What can I do to improve my writing now?

[MonkeySage]

I have never been good at, in my view, turning a sentence into a paragraph. When it comes to writing assignments with page minimums, I can't ever reach those minimums, no matter how hard I try. Part of it is because I don't like repeating myself. I can do background, but even then I don't see a point in saying more than what needs to be said to answer the prompt.

Example: In 5 pages, explain how this historical figure did this, based on the source literature.
At most, I can get 3 pages out of it.

After a conversation with a friend of mine who has the exact same problem, and realizing that we're both autistic, i wonder if that might have anything to do with it.

[Peelee]

Part of it is because I don't like repeating myself.
Rrpeat yourself. Say things again, but differently and with a different focus.


I can do background, but even then I don't see a point in saying more than what needs to be said to answer the prompt.

The point is to meet the criteria (there's other points but let's focus on this one). Say more than what needs to be said. Expound needlessly.

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair, we had everything before us, we had nothing before us

[halfeye]

When I saw the thread title, I thought "learn precis", but then I read the first post. :smallsigh:

[Rynjin]

"Write more" is the general platitude, but it's a good one. The more you do the better you get, just like any skill. Find some practice essays or something to write on.

Also note that school assignments are usually going to be inherently complex questions. Use that. "How did Alexander the Great conquer so much of the world" is technically something you could boil down to a single sentence, sure, but it can't possibly be that simple; people have written multiple books about his life and conquests.

So, avoid the urge to over-simplify things. Explain the subject to your teacher like they've never heard of it before.

This works for any kind of writing. One of my clients has me doing product reviews. Yes, everybody knows what a spatula is. But you have to explain it anyway, because as it turns out, "everybody" is a lot smaller than you think.

It's difficult to explain more for me, since things that work for me ("don't think, write" being the big one; overthinking things just slows me down, so if I know the material the words can just flow out as I need them) might not work for you. Maybe somebody who had trouble writing in school can chime in with ways to get over mental blocks.

[Peelee]

There's a rather famous story about Mike Rowe and the Ticonderoga #2 pencil. I'm going to cut it up a bit, since parts are not Forum-appropriate, but the main part is, and I highly recommend a very close reading of the sales pitch. This also feeds heavily into what Rynjin said - don't be afraid to explain like they've never even had a pencil before.

Back in 1990, The QVC Cable Shopping Channel was conducting a national talent search. I had no qualifications to speak of, but I needed a job, and thought TV might be a fun way to pay the bills. So I showed up at The Marriott in downtown Baltimore with a few hundred other hopefuls, and waited for a chance to audition. When it was my turn, the elevator took me to the top floor, where a man no expression led me into a suite and asked me to take a seat behind a large desk. Across from the desk, there was a camera on a tripod. On the desk was a digital timer with an LED display. I took a seat as the man clipped a microphone on my shirt and explained the situation.

“The purpose of this audition is to see if you can talk for eight minutes without stuttering, blathering, passing out, or throwing up. Any questions?”

“What would you like me to talk about,” I asked.

The man pulled a pencil from behind his ear and rolled it across the desk. “Talk to me about that pencil. Sell it. Make me want it. But be yourself. If you can do that for eight minutes, the job is yours. Ok?”

I looked at the pencil. It was yellow. It had a point on one end, and an eraser on the other. On the side were the words, Dixon Ticonderoga Number 2 SOFT.

“Ok,” I said.

The man set the timer to 8:00, and walked behind the tripod. He pressed a button and a red light appeared on the camera. He pressed another button and the timer began to count backwards. “Action,” he said. I picked up the pencil and started talking.

“Hi there. My name’s Mike Rowe, and I only have eight minutes to tell you why this is finest pencil on Planet Earth. So let’s get right to it.”

I opened the desk drawer and found a piece of hotel stationary, right where I hoped it would be. I picked up the pencil and wrote the word, QUALITY in capital letters. I held the paper toward the camera.

