Posted by Shar on March 16, 2001, at 23:26:59
In reply to Any writers, academic or otherwise???, posted by Sulpicia on March 16, 2001, at 22:00:30
> Hello from the special circle of he## reserved for people
> IDIOTIC enough to go to grad school.......
>
> Argh.
> S.S - I feel your pain. After getting my doctorate I taught a class for a while on writing a dissertation or thesis. Some time later I sent a friend of mine the following letter that includes some of the stuff from the class. This friend wanted to write a book, and this was my advice.
Good luck to you!
SDear X,
I wanted to write to you about your writing. You may hate this, I don't know how you feel about "advice" .....but, the good thing about advice is that you don't have to take it!In the "finish your dissertation class" I taught, a lot of focus was on writing, because people would get stuck, or their expectations were high as the moon, or the very idea was unpleasant because they thought this was to be their magnum opus. In other words, they had beliefs that were stopping them. Obviously these people were capable, as I wholeheartedly believe you are, but their thoughts were getting in the way. They were used to being able to ace about anything, as I believe you were, yet here was this "thing" that was insurmountable.
I used to tell them that you can't write a dissertation. My god, a dissertation is equivalent to a book. They could write two pages on their method, or a couple of paragraphs on the stats they used, or 4 pages on their conclusions. But they couldn't write a dissertation. The idea, as you've figured out, is that the two pages turn into four, the paragraphs turn into pages, the pages turn into chapters.
So, what it really took to have enough words on paper was perseverence and tenacity. Not a huge IQ--that mattered much less. It was a willingness to plug away, write the two paragraphs, even if they were pure, unadulterated shit, and keep going. They did not need to--and I told them they should not ever--stop to edit a first draft. They should not expect their first draft to be perfect. That is why it is a draft.
The first time someone sits down to write, the real goal is to get their ideas on paper. For some, it takes the form of a document (sentences, paragraphs, etc.). For some, it is a string of sentences of things they want to touch on. For some it is an outline. It serves to anchor one's thoughts, and perhaps chunk or organize them. That's all. What are the important points? Not every single important point, some will come later--but, at this moment, what does the writer want to say? Does it help to chunk things in chronological order? Are there chunks that are different, but will tied together in the end? Are there chunks that lead to other chunks (like in a diss you go from general discussion, to statement of the problem, to hypotheses, etc.). Whatever. A first draft doesn't have to make sense to anyone except the writer. And, it is not necessary to have every idea that you start with end up in the final product.
A lot of people also had the idea that when they started writing they had to start with chapter one, and go through step-by-step to chapter 7 or 8. People did not always know you don't have to start at the beginning. This leads to another idea---do whatever is easiest first. A lot of people resisted these ideas. They (being students) were used to writing in a very specific format, so letting loose of that was hard. But, I would go around and ask students what part of their diss jazzed them the most? What was it they were wanting to write about? It differed widely for people, but the point was that the part they were jazzed about was where they should put their energy--start with that.
Being jazzed about writing something meant it was probably easier to write. Start with whatever is easiest first. If they were writing and had a blank spot, they wrote blank spot. By and large, these folks had time to do the minimum of three drafts that I said would probably be required. There was no reason to force words out, to squeeze out something that wouldn't flow with their document. They would go back later, and the words for that blank spot would come. And what about the hard stuff? Well, there is a sort of hierarchy. You start with the easiest. When that's done you go to the next easiest. That's done, go to next easiest. Finally, there may be one thing left--that used to be the hardest thing. Now it is the easiest.
Another idea that caused folks discomfort was: there is no one right way. In school, and often in life, we are taught there IS one right way to do something. Ie, the starting at page one and ending with the end as a writing process. However, what they did in their private times in their homes, or offices, was nobody's business. Whatever it took to get ready to write, was ok. If they needed to be nekkid on a bed of bubble wrap, fine. And the writing was the same. If they needed at first to write using "I" (taboo in journals as you probably know), fine, no problem. That can be taken care of later. No biggie. The voice did not have to be consistent, the persona they took--while good to be aware of it--did not matter, they could abandon all jargon, they could drop the embroidery, they could just tell their story.
I could say more, but I think this is a good stopping point.
.....just tell your story. It is inside of you. It will come out as all things inside of us do--haltingly at times, easily at times, not in chronological order usually, and with surprise at times. Your first draft is to try to touch on those things. Your second draft is probably get them more into the order you want. Your third draft, probably will have most of what you want to say in it, but it will not be perfect. DO NOT show anyone your first or second draft for critique. Only the third for critique. Then, you work on that.
.....you write about what is easiest for you to write about now.....
Love, Shar
poster:Shar
thread:5140
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20010209/msgs/5142.html