review/O-Rourke-t.html?_r=1&ref=books&oref. Or try searching the review under “books” on the New York Times web page.

Item 2. A question I would pose to those who comment on the blog: When using a particularly valuable piece of software to study and organize information, have you ever recognized the software designer’s algorithms or heuristics (ouch, big word) influencing your approach to own your material? If so, what are you thoughts about those influences? Have you seen research on the subject? Who else has been thinking about this idea?