Writing Is Hard
Speech is communication through space.<p>Writing is communication through time.<p>Harrold Lasswell&#x27;s model of communications is useful to analyze practices:  <i>Who</i> says <i>what</i> in <i>which channel</i> to <i>whom</i> with <i>what effect</i>?  I&#x27;d add to that one further element:  <i>with what intent?</i>[1]<p>At least in its intimate forms, <i>speech is interactive</i>.  When talking directly to an audience, whether that&#x27;s yourself (0), in a dialogue (2), a conversation with multiple people (typically ~&lt; 15), or even lecturing to groups or large audiences (20 -- 1,000 or so), there&#x27;s a <i>live</i> interaction between the speaker and others (interlocutors or audience), though that&#x27;s tempered somewhat as group size exceeds about 20:  teachers plan courses and sections, speakers write out <i>and rehearse</i> their speeches.<p>Writing ... has little or none of that.  You&#x27;re writing to a <i>reader</i> (or readers), at some future point in time.  Key to that is <i>you must anticipate questions or interactions a reader might wish to have</i>.  This means spelling out what you&#x27;re writing about, why it matters, how it coheres, your main points and supporting evidence or arguments (in persuasive writing), plotting and development (in fiction), processes and interactions (for instructions), etc.<p>One of the better books to read on writing to this extent is Mortimer Adler&#x27;s <i>How to Read a Book</i>[2].  In guiding readers how to read books (despite the title, the intent addresses more than a single book ;-), the <i>types</i> of book, and <i>the types of reading</i>.  Reversing the product provides <i>some</i> insights to writers in how they might better <i>compose</i> books.<p>One of the key points of Adler&#x27;s analysis is that there are different types of both documents and readers.  When writing, it&#x27;s highly beneficial to keep this in mind, and to have <i>at least some view</i> of which you have in mind.  Advice <i>does</i> differ across genres and audiences.<p>Then there&#x27;s the challenge of <i>actually getting words on paper</i> (or screens, or disk, or cloud, or whereever it is your deathless prose shall live).  Here the basic principles I&#x27;d suggest in general:<p>- Know <i>at least in general</i> what you&#x27;re writing and for whom.  Technical?  Amusing?  How to?  Why?  What?  Bearing witness?  Persuading?  And who will likely read this?<p>- Plot your course.  Have some idea of where you&#x27;re going to begin and where you&#x27;ll end up.  As with most journeys, this may change.  Whether you&#x27;re walking to the kitchen or tracing the source of the Nile, it&#x27;s quite possible you&#x27;ll revise your plans along the way due to changing circumstances or random chance.  But have some idea.  This might manifest as thoughts, a rough outline, a set of index cards, a mind map, whiteboard notes, or other materials.  As with other aspects, find an appropriate approach to your task.<p>- For sufficiently complex writing, as with construction, frameworks and scaffolding may be necessary.  It&#x27;s possible to build a sand castle or assemble a sandwich without much of a plan.  The Space Shuttle or a chip fab might require slightly more advance preparation.  There&#x27;s a whole host of tools available for this, many writers, myself included, find index-card systems (or their digital analogues) invaluable.  <i>Very little high-quality writing or speech is extemporaneous.</i>  Most is rehearsed, or at least has been through numerous versions and attempt through the years.  The trick as with most performance arts is to make what <i>is</i> highly rehearsed <i>appear</i> spontaneous.[3]<p>- Write, revisit, have others review (if the work is significant enough), and revise.  Often it&#x27;s useful to let a work rest at least a few hours or overnight before posting, even if short.  There are books which have taken years, or even lifetimes.  Wittgenstein wrote two books in his life, both of which profoundly changed Western Philosophy.  Joseph Needham conceived of a text on Chinese technological innovation which has grown to over 27 bound volumes, written from 1954 to the present, and is still ongoing 27 years after its originating author&#x27;s own death.[4]  Even a brief dashed-off line deserves re-reading and proofing before hitting &quot;submit&quot; or otherwise loosing on the world.<p>- One key use for me of sites such as Hack News or platforms like Mastodon is to pose thoughts and viewpoints for consideration and development.  Feedback, corrections, praise, criticism, and other viewpoints can all be invaluable.<p>________________________________<p>Notes:<p>1. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Lasswell's_model_of_communication" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Lasswell's_model_of_communic...</a><p>2. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.org&#x2F;details&#x2F;howtoreadbook0000adle_y9v4" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.org&#x2F;details&#x2F;howtoreadbook0000adle_y9v4</a>  An HN perennial favourite:  <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hn.algolia.com&#x2F;?q=how to read a book" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;hn.algolia.com&#x2F;?q=how to read a book</a>  There are also variations on the theme such as how to read a scientific paper <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=21979350" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=21979350</a><p>3. Even exceptions <i>usually</i> prove the rule.  Speakers or writers who perform spontaneously <i>are practiced at that</i>, and typically perform or write within a familiar context or venue.  In particular, they&#x27;ve often seen the standard responses, criticisms, heckling, and other interactions, and have, again, <i>a framework for responding</i>.  There&#x27;s much practice behind the performance.<p>4. <i>Science and Civilisation</i> is a true masterwork.  <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Science_and_Civilisation_in_China" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Science_and_Civilisation_in_Ch...</a>