“As you can plainly see, The #2 Dixon Ticonderoga leaves a bold, unmistakable line, far superior to the thin and wispy wake left by the #3, or the fat, sloppy skid mark of the unwieldy #1. Best of all, the Ticonderoga is not filled with actual lead, but “madagascar graphite,” a far safer alternative for anyone who likes to chew on their writing implements.”

To underscore the claim, I licked the point. I then discussed the many advantages of the Ticonderoga’s color.

“A vibrant yellow, perfectly suited for an object that needs to stand out from the clutter of a desk drawer.”

I commented on the comfort of it’s design.

“Unlike those completely round pencils that press hard into the web of your hand, the Ticonderoga’s circumference is comprised of eight, gently plained surfaces, which dramatically reduce fatigue, and make writing for extended periods an absolute delight.”

I pointed out the “enhanced eraser,” which was “guaranteed to still be there - even when the pencil was sharpened down to an unusable nub.”

I opined about handmade craftsmanship and American made quality. I talked about the feel of real wood.

“In a world overrun with plastic and high tech gadgets, isn’t it comforting to know that some things haven’t evolved into something shiny and gleaming and completely unrecognizable?’”

After all that, there was still five minutes on the timer. So I shifted gears and considered the pencil’s impact on Western Civilization. I spoke of Picasso and Van Gogh, and their hundreds of priceless drawings - all done in pencil. I talked about Einstein and Hawking, and their many complicated theories and theorems - all done in pencil.

“Pen and ink are fine for memorializing contracts,” I said, “but real progress relies on the ability to erase and start anew. Archimedes said he could move the world with a lever long enough, but when it came to proving it, he needed a pencil to make the point.”

With three minutes remaining, I moved on to some personal recollections about the role of pencils in my own life. My first legible signature, my first book report, my first crossword puzzle, and of course, my first love letter. I may have even worked up a tear as I recalled the innocence of my youth, scribbled out on a piece of looseleaf with all the hope and passion a desperate 6th grader could muster...courtesy of a #2 pencil.

With :30 seconds left on the timer, I looked fondly at the Dixon Ticonderoga, and sat silently for five seconds. Then I wrapped it up.

“We call it a pencil, because all things need a name. But today, let’s call it what it really is. A time machine. A match maker. A magic wand. And let’s say it can all be yours...for just .99 cents.”

The timer read 0:00. The man walked back to the desk. He took the pencil and wrote “YOU’RE HIRED” on the stationary, and few days later, I moved to West Chester, PA. And a few days after that, I was on live television, face to face with the never-ending parade of trinkets and chotchkies that comprise QVC’s overnight inventory.

I spent three months on the graveyard shift, five nights a week. Technically, this was my training period, which was curious, given the conspicuous absence of supervision, or anything that could be confused with actual instruction. Every few minutes a stagehand would bring me another mysterious “must have item,” which I’d blather about nonsensically until it was whisked away and replaced with something no less baffling. In this way, I slowly uncovered the mysteries of my job, and forged a tenuous relationship with an audience of chronic insomniacs and narcoleptic lonely-hearts. It was a crucible of confusion and ambiguity, and in hindsight, the best training I ever had.

Here’s what I didn’t understand 25 years ago. QVC had a serious recruiting problem. Qualified candidates were applying in droves, but failing miserably on the air. Polished salespeople with proven track records were awkward on TV. Professional actors with extensive credits couldn’t be themselves on camera. And seasoned hosts who understood live television had no experience hawking products. So eventually, QVC hit the reset button. They stopped looking for “qualified” people, and started looking for anyone who could talk about a pencil for eight minutes.
Much of what he said was bull****. Some of it he just made up because it sounded good, and that's one hell of a skill to be able to do live. But you're not doing it live, you have time to write it all out, and that's a heck of an advantage. A lot more people can do they.

In short: teach yourself how to talk about a pencil for eight minutes.

