Category: Writing

  • Tapping into my inner Luddite – Why I am returning to pen and paper for planning.

    Tapping into my inner Luddite – Why I am returning to pen and paper for planning.

    If you have been following this blog then you will know that I am no technological luddite, with many of the most viewed posts dealing with Zotero, Scrivener and other computer based writing management software.

    However, recently things have been changing, although perhaps not for the reasons that first come to mind. Perhaps a bit of background is appropriate though. Like many others my age, I grew up with the burgeoning computer period, but before they become so ubiquitous that we walk around with more processing power than Apollo in our pockets. Being in this liminal space means a few things. Firstly, it means that while I have had a long string of computerised assistive devices, I originally learnt to do most things without them. Secondly, I remember how annoying some physical processes were before the rise of easy digitisation, gone are reams of paper, and in comes the iPad. Finally, I also spent a lot of time at a computer without any particularly good OH&S advice.

    It is this last aspect that has been one for me of the driving forces towards digitisation over paper technologies. I have RSI and carpal tunnel in one hand, and as a result don’t write a huge amount, and therefore have exceedingly bad handwriting. Amusingly though it is also this aspect that recently I have found myself benefiting from. Simply put, when i want to scribble something down it takes effort, and that effort means that I think things through a bit more thoroughly. So when I am putting things in my diary, or making plans for different things, the extra effort actually helps in making good decisions or proper planning. I have written in the past about how this relates to students using higher cognitive load methods for note taking (see here for that post), but this is taking the same mechanism in a new direction.

    Therefore, this year–for the first time in about 10 years–I have bought myself a paper diary. While it is a pretty spiffy paper diary, and with all sorts of other advantages, it has really been helping me to pare back what I want to record and what I am planning to do. Now I still use my digital calendar for meeting reminders, and other things like that, but as a planner this mechanism seems to be far more effective for me at the moment.

    The planner I have decided to use is the Ink+Volt Planner (I backed it on Kickstarter) that has a few spiffy features, but one of the best is that each day is just split into three sections of time. This minimisation of the number of things you can cram into a period of time really helps with planning and execution of the things to do in a day. Note: this feature can also be implemented in other planners with a ruler and sharpie to limit the amount of space you have to write in, so give it a go and see what you think.

    Im interested if anyone else is experiencing the digital fatigue, and returning to pen and paper as well. Please comment below. Ill blog in the future about what using a pen and pad has done for my conference notes.

    Or perhaps I am just becoming a luddite hipster… after all I have rediscovered my vinyl collection too.

  • Zotero++ Addons and Extensions

    Zotero++ Addons and Extensions

    For a while now I have had some minor annoyances with Zotero and how it integrates with Scrivener. A lot of it has to do with needing to use Word for the final output stage as the RTFScan in Zotero gives you very few other options.

    One of the problems here is that the Zotero shortcode referencing for these two citations looks the same:

    Dunn, James D. G. “John and the Oral Gospel Tradition.” Jesus and the Oral Gospel Tradition. Edited by Henry Wansbrough. Journal for the Study of the New Testament 64. Sheffield: JSOT, 1991.
    ———. The Partings of the Ways: Between Christianity and Judaism and Their Significance for the Character of Christianity. London : Philadelphia, Pa: SCM Press ; Trinity Press International, 1991.

    They both are cited as {Dunn, 1991} which leads to odd shortcodes such as {Dunn-Partings, 1991} etc.

    Well this morning I found a very neat option to do away with both the RTF Scan output, and therefore Word, and also to further differentiate citations. It also integrates Scrivener and Zotero with LaTeX, which will help with odd formatting and improve the output (as you don’t have Word messing about with all your nice formatting output from Scrivener).

    The core of this method comes from the Better BibTeX portion of the Zotero++ project: https://zotplus.github.io/better-bibtex/index.html

    This allows Zotero to integrate seamlessly with BibTeX and therefore allow you to export from Scrivener using the LaTeX markdown. This allows you to use nice Citekeys, which look like this: [#dunn_partings_1991] Those Citekeys are unique when exported from Zotero++ and so no more confusion of references.

