The Method Of Writing that Actually Produces Output
I used to spend about four hours drafting a single technical document because I kept editing sentences as I wrote them. That changed when I started treating the Method Of Writing as two separate phases instead of one continuous task. The first pass is purely about getting content out without judgment. The second pass is where anything actually gets polished. Combining both at the same time was the bottleneck. Here is how the process works in practice. You open a blank document and you write the rough version straight through without backspacing to fix anything. You skip words you cannot think of yet and leave bracketed placeholders. You do not stop to check spelling, grammar, or whether your transitions flow. The goal is raw material, not a final product. A typical 2000-word piece goes from start to finish in about 35 minutes using this approach instead of the two hours it would normally take with real-time editing.
The Method Of Writing: Separation of Drafting and Revision
The core insight is that drafting and editing activate different parts of your cognitive process. When you switch between generating and critiquing mid-sentence, your working memory has to constantly reload context. That is why you lose time staring at a cursor after deleting a paragraph you just wrote. Keeping the phases separate means each mode runs at full speed without the other slowing it down. During the drafting phase, I use a simple structural scaffold. I write the heading for each section before I fill in the body text. Then I move section by section, filling in whatever comes to mind. If a connection between sections feels important, I note it as a bracketed reminder to address later. I do not go back and fix things until the draft is complete. The revision phase is where most of the actual work happens. In my first round of revisions, I read the entire document once to check the logical flow and fix any gaps. This usually takes 20 minutes for a 2000-word piece. In the second round, I do line-level editing for clarity, word choice, and sentence structure. A third pass focuses on grammar and punctuation. Spreading the revision into multiple passes rather than one marathon session keeps errors from slipping through. I have found that trying to do everything at once results in roughly 40 percent more typos and awkward phrasing than doing sequential passes.
One edge case I ran into regularly is the gap between technical accuracy and readability. Early in my career I wrote documentation for a deployment tool where every sentence was technically correct but impossible for a developer to follow on a first read. The workaround was to add a dedicated readability pass where I read the document aloud. Any sentence that made me stumble became a rewrite candidate. This alone cut our average support ticket count for that tool down by about sixty percent over the next three months. Another detail people often miss is that planning time should be counted as part of the Method Of Writing, not separate from it. A fifteen-minute outline before you start drafting the rough version typically cuts total production time in half compared to diving in blind. I sketch out the main points and the order I want to cover them. That alone prevents the most common failure mode, which is realizing halfway through a draft that you have no logical structure and need to rewrite the second half from scratch. There are scenarios where this method does not work well. If you are writing something highly regulated, like legal copy or medical documentation, the separation of drafting and revision still applies but you need additional review passes from subject matter experts before anything gets published. The method also struggles with creative writing that depends heavily on voice and tone. In those cases, the rigid separation can strip the writing of its natural rhythm. For technical and instructional content, however, it reliably produces better results faster than the alternative.
Get the Full Details