[Khedrac]

Another point which may or may not be useful to you: A lesson I learnt from my father, who said that whenever you write a report putting across a position, start with your conclusions, otherwise people will follow your reasoning to a completely different set of conclusions.

So, what use is this to you? Well, if you have an essay question that asks you to present a position (not just recite facts) then you should be able to use 1 page to summarise your answer and then the rest of the essay to provide the reasoning (which gets you to at least 4 pages).
Yes, it is repeating yourself, but it is doing so much more constructively than simple repetition.

In the case of an essay asking "how did X achieve Y?" then rather than simply say "he did Z", think about how doing Z achieves Y and then put that in your essay too (which is probably what your teachers want anyway). This provides the reasoning which both pads your essay and enables you to play with the essay structure as per my starting suggestion.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by MonkeySage
When it comes to writing assignments with page minimums, I can't ever reach those minimums, no matter how hard I try. Part of it is because I don't like repeating myself.


Originally Posted by Peelee
Repeat yourself…. Expound needlessly.

I’m going to give different advice, which is to very definitely not repeat yourself. I also don’t think the quote from Dickens is fair in this context, since Dickens isn’t actually repeating himself, and he has a purpose for writing what he does.

Rather than repeating yourself, which teachers will see right through, just follow Obi-Wan’s advice and let yourself go. Explore the ideas and possibilities raised by the question. Narrate when necessary, but feel free to speculate and then compare the results of your speculation with what you know of the situation. Then explore that contrast.

I have the opposite problem, in that I tend to write too much; I’ll take a simple question and reply with an essay. It’s usually not a problem except in those situations when you need to write concisely to hold someone’s attention, i.e. someone in management, state legislation, etc.

As for the autism, that’s worth asking whoever you speak with regarding the medical aspects of your condition, or even contacting someone who does research on autism.

And speaking of asking people, it would be worthwhile to talk with some of your professors, especially if any of them have left constructive comments on prior assignments. This lets them know that you actually care about improving your performance, and they may respond with some very targeted advice, since they've probably read more of your writing than we have.

[GrayDeath]

I have the opposite problem, in that I tend to write too much; I’ll take a simple question and reply with an essay. It’s usually not a problem except in those situations when you need to write concisely to hold someone’s attention, i.e. someone in management, state legislation, etc.




Same here.

But I ahve been successfully repressing my tendencies to elaborate and write endlessly in the last Decade or so, hence I can tell you: Changing the way you write is quite doable!

Its just imperative that you try and find out WHY you have problems "meeting the minimum length" of essays/etc.
Is it because you tend to write short, concise and matter of factish? Is it because you assume a lot of foreknowledge? Or is there another reason altogether?

For School Tasks, in my experience, almost all the time you can answer it in half the length if you assume the one reading understands what this is about at least as well as you do.
So assume you are writing for someone who has NO IDEA whatsoever about the topic, and you should be able to wring additional introductions of ideas/etc from it at the very least.

Another thing that can help is try and write as you see fit, and then, after finishing, redo it with more elaborate word choices and some "stuffing" (mind, this of course wont work at an actual time limited assignment, but for homework it can help a lot!).

Summing up: A lot of people have trouble fitting the "expected average length" of School exercises. Dont fret about it, but if you want to change, you now have more than a few ways to go about it!

:smallcool:

[Xyril]

IÂ’m going to give different advice, which is to very definitely not repeat yourself. I also donÂ’t think the quote from Dickens is fair in this context, since Dickens isnÂ’t actually repeating himself, and he has a purpose for writing what he does.

Rather than repeating yourself, which teachers will see right through, just follow Obi-WanÂ’s advice and let yourself go. Explore the ideas and possibilities raised by the question. Narrate when necessary, but feel free to speculate and then compare the results of your speculation with what you know of the situation. Then explore that contrast.


