I frequently write about the importance of freewriting and writing as a method of inquiry. This may lead to the impression that I believe in a free for all approach to article writing, in which you write as much as you can and then find a way of cutting.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. I am a huge proponent of developing structures and disincline for articles in which you work your tail off to not cut. Freewriting in its purest form should not be done in an article, but as side work to stimulate thinking and draw connections between ideas.
Focused freewriting, for maximum efficiently, comes within the context of a clear structure and predetermined word length for each section of your article.
Two tools that I do not write much about (I don't want to give away ALL of my secrets away on this blog, after all), are how to develop powerful architectures that carry specific section lengths, and how to use various modes of writing when working on articles.
That said, endeavor to not overwrite. My experience is that most people overestimate their skill at cutting their work, if we are to look at their actual outcomes.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. I am a huge proponent of developing structures and disincline for articles in which you work your tail off to not cut. Freewriting in its purest form should not be done in an article, but as side work to stimulate thinking and draw connections between ideas.
Focused freewriting, for maximum efficiently, comes within the context of a clear structure and predetermined word length for each section of your article.
Two tools that I do not write much about (I don't want to give away ALL of my secrets away on this blog, after all), are how to develop powerful architectures that carry specific section lengths, and how to use various modes of writing when working on articles.
That said, endeavor to not overwrite. My experience is that most people overestimate their skill at cutting their work, if we are to look at their actual outcomes.
No comments:
Post a Comment