If it’s tough to write it’s even tougher to write one that engaging, or is it? I have evidenced two types of writing that work for me. 1. Writing as execution of Play[wild-fire] 2.
Writing as execution of Plan[following] The first one is my choice whether its philosophy or science, I prefer the first method. And to be engaging 1. It should start from the reader, creating a wonder in him 2. It should continue creating wonder. . . 3. It should be short, one-sitting reading.
Now creating an engaging reading is very much a question of how to make people wonder and curious every time. And one can’t create wonder for the sake of it, only an insight can create that. Ie insight creates a broad POV with respect to the topic which can then be used to project it. Wild fire thinking is essential in this regard. And nothing comes out of thin air without thinking, so all in all it does takes time to make a really good engaging read, but that time is not addition to the thinking time?
And the thought of making the really dry non fiction, makes it to get integrated with the fiction. And embodied metaphors are also worthy in this regard. In this regard a good writing comes out of play, just as the poet who said , one should keep writing and writing and writing till it causes, pain infact what he saying is that to let the mind to play and get some data which you can then organize and play the game. Can science be like that, can we make the objective data subjective.
No matter what you are trying to say, if you are trying to make sense, make meaning then you must log on to philosophy, fiction, poetry because that what builds and inspires the meaning it’s not logic and reason as said in ‘Mind in society’ , ‘homo ludes’ and in ‘man play and games’. What does it mean to have an insight, to have an insight is to have an wonderful understanding of something, to have an unusual understanding of something, and the good news is its always a result of Play.
Resumes, News papers atc are written to spread information while few others are written to spread the meaning. In such cases the best practice would to mirror the writer’s own mind as he writes. Articles written to spread the meaning are more engaging than the articles written to spread the info. Highly cited research articles regardless of their field are found in agreement with this. I. e the piece the writer writes should be a live recorded footage of his learning, so it’s a matter of play and a little game.
Whatever that gets through his head while he is at play, Conversations, pictures, anecdotes etc would be the best thing and best order but one should be aware whether it’s authentic content or not. And one should decidedly remove stuff which is unauthentic in this regard. A good article/book will be reflection of writer’s learning, Writer’s learning as it happened. So writing is not different from learning and it’s not an extra burden as usually thought. Follow the sense, sound will follow: poet Follow the thought with pen, engaging reading will follow: Writer