    Tim Brandes has a good explanation of how to use Scrivener with MMD and BibTeX over here: http://timbrandes.com/blog/2012/02/28/howto-write-your-thesis-in-latex-using-scrivener-2-multimarkdown-3-and-bibdesk/

    In the next little while I will be experimenting with how it all works together, and will write somewhat of a guide for it. But from what I can tell it should all work well.

     

    In addition the Zotero++ project also hosts a few other neat plugins, such as AutoIndex that will regularly re-index your Zotero library keeping it all nicely up to date. Go check the site out.

  • It’s All About the Style – Writing Well

    It’s All About the Style – Writing Well

    Style or substance, which one is more important?

    While our last Friday post dealt with the process of writing—how to stimulate those word juices flowing in your head—this post looks at the style of those words. Now style is a very personal thing, and it is entirely likely that your style will change based on what you are writing. For example this chatty style that is suitable for a blog post would be terribly inappropriate in an academic paper. However, there are still some aspects of style that have broader applications, and these should be examined.

    Aspects of style have already popped up a couple of times in the various comments on this series, with some people loving and others disliking my style (no-one hates me yet). To some degree the style on this blog is part of my natural writing output, and the technicality that creeps in reflects some of my background. Nevertheless, there are many foibles to my writing style, and this sentence is but one florid example of this. Personally I have a tendency to over-use adjectives, and make my sentences overly complex, while also introducing technical jargon in the middle of a thought process. While a lot of this I have picked up from the reading I have done in my fields, they are still poor habits to be in. I am certainly not be the best writer. In fact with many others I decry ‘I am no Hemingway,’ and I certainly have a lot to learn. But here are my top five tips—really the top things I need to work on too—for thinking about your style and writing well.

    1. Style is Personal

    formal-writingThis one is relatively obvious, your style is your own. It is useless slavishly copying someone else’s writing, as it will appear forced and unnatural. Getting comfortable with your own writing style is essential. However, don’t use this as an excuse for sloppy writing. While your style may have particular nuances, and engage with certain audiences effectively, it should still be intelligible to a wider range. For example one of my bad habits is to create run-on sentences, joining ideas together in, what for me is, a logical manner. But these sentences actually make my work harder to read, harder to digest, and harder to understand. Similarly my digressions into technical language rarely make my writing more intelligible. Simply because certain jargon is used in a specific field doesn’t mean it is ideal.

    One of the ways you can shake up your style is to simply write in a different genre. While for an academic paper it may be acceptable to use ’this author’ or ‘this paper’, to use such formality on a blog makes it hard to read and you look excessively formal. You need to find your writing style, but don’t etch it in stone, it can always be improved.

    2. Edit… a lot

    In his very useful book On Writing Well, William Zinnser expounds the virtues of editing:

    ‘Examine every word you put on paper. You’ll find a surprising number that don’t serve any purpose.’

    and

    ‘Clutter is the disease of … writing. We are a society strangling in unnecessary words, circular constructions, pompous frills and meaningless jargon.’

    It is not unusual for writing to require editing, that is only natural. In fact I haven’t met a single author who is able to write their pieces without any editing work whatsoever. Of course if we are so focused on putting the first draft down perfectly, such that it needs no editing, then we will rarely write anything. Write first, then edit. But definitely edit, and be ruthless with your work.

    3. Get to the Pointget-on-with-it

    Similar to the old Monty Python sketch in The Holy Grail: ‘Get On With It!’ Often our writing can take circuitous routes that involve so many qualifications and hedges that the reader loses sight of the point. There is a virtue in simply getting to the point of a sentence. In my case those sentences of mine that involve layered adverbs, and compound superlatives can be simplified. If you strip sentences back to their raw components and then build from there your writing will normally be better for it. As Zinsser poetically comments:

    ‘Most writers sow adjectives almost unconsciously into the soil of their prose to make it more lush and pretty, and the sentences become longer and longer as they fill up with stately elms and frisky kittens and hard-bitten detectives and sleepy lagoons.’

