A simple rule for better writing: meta goes to the end.
Not sure if this is also useful for others or just specifically my bad habit. I start to write something, then I feel like some further explanation or a disclaimer is needed, then I find something more to add… and it is tempting to start the article with the disclaimers and other meta stuff. The result is a bad article where after the first screen of text you still haven’t seen the important stuff, and now you are probably bored and close the browser tab.
Psychologically, it feels like I predict objections, so I try to deflect them in advance. But it results in bad writing.
Instead, I now decided to start with the meat of the article, and move the disclaimers and explanations to the end (unless I maybe later decide that they are not needed at all). I can add footnotes to the potentially controversial parts, or maybe just a note saying “this will be explained later”.
This is also related to the well-known (and well-ignored) rule of explaining: provide specific examples first, generalize later.
My own version of this is over-trying to introduce a topic. I’ll zoom out until I hit a generally relatable idea like, “one day I was at a bookstore and...”, then I’ll retrace my steps until I finally introduce what I originally wanted to talk about. That makes for a lot of confusing filler.
The opposite of this l, and what I use to correct myself, is how Scott Alexander starts his posts with the specific question or statement he wants to talk about.
This, of course, depends on the audience and the standards of the medium. And even more whether your main point is what you’re calling “meta”, or if the meta is really an addendum to whatever you’re exploring.
For things longer than a few paragraphs, put a summary up front, then sections for each supporting idea, then a re-summary of how the details support the thesis. If the “meta” is disclaimers and exceptions and acknowledgement that the thesis isn’t applicable to everywhere readers might assume you intend, then I think a brief note at the front is worth including, mentioning that there’s a lot of unknowns and exceptions which are explored at the end.
A simple rule for better writing: meta goes to the end.
Not sure if this is also useful for others or just specifically my bad habit. I start to write something, then I feel like some further explanation or a disclaimer is needed, then I find something more to add… and it is tempting to start the article with the disclaimers and other meta stuff. The result is a bad article where after the first screen of text you still haven’t seen the important stuff, and now you are probably bored and close the browser tab.
Psychologically, it feels like I predict objections, so I try to deflect them in advance. But it results in bad writing.
Instead, I now decided to start with the meat of the article, and move the disclaimers and explanations to the end (unless I maybe later decide that they are not needed at all). I can add footnotes to the potentially controversial parts, or maybe just a note saying “this will be explained later”.
This is also related to the well-known (and well-ignored) rule of explaining: provide specific examples first, generalize later.
My own version of this is over-trying to introduce a topic. I’ll zoom out until I hit a generally relatable idea like, “one day I was at a bookstore and...”, then I’ll retrace my steps until I finally introduce what I originally wanted to talk about. That makes for a lot of confusing filler.
The opposite of this l, and what I use to correct myself, is how Scott Alexander starts his posts with the specific question or statement he wants to talk about.
This, of course, depends on the audience and the standards of the medium. And even more whether your main point is what you’re calling “meta”, or if the meta is really an addendum to whatever you’re exploring.
For things longer than a few paragraphs, put a summary up front, then sections for each supporting idea, then a re-summary of how the details support the thesis. If the “meta” is disclaimers and exceptions and acknowledgement that the thesis isn’t applicable to everywhere readers might assume you intend, then I think a brief note at the front is worth including, mentioning that there’s a lot of unknowns and exceptions which are explored at the end.