To say “algebraic expression” is vague; it can be something simple like 4x-1 or it can be a long and complex mutli-degree, rational or radical function, perhaps even an implicit equation with more than two variables. No matter what, however, algebra is constant. The procedures are always the same, no matter how complex the equation. With the mathematician’s expertise, the complexity of solvable equations increases; it’s merely a matter of confidence and familiarity with the concepts and procedures at hand. The most skilled of mathematicians can build and solve equations with several dozen variables and even hundreds of terms, given the value of a few variables. Such an equation rarely has much of a bearing in reality, but nevertheless, the skill is certainly there and it takes a lot of practice to get there.

Programming is interestingly similar; the novice programmer can write a few lines, which produce a minor effect. Sometimes they can even write one effect that depends upon user input (a variable). Given time, the novice could write their own version of the classic calculator on all computers. As a programmer gets better, he can write larger and more complex programs, ones that deal with more variable on a grander scale. The best programmers can write a program that depends on many, many variables to produce a specific result.

Is it interesting to compare these various fields to each other? Further, if they are so similar, is it surprising that I find them all so amusing? So interesting?

I think I am interested in these three “different” things because I see them as very similar. They are all mathematical in nature. Yes, I am comparing writing to math. Fiction writing, at least, is very similar to an algebra worksheet, and because of that, I enjoy it, just like I enjoy long, complex algebra problems that are simple but require a lot of work.

Consider first a character. Characters are supposed to resemble human beings, by definition. I’m going to ask you to discard that resemblance, because it will hinder you. I don’t think of characters as people. Well, consciously I do, but subconsciously when I consider their movements, their actions, they aren’t people; they are complex algebraic equations, made of many, many variables.

Character equations all have similar forms; the variables can be stress, energy, hunger, strength, emotion, logic; they can also be more external - position, distance, what is being seen, what is being heard, and others resembling them. Sometimes, you disregard a few variables (put in a big, fat Zero); others, especially towards a climax for that character, you consider almost all the variables. It makes the equation complex, but that’s only more fun to write.

What’s the point of the “equation”? What’s on the other side of the equals-sign? Very simple: R. Reaction. The variables are mixed into the equation and what you get out of the soup is the character’s reaction.

Consider next a scene. At least in the stories I prefer to read and write, a scene is a series of reactions. What happens in the scene depends upon the reaction to the first event, then depends on the reactions of each reaction prior to the last, until the action level drops to a point that the reader will surely lose interest, and so the scene changes. Every scene has to have a setting, and what happens in the scene is “a function of the setting relating to the reactions”. In other words, the scene depends on both reactions and settings. Once you determine all the reactions of the characters, you insert it into the “setting equation”, and you get a short conversation, or a series of actions, and from there you must redo the equation, with new values, maybe even a new setting. And so you go on until the story is written.

Writing is a difficult profession, but when you look at it correctly, it does resemble algebra, almost uncannily.