    4. Be Active

    While the passive voice has a place in the writing sphere, it shouldn’t be used as the primary voice. Be active, use the active voice as much as you can. Not only is it simpler and more direct, but it also engages the reader vigorously. But there is more than that, being active conveys passion and intent. It communicates your thoughts with the same passion that they are swirling around your head. Rarely do we write without any passion for the topic at hand. Yet often the reader receives a piece that is dispassionate and flat. Make your writing active.

    5. Get an external reader or editor

    editing-humorAlthough the idea of getting someone else to read through your work with a critical eye may be terrifying, it is one of the best ways to become a better writer. Ideally you want someone who is distant enough from your content that they absorb the force of the argument for the first time. Yet also someone who is close enough to the content to not be plunged in the deep end of your laboured work. In addition try to pick someone who you don’t interact with in that frame as often. That way they are not used to the foibles of your writing style, and can highlight them for you. Once you have an editor or reader, take on their advice. It is of little use if all of the red ink is never read or absorbed.

     

    Bonus: Read widely.

    The broader your reading base is the more you will see other styles in action. Keeping across multiple styles and fields helps with not being anchored in any specific style. In addition reading books on writing, such as William Zinsser’s On Writing Well will help identify your style issues.

    That is my top five (plus one) tips for writing well, or at least improving stylistically. Does it sound a bit hypocritical? Well really I am also preaching to myself here, as I tend to fall short in each of these areas regularly.
    What is it that you fall short in? What tips would you give in improving style? Comment below. I look forward to reading them.

  • How to Write a Lot – The Writing Task

    How to Write a Lot – The Writing Task

    We often consider writing an arduous task, bemoaning things such as writers block, or looming deadlines; and the writing requirement of academia usually won’t alleviate this.

    However, it doesn’t have to be this way, the seemingly sheer cliff face of a writing task can be scaled, and often with relative ease. Welcome to the Friday theory session of the work and research methods series, today we will be covering writing. Last week I intimated that reading is not a stand alone process, and that writing is its strong partner in crime. So if this is the case, then why is writing so hard?

    Well one of the reasons is in the same vein as why reading is so hard. Our primary modes of communication have become shorter and shorter, from when the long form letter ruled supreme, through to the telegraph, phone calls, email, Facebook and now Twitter. Our communications, and therefore our regular writing tasks, are becoming pithier and shorter. So on the whole our long form writing suffers from length of concentration and frequency. Have you ever tried writing a dissertation or even a blog post on a phone keyboard? Yeah… So instead we talk about writers block and deadlines, and then subsequently consume copious quantities of caffeinated beverages while staring at a blank word processor document, and interrupted only by frequent panicked glances at the clock, calendar, task list, research pile, and social media. Perhaps this is a little hyperbolic, although I’m willing to bet that for many readers this picture resonates at some level.

    writers-block1What can be done about it? Well, simply put the main thing to be done about the difficulty of writings is to write. The majority of advice that I have received over my years of having to write reports, papers, presentations, essays, etc (and commonly bemoaning the process), is to simply write a lot. Now that most likely sounds pithy and trite, like telling someone who is struggling to climb over a fence to simply climb over the fence. But while it is trite, it is also true. Writing begets writing, and writing regularly makes the overall process easier. Indeed, studies have shown that regular writing increases the number of fresh ideas for the writing task.[ref]Boice, Robert. Professors as Writers: A Self-Help Guide to Productive Writing. New Forums Press, 1990.[/ref] Nevertheless very few of us have the prodigious writing output of someone like Colleen McCullough, who reportedly wrote up to 30,000 words a day![ref]http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/30/books/colleen-mccullough-author-of-the-thorn-birds-dies-at-77.html?_r=3[/ref] However, there are methods and mechanisms that can be put in place to assist in the writing process. Here are some of the top methods on my list of writing strategies.

