As a freelancer who never attended journalism school and has been writing for pay for the last 15 years, I’m curious how my methodology relates to the protocol passed down to J-school grads. Upon reflection I see my style is somewhat like the old video game Tetris: I jot down quotes, facts, comments and brainstorms and continue to match common thoughts together which tend to build into a structured and flowing commentary. Without any written outline. It’s an organic process that builds from the key points as they reveal themselves via my notetaking, fortune in research or inspiration.
Tetris as a writing style: genius or madness?
Another thing I’ve found is that I nearly always have the ending written before the introductory paragraph. I’ve found this ending comes together as the most salient points get fleshed out; only then can I work backwards to develop a flow of details that support the conclusion. And somewhere in there the (hopefully) compelling intro becomes apparent.
This puzzle-pieces technique of writing may have been instructed to me someplace back in the years of English composition in grade school, but I haven’t ever sat down with an overt writing plan. “What’s most interesting about this?” is my driving thought.
Sometimes I feel that question is forgotten by writers. There is such a focus on facts, or on the, umm, less than creative directive of the assignment, that the result is a bland scroll of text that doesn’t prompt any further thought. I like to go for the “Hmm” effect. I want there to be at least one quote, one angle, one facet of the topic that will catch someone’s imagination and help them see something a little different than they did when they woke up that morning.
I’m guessing J-schoolers had at least one furrowed-brow “hmmm” reading this post…
{ 0 comments… add one now }