accuracy epitome of incomprehensibility A rough copy of chapter 8 of my supposed novel has it raining on October 4, 2001. But did it? I try to search the Montreal weather on that day, but a quick Google search only leads me to a site with a graph of the temperatures. Then I get annoyed, tell myself, "It can rain in your story even if it didn't in real life! You don't need THAT level of accuracy!" ... My creative writing teacher still hasn't sent back her comments on chapters 1-7. Tonight I wondered superstitiously if it was some karmic punishment for never looking at her comments on my story "Croissant," which she'd sent months ago. Avoidant. It never seemed the right time. I don't know. Anyway, I'd tried to describe, from memory, the moment in the 9/11 footage on CNN when a reporter is speaking and the second tower collapses, interrupting him. Reporters don't usually show surprise, so the fact that he looked startled stood out to me. In the story, the scene takes place in an imaginary cafe in Ottawa; the characters commenting on the action are the 18-year-old narrator, a first-year student at Carleton, and her slightly older classmate. The teacher's comments (loosely): You can describe this differently. Bring us more into the scene. And by the way I met this guy: here's his name, etc. Always forget about her journalism background. I remember the psychology degree but not the journalism. The thing is, I did kind of commit to being accurate by mentioning CNN. It's the channel we watched the footage on back in Cedar_Christian_Academy. But I could forgivably be vague in my novel, which has people watching TV on that day in A Totally Different Imaginary Christian School (hey, I put it in Dorval and not DDO). 13-year-old Carol notice the channel, so I can be a bit vaguer. Plus, she falls asleep. ... Another comment on "Croissant" suggested making people stumble over their words more when they're stressed out in the interests of psychological realism. That's a great point. I got to thinking more about psychological realism and I wondered what Janet would write if I'd recorded how the children around me reacted to the collapsing-tower moment. They started laughing. They found it hilarious. At least from what I remember. And I did too, at least the surprised look on the reporter's face. Would she be appalled? Would that be too much psychological realism? Adults would be less likely to laugh at that than children. But they might be more jaded as well. Fear, laughter, happiness, anger: they all seem to come more easily to kids. ... Anyway, I am afraid to see the video footage. If I'm afraid to look at comments from a sympathetic reader, you can bet my fearful ass I'm afraid to even type "cnn 9/11 footage" into a search bar. Just before the pandemic, I got a card for the Jewish Public Library (JPL) on an impulse: their website stated that membership gave access to the Montreal Gazette archives and I thought I'd need to look up the Gazette's coverage of the terrorist attacks to write about it. (I was in the Presbyterian College library when I ordered the card.) Then I couldn't figure out how the online Gazette access worked and I gave up. Last Tuesday when I went to the JPL, first time since COVID, I asked one of the librarians at the front how it worked and she said to ask the reference librarian. Me: "Maybe not now, maybe when I have more time," as if I needed to explain anything to her. I don't really need those papers? But maybe I do? You know, I could probably find digitized Gazette archives through Concordia too. So it's just plain old avoidance. Then again, thinking that I can't finish chapter 8 until I have that is also avoidance. I don't know. 220721 ... past (for chapter 8, i suggest newspaper archives online through a database or physically at the BAnQ or concordia...though the university or library credentials will likely get you into a robust online repository). 220722 ... past (you actually said that at the end. beware the rabbit hole of old newspapers and, particularly, the hilarity of old newspaper advertisements.) 220722 ... e_o_i Thanks, past! Speaking of avoidance, did you know I was afraid to open this when I saw someone had written on this word yesterday? I feared you in particular would respond, informing me that I'd made a serious factual error. Like, "er, Carlton University wasn't around in 2001." (I mean, of course it was. But the idea was that I made some mistake like that. I inadvertently created a new Ontarian university in another story, by calling Queen's the "U of K.") ...Furthermore, I'm impressed: you guessed correctly that I have a membership for the BAnQ system (i.e. Grande Bibliotheque here). Although it happens to be the library card I *haven't* renewed yet. Probably will before 2040 - we'll see. 220723 what's it to you? who go blather from