    Writing Regularly

    keep-calm-and-don-t-stop-writing-2One of the best ways to get those writing juices flowing is to write regularly. I know quite a few people who simply set aside a couple of hours a day in their schedule to write. In that writing time they simply write on whatever is currently on the agenda. It could be for a paper, or project, or a conference; so long as it is writing. The dedicated time set aside helps to get a little bit done every day. However, for me this isn’t optimal, as some days with the little man I barely get a chance to write at all. For me I instead aim to write a certain amount per day, a task focused goal rather than time focused. While I don’t dedicate time, I do set myself a task every day to be written. This type of regularity works better with my schedule, and my thought processes. But whichever one you do it gets you writing regularly, and set it as a goal. As Bandura showed, short term goal setting increases the motivation for the task.[ref]Bandura, Albert. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. New York: Freeman, 1997.[/ref]

    Writing summaries

    While often we have far more things to write about than there is time to write, occasionally there are lulls, or periods where you don’t have enough time to dedicate to that long-form argument, or a larger piece. In these scenarios I generally have a handful of other writing tasks that can fill the gap. One of these comes from last week’s theory post, on reading. When reading in the ‘studying’ methodology the idea is to absorb the information but also mark up the material for later recording as a reference. This transcription and synthesis of argument from my reading tasks forms one of my regular writing tasks as well. It’s almost killing two birds with one stone.

    connectomeIn addition this phase also is a great reinforcement technique for the reading process. The act of writing a synopsis or summary of the work in your own words is a great way of reinforcing the material. It allows for a different set of neural connections to be formed, rather than simply absorbing the material second hand, in the synthesis process you are making it your own (this still means you have to cite the original idea). To harken back to Bruce Ellis Benson’s idea of academic writing as improv, in writing your synopsis you are learning the flow of the music on your own instrument. Writing out what we read helps us to tune our signal-to-noise heuristics, and really absorb the things that matter. As William Zinsser reflects:

    ‘Writing is thinking on paper, or talking to someone on paper. If you can think clearly … you can write – with confidence and enjoyment’

    Blogging

    blogOccasionally though you may have written all your synopses, or for various other reasons don’t have any ‘on-topic’ things to write about. Well for this phase it is great to have an alternative writing outlet. It just so happens that you are currently reading my alternative outlet. Basically every summer (Dec/Jan) when I have had a bit of a lull in the academic year, I tend to write for my own means. For several years this meant documenting various motorsport related items that I had worked on in the past year, or fixing up a journal paper or two. However, this year I decided to focus much of my extraneous writing on this blog, and in an inception like moment am actually writing this article on writing to fulfil my regular writing commitment. Not only do I get to explore some of the aspects of studying that I enjoy, and answer some questions that I am regularly asked in my tutoring role on campus, but it keeps the writing juices flowing. I would encourage you to start your own blog, write a bunch, and then send me the link.

    Enforced writing

    The final aspect of writing regularly that I will briefly touch on is that of enforced writing. I have some friends who set themselves a specific word limit every day that they must hit. Personally this doesn’t work for me, as it feels quite rigid and doesn’t fit with my writing style. But if it keeps the brain stimulated, then by all means go for it.

    Writing Differently

    The next tactic I will touch on more briefly, that of the need for variety. In academia, as with many fields, the style of writing rarely changes, and it is easy to be staid in the writing style. For example I still find it difficult to talk in the first person in a journal paper, and prefer to use ‘this author’ or ‘this paper;’ despite the first person being acceptable. Further evidence can be found in that I am footnoting on a blog…  In that regard it is very easy to fall into a rut, especially when it comes to the use of florid language and jargon. But more on style in another post. It is worth changing up your writing style occasionally, and one of the best ways to do this is to try for a different methodology or audience.

