Aw ye

I have had some downright good times writing in the past 2 days. A couple of cool things: First, I’m really liking having a clear statement of what I am going to write about before I write it, so that what I am writing flows for the reader but also makes sense for me. There are so many different ways that ideas can fit together, so having a few different, distinct sub-topics to address about a particular subject allows me to filter a little bit. I can then make on-the-fly decisions if the ideas popping into my head are relevant to the sub-topic I’m currently addressing. If what is popping into my head isn’t relevant to the current topic, I can either create a new paragraph and write it there to come back later, or just move on to the next thought. This keeps me on-topic, and the words flow more easily.

On the other hand, I mentioned that sometimes as I write, a “better” argument than the one I’m defending tends to arise. In other words, the argument I think I want to make isn’t really supported by the research or document I’m looking at. This tends to make me feel slowly confused and frustrated as my initial appraisal is not quite on point. I hate leaving holes in my arguments, or feel like I’m selectively ignoring important points. As such, when the source material isn’t backing up what I’m trying to say, it annoys me.

The good news is that generally most of what I’ve written up to that point is still a valid interpretation of the source. At this point, it feels good to accept that I’m feeling a little lost, to stop writing, and re-assess for a moment. Once I’ve thought through a revised argument (helpfully developed from what I’ve written) I get that on paper, and then go through what I’ve already written. I can then cut and paste this stuff into places that better support the new argument.

And of course, I wouldn’t be able to do that nearly as well if I hadn’t written what I already did. The writing forced me to become more familiar with the content, which informs the better question. The initial writing is downright worthwhile, both for formulating the better argument, and then supporting it by slightly revising (or re-positioning) what I’ve already written.

A similar approach also works with when I’m dealing with writing that has no particular argument which I might have put together on an off day. I can make an argument about the content, then go back through, and re-order the writing into something that makes more sense.

It’s actually really cool to see what I’ve previously written becoming so much more concise simply because it’s placed in a different relation to other pieces of information, or prefaced with an argument or guiding statement.

And this approach makes me feel less like I’m wasting time when I write, good arguments are also helping guide me in choosing what I am going to read, and then write about.

Man, now I just need to stop getting sidetracked by random idiocy on the internet.

Wheeeeeee!

Edit: A simple lesson that I can take out of this: a sentence or paragraph can seem way better or way worse depending on what comes before or after it. With proper context it can be a gem; out of place it can be a waste of everyone’s time.

This means I owe it to myself to not just delete what i don’t like, but to leave it for later and move on. I can then consider its place relative to the other things I’m saying and use it elsewhere. Alternately re-reading it may help me realize my current argument isn’t quite what it should be.