I summarized everything I've ever written about writing and creativity.

Behold: a big idea summary for readers and thinkers, artists and creators. (thread)

It’s not about you…
🔷It’s about ideas
🔷It’s about the message
🔷It’s about how you send it
Creating is like…
🔷Having your ego surgically removed one day
🔷Replaced the next
🔷And then removed the day after, in a continuous cycle
Don’t waste your audience’s time…
🔷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
Don’t write words, play with ideas…
🔷Concentrate on themes
🔷Consider how they’re organized
🔷Recognize images people use to express them
We don’t will ourselves to like a subject, we’re simply aware of it at first…
🔷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
The only way to create something new is to go through a painful, deliberate creative process…

🔷Organize your thoughts
🔷Reflect them back to yourself in written form
🔷Resolve and structure ideas in a logical order

Repeat stages 1-3
Note: the strategy that works in one stage of the creative process causes failure in the next

🔷Make new parts (create)
🔷Remove favorite parts (delete)
🔷Publish and get feedback (stop deleting and share)

Repeat stages 1-3
Keep your creative process simple:

🔷Build on the ideas of others
🔷Put something new into the world

Repeat stages 1-2
Need creative assistance?
🔷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
To create something compelling…

🔷Put bigger ideas in a smaller package

To create something attractive…

🔷Make the ideas simple and universal at the same time
Focus on process more than output…
🔷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).
No one cares about the last thing or the thing before that…
🔷The main thing is the next thing
🔷Simply make outputs faster than you deplete inputs
A product is not refined from crude oil to super premium in one step…
🔷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).
Convert content into a format you love...
🔷Force choices
🔷Structure ideas
🔷Reward quality
🔷Constrain yourself
🔷Mandate discovery
🔷Strip away distractions
Don’t think about what you’re creating…
🔷Think about leaving a message
🔷And then *discover* what you’re creating
🔷By resolving underlying ideas into a self-evident structure
Amateurs think about entertaining an audience…
🔷Professionals think about moving an audience from one point of view to another
Remember, reading, thinking, and writing are three *processes* within a larger creative process…
🔷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
Write what you mean…
🔷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
Apply these principles of communication…
🔷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
If the quality of the things you write is compelling, the value of the things you write is compounding…
🔷Share ideas in the spirit of helping others
🔷Apply them in a continuous cycle of learning
Find the rest here...

And follow me if you want more big idea summaries!

https://t.co/DaIND5p1Cj

You May Also Like

The first ever world map was sketched thousands of years ago by Indian saint
“Ramanujacharya” who simply translated the following verse from Mahabharat and gave the world its real face

In Mahabharat,it is described how 'Maharishi Ved Vyasa' gave away his divine vision to Sanjay


Dhritarashtra's charioteer so that he could describe him the events of the upcoming war.

But, even before questions of war could begin, Dhritarashtra asked him to describe how the world looks like from space.

This is how he described the face of the world:

सुदर्शनं प्रवक्ष्यामि द्वीपं तु कुरुनन्दन। परिमण्डलो महाराज द्वीपोऽसौ चक्रसंस्थितः॥
यथा हि पुरुषः पश्येदादर्शे मुखमात्मनः। एवं सुदर्शनद्वीपो दृश्यते चन्द्रमण्डले॥ द्विरंशे पिप्पलस्तत्र द्विरंशे च शशो महान्।

—वेद व्यास, भीष्म पर्व, महाभारत


Meaning:-

हे कुरुनन्दन ! सुदर्शन नामक यह द्वीप चक्र की भाँति गोलाकार स्थित है, जैसे पुरुष दर्पण में अपना मुख देखता है, उसी प्रकार यह द्वीप चन्द्रमण्डल में दिखायी देता है। इसके दो अंशो मे पीपल और दो अंशो मे विशाल शश (खरगोश) दिखायी देता है।


Meaning: "Just like a man sees his face in the mirror, so does the Earth appears in the Universe. In the first part you see leaves of the Peepal Tree, and in the next part you see a Rabbit."

Based on this shloka, Saint Ramanujacharya sketched out the map, but the world laughed
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?