    NaNoWriMo

    crest_square-1902dc8c2829c4d58f4cd667a59f9259

    There are two ways that I do this from time to time. Firstly, it can be enjoyable to write a short piece of fiction, as academic writing can sap the creative juices. A couple of times now I have participated in the NaNoWriMo event. NaNoWriMo is a celebration of National Novel Writing Month, and encourages writers to sit down and write a short novel in the 30 days of November. Now the 50,000 word draft can be a bit daunting, and I only made it to the word limit once, but it is still worth doing. It is a fun little event, and a good opportunity to turn some writing time to a different end. However, for my purposes the timing is problematic, as November is the end of semester in Australia, and is also conference month. Still I hope to bash out a novel again some time. Perhaps this time it will be worth someone else reading.

    Different Styles

    The second way that I mix up my writing is to try a different style. There are many methods of writing, and one that I have experimented with twice—once actually for NaNoWriMo— is narrative writing through a ‘stream of consciousness’ or ‘free writing.’ This mode of writing is simply writing for a certain duration of time whatever flows through your head. Colleen McCullough is said to have used this type of writing, and that it contributed to her prodigious output. Essentially you write without concern for grammar, spelling and you don’t correct anything. The idea is to follow your mind where it leads, including all those tangents, diversions and your small rabbit warren under the hippocampus. A lot of the time it produces relatively unusable writing. But it can be a way of shifting so dramatically out of a set mode of writing that it freshens up your entire writing style and perspective.

    Sectioning Work

    phd_targetFinally I want to briefly touch on breaking work up in to small manageable sections. I know a lot of people are daunted by the prospects of writing large bodies of material. Quite a few first year students I meet wonder how they will write a 2,000 word essay. Later year students wonder how they could ever write a 3,000 word piece, let alone their 6,000 word project. Many in both categories are in equal parts shocked, awed and dismayed at the prospect of writing an 80-100,000 word PhD thesis. However, if these targets are broken down in to their relevant sections the overall scope suddenly appears more manageable. That 100,000 word thesis is really only 8 12,500 word chapters, and each chapter is really 5 2,500 word sections. All of which suddenly seem more workable. Plus if you keep breaking it down, and you end up daily, then that PhD thesis is only 139 words a day if you are working 5 days a week, 11 months a year for the nominal 3 year duration! Quite manageable really. The added bonus is that breaking your work down lets you see the flow of the argument better, and helps you stay coherent. But that is a topic for another time.

    Finally there are many good books out there to help you in this process. I have found three exceedingly useful, for both methodology and style. They are:

    Kidder, Tracy, and Richard Todd. Good Prose: The Art of Nonfiction. New York: Random House, 2013.
    Silvia, Paul J. How to Write a Lot: A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing. 1 edition. Washington, DC: APA, 2007.
    Zinsser, William. On Writing Well, 30th Anniversary Edition: The Classic Guide to Writing Nonfiction. New York: Harper Perennial, 2006.

    good-writing-is-hard-workUltimately though, as even William Zinsser admits ‘Writing is hard work.’ But if we write regularly, then the process comes a bit more easily, and rather than focusing on the writing task we can focus on writing style, which is arguably even more important. After all how can one edit and refine their work if there is no work there to edit in the first place. So focus first on getting words out on the screen or page and then perfecting them. Undoubtedly they wont come out exactly right the first time, or the second, or even perhaps the third, but get something out so you can work with it. In the vein of Confucious or Yoda, ‘to write a lot, you first have to write.’ Next week we will take a look at the second aspect of writing: style.

    Would love to hear your feedback and suggestions on how you write, and the processes you have for writing regularly. Tell me below, in the comments.

  • Another Chapter Done

    Another Chapter Done

    10801715_10152769425980944_997747774922569711_n
    I know I haven’t posted a Wordle for a while, but today I thought I would resurrect the practice. I submitted my major project/thesis for my M.Div/G.D.Theol today (in triplicate).

    In many ways this feels like the stepping stone that my ‘honours’ thesis was so many years ago (in quotes because it wasnt awarded for credit), and hopefully I will be admitted to the PhD program next year. More on that later. But in celebration here is the Wordle of my 16,262 words on the topic of Johannine Christology:

    Wordle

  • Writing, Jazz, Plagiarism and Improv – Jazz as a metaphor for academic writing.

