🔷It’s about ideas
🔷It’s about the message
🔷It’s about how you send it
I summarized everything I've ever written about writing and creativity.
Behold: a big idea summary for readers and thinkers, artists and creators. (thread)
🔷Having your ego surgically removed one day
🔷Replaced the next
🔷And then removed the day after, in a continuous cycle
🔷Create a worthy product before you show it
🔷Ask yourself whether you can make it any better
🔷Enjoy what the work itself is teaching you
🔷Concentrate on themes
🔷Consider how they’re organized
🔷Recognize images people use to express them
🔷The closer we observe the more we learn
🔷The more we learn the more interested we become
🔷The more interested we become the closer we observe, in a virtuous circle
🔷Organize your thoughts
🔷Reflect them back to yourself in written form
🔷Resolve and structure ideas in a logical order
Repeat stages 1-3
🔷Make new parts (create)
🔷Remove favorite parts (delete)
🔷Publish and get feedback (stop deleting and share)
Repeat stages 1-3
🔷Build on the ideas of others
🔷Put something new into the world
Repeat stages 1-2
🔷Print Orwell’s “Politics and the English Language”
🔷Cut out one sentence and tape it to your desk
🔷“Let the meaning choose the word, and not the other way around”
🔷Look at it every time you’re stuck and need to find the right thought
🔷Put bigger ideas in a smaller package
To create something attractive…
🔷Make the ideas simple and universal at the same time
🔷Refine what you create to the asymptote
🔷Throw the output back into the process
🔷Create things. Create more things from those things (the more products you refine, the more products you combine, in a cycle).
🔷The main thing is the next thing
🔷Simply make outputs faster than you deplete inputs
🔷Your first draft is the product of extraction (rich sources).
🔷Your published draft is the products of editing (refined products).
🔷Your masterpiece is the products of refined products (premium products).
🔷Force choices
🔷Structure ideas
🔷Reward quality
🔷Constrain yourself
🔷Mandate discovery
🔷Strip away distractions
🔷Think about leaving a message
🔷And then *discover* what you’re creating
🔷By resolving underlying ideas into a self-evident structure
🔷Professionals think about moving an audience from one point of view to another
🔷Reading is the process of filling yourself with ideas
🔷Thinking is the process of clarifying and ordering ideas
🔷Writing is the process of reflecting ideas back to yourself
🔷Don’t overreach
🔷Don’t make a grab for insight
🔷Don’t write something memorable
🔷Don’t write because you like the way it sounds
🔷Don’t search for a phrase at the expense of an idea
🔷Convey your intended ideas, and none more
🔷Speak only when you have something to say
🔷Speak such that you cannot be misunderstood
🔷Leave your audience with an unmistakable single headline
🔷Share ideas in the spirit of helping others
🔷Apply them in a continuous cycle of learning
You May Also Like
Trending news of The Rock's daughter Simone Johnson's announcing her new Stage Name is breaking our Versus tool because "Wrestling Name" isn't in our database!
Here's the most useful #Factualist comparison pages #Thread 🧵
What is the difference between “pseudonym” and “stage name?”
Pseudonym means “a fictitious name (more literally, a false name), as those used by writers and movie stars,” while stage name is “the pseudonym of an entertainer.”
https://t.co/hT5XPkTepy #english #wiki #wikidiff
People also found this comparison helpful:
Alias #versus Stage Name: What’s the difference?
Alias means “another name; an assumed name,” while stage name means “the pseudonym of an entertainer.”
https://t.co/Kf7uVKekMd #Etymology #words
Another common #question:
What is the difference between “alias” and “pseudonym?”
As nouns alias means “another name; an assumed name,” while pseudonym means “a fictitious name (more literally, a false name), as those used by writers and movie
Here is a very basic #comparison: "Name versus Stage Name"
As #nouns, the difference is that name means “any nounal word or phrase which indicates a particular person, place, class, or thing,” but stage name means “the pseudonym of an
Here's the most useful #Factualist comparison pages #Thread 🧵
What is the difference between “pseudonym” and “stage name?”
Pseudonym means “a fictitious name (more literally, a false name), as those used by writers and movie stars,” while stage name is “the pseudonym of an entertainer.”
https://t.co/hT5XPkTepy #english #wiki #wikidiff
People also found this comparison helpful:
Alias #versus Stage Name: What’s the difference?
Alias means “another name; an assumed name,” while stage name means “the pseudonym of an entertainer.”
https://t.co/Kf7uVKekMd #Etymology #words
Another common #question:
What is the difference between “alias” and “pseudonym?”
As nouns alias means “another name; an assumed name,” while pseudonym means “a fictitious name (more literally, a false name), as those used by writers and movie
Here is a very basic #comparison: "Name versus Stage Name"
As #nouns, the difference is that name means “any nounal word or phrase which indicates a particular person, place, class, or thing,” but stage name means “the pseudonym of an
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x