Outlining

"Balance the need for thoroughness and perfection with the flexibility of delaying closure, and of moving ahead, for the moment, with the chain of ideas"

I have to admit, I wasn't all that excited to read the outlining assignment at first glace (I'm sorry Donna, I know you were really excited about it!)

I figured...it's outlining. Isn't outlining pretty basic? Or at least one of the more basic steps in the writing process?

I did find a few things quite helpful, though.

Three things that really stuck out to me: balance, patience and clarity (I've had that new song "clarity" stuck in my head for days now, so that might have something to do with it!)

Balance and patience. This is crucial.

The outline I've come to use regularly, is probably the same one everyone else has been taught since we were little.
Intro > Main Point (transition) > Next Main Point (transition) >  Next Main Point (transition) > Conclusion

My introduction and my conclusion are the most tedious parts of anything I write. I, like most writers, want to start strong and finish with a bang. Usually, my introduction will take hours. HOURS, I tell you! I want the most comprehensive overview of my content that is humanly possible. Content can be tricky at times, yes. Citing can be exhausting, yes. My content and citations aren't always (okay, maybe "are never" was what I meant) perfect, yes. But I've rarely submitted a paper with an introduction I wasn't proud of.

That's a terrible way to approach a paper. If I rest such importance on the beginning (and the end) the middle gets neglected.

I also lump in the introduction and conclusion with being completed in the pre-writing process. Essentially, a pre writing process for me is doing the introduction, the conclusion, and formulating titles for the main points in between. Not good. These parts of the paper are not pre-writing. Pre-writing is pre-writing!



Edit: --Morning BDS--


"Is it all necessary?"


I kept this question alive in my head as I sat down to work on my Politics & The Media paper. I began with a 10 minute meditation, followed by 20 minutes of writing with a 5 minute break at the halfway point, and ended with a written reflection. 

Is it all necessary? This is such a simplistic but profoundly helpful question to keep in mind, particularly when writing about politics. In this class, my writing should assume the reader is privy to the broad topics being discussed. I don't need to waste time (or energy!) on self-explanatory areas.

Thoughts to self while pre writing:

- you don't have to explain who this public official is
- you don't have to expand on the reasoning behind policy stance for each party
- you don't need to define anything that isn't directly related to the variables you're using


I'm comfortable with the draft that resulted. I didn't allow myself to linger on the introduction. I didn't allow myself to linger period. As Boice would say, how can I come up with the best way to say something if I've only just recently thought to use it as a talking point?

I kept it general. When I edit, I will specify further.

It's only a pre-write. It's only a pre-write.