    Writing, Jazz, Plagiarism and Improv – Jazz as a metaphor for academic writing.

    Copyright: Unattributed Creative CommonsAcademic writing, Jazz, Plagiarism and Improv. You might be wondering at what these concepts have in common, and why they should be written about in a single article. Well last week I had the opportunity to attend a network meeting-come-book launch-come-philosophy lecture by Bruce Ellis Benson talking about his new-ish book Liturgy as a Way of Life. “Ugh, are you serious” – I can hear the groans already. What does Liturgy have to do with anything? Well i wont be directly addressing the liturgy part of the lecture tonight, except to say that it’s not quite as you may think.

    Instead one of the parts that piqued my interest was Benson’s extensive use of musica as a philosophical framework for the explanation of life, amongst many other things. From this framework he posits a veritable bevy of comparisons between Jazz and life, of which I will only look at one in this post: Improv. Benson argues that while God is the originator and creator of the world, we are instead re-creators, taking what has been already created and reimagining it and recreating it into something new. While Marx and Hegel may have argued that everything has been done already, in the same vein as Ecclesiastes 1:9; Benson instead argues that we take the original strains of musica and reinterpret them as a form of Jazz-like improvisation i.e. Improv. In such a way we stand on the shoulders of giants and play the tune that has come before but in a slightly different way.

    Now for this metaphor to work it is worth noting a few things about Jazz music. Firstly, despite the seemingly cacaphonic nature of an improv within the piece it inevitably picks up on the theme laid out earlier in the piece, and ‘riffs’ off it. In this way the improv soloist (or band) are taking what has already happened and turning it into something a little bit new. Secondly, it is not the wholesale replacement of the original piece. Despite how different the improv may seem there is acknowledgement of what has come before, and cues for what is to come afterward. In this way an improv cannot simply stand on its own as a whole piece, it is shallow and thin; and the piece is somewhat hollow without that corresponding improv.

    But what does this have to do with academic writing? – I hear you ask; well I offer this corollary. One of the aspects of academic essay writing that the students who come and see me for first year tutoring commonly wrestle with is how to present ‘novel’ thoughts within their essays. They rebel at the concept that an essay could be simply the regurgitation of someone else’s ideas, organised into a pithy 2000 words; and I would say rightly so. Nevertheless the balance between acknowledging the supports for your argument and simply depositing it onto the page with a citation is a fine balance at times. [ref]I know that the comparison between classical music and regurgitation can be made here. However, even in classical music I think there is some scope for individual interpretations.[/ref] Here is where I think the metaphor of Jazz plays into the equation: writing an academic essay is somewhat like performing a Jazz improv. When you are writing an academic piece you are constantly acknowledging the shoulders on which you stand, those who have run the race beforehand and set benchmarks, the explorers who have charted their little bit of new territory and laid out some of the markers. Rare is it that a paper stands on its own, and in the vein of Star Trek: boldly goes ‘where no man has gone before.’

    However, a good academic essay should not be simply regurgitating the previous information, but should be teasing out the implications, the differences in individual perspective  that make previous arguments sing more brightly, or lend weight to a specific train of thought over another. This is the improv part, the offering of a different interpretation, nuances here and there, extending the bounds of the sphere of research wider. It is not simply slavish wholesale copying which is realistically plagiarism, even if it is cited. But rather seeing the intricacies of the arguments that have come before hand, watching the notes bounce off each other, and recognising the gaps that can be filled, or the silences that can be left, and working with those. Sure at an introductory level the author is bound to find that someone else has thought of their lightbulb before, or shares the same interpretation of a text as them. But even there the nuance is different. In the indomitable words of Monty Python ‘you are all individuals’, and as such the individual differences of our perspectives can be brought to bear in an essay, of any level.

    Perhaps the best way to sum it up is by using Bruce Ellis Benson’s own words:

    Just like in Jazz improv, one may borrow an idea but one must return it with interest.