Given the apparent context (school writing assignments), I am going to have to agree with Palanan and respectfully disagree with everyone else. For a school assignment, you generally aren't repeating yourself for its own sake--even if you do so in different, attractive language. You develop your main point. Usually, you want to articulate your supporting points, all together. For people with autism and more generally for some folks who are very knowledgeable or just very good at processing new information, this is a point where they start losing word-count: When you first introduce these supporting points, you can consider being more explicit in drawing the connections between these supporting point and the main point. This generally depends on the length of the work and the presumed background knowledge of the audience, but if you constantly find your writing to be too brief, I would consider expounding a bit more than you normally feel comfortable doing.

For example, instead of saying, "This is a great pencil because of its durability and precision," you might want to break things down more. "This is a great pencil. Its durability means that you don't need to worry about keeping many spares around in case one breaks, and you save money because you get more out of each one. It is built to more stringent tolerances, meaning that you can draw straighter, finer lines. This means that our pencil can be used for applications for which our competitors are poorly suited."

The only time you should straight-up repeat the same points is in moderately long formats--i.e., some version of that standard five-paragraph essay we learn in elementary school. If your introduction or thesis statement relates supporting points to your main point, and the rest of your paper provides evidence for or expands upon each of those supporting point, then you probably want to restate each supporting point to allow the reader to reorient himself before you continue writing. At this point, you are no longer "repeating" anything: Everything you say should be novel information to the reader. It might be evidence that supports your point; it could begin with your supporting point, but move from general to specific assertions; really, it could be anything that you feel is worth discussion and contributes to an understanding of your main point (and is within the scope of your school assignment.) Just some examples:

"We mentioned the durability of this pencil. Crafted from the wood of an endangered redwood species, these pencils are stiff but flexible enough not to break easily. We use a softer graphite than our competitors, meaning that it is harder to break or chip the tip if you apply too much pressure while writing. Since breaking your lead and having to sharpen a new tip reduces the lifetime of your pencil by about 3%, this increases the life-expectancy of your pencil, allowing you to save money by buying fewer replacements."

Basically, you repeat the main point so that the reader knows what you're focusing on now, and everything else is a new piece of information to support the idea that the pencil is durable.

"Our pencils are the most high-precision pencils on the market. Our thinner, harder graphite cores can be sharpened to a smaller point, allowing you to draw fine lines without having to sharpen your pencil frequently. Our unique graphite formulation is also more responsive to pressure--when used for shading, it is much easier to control the darkness of the marks you leave by varying how hard you press."

In this case, you repeat the main point, which is expressed in general terms. Everything afterwards supports that first point by going into specifics: If your reader was wondering what the heck you even mean by a "precision" pencil, your next sentences answer that question by describing specific characteristics that you consider "high precision."

[truemane]

Dickens got paid by the word, and he wrote most of his novel piecemeal for periodicals, so he was certainly a little more prolix than maybe he needed to be, but he also happened to be a genuine genius, so it doesn't show as much as might have with anyone else. That first paragraph of Tale of Two Cities that is so often cited, though, is just about perfect. It says exactly what it means to say and is just enough words to do what needs doing.

The writing rule is "All things being equal, fewer words is better." But all things are seldom equal because the goal isn't 'use the fewest possible words' it's 'communicate as efficiently (most impact with fewest words) as possible.' You can boil famous stories down to painfully thin synopses, but those aren't anything anyone would read or love or remember. Sort of like how, in chess, all the pieces have number values. All things being equal, you're always better off trading a lower-valued piece for a higher-valued one. But all things aren't always equal, because the goal of chess isn't 'have the most points' it's Checkmate. You can validly trade points for position, and you can disagree over whether a given position is worth the points. Just like writing.

The pencil story is a good story, but it's not relevant to what your'e talking about. The goals of the Pencil Rant are: fill eight minutes and make someone want the pencil. Those are not your goals. Your goals for an essay are: present five pages of organized facts that support a central thesis. Almost opposite goals.

The 'easiest' way to write more on essays (easiest for ND's, maybe) is just to know more. The best essays are the ones where you wrote one word but you could have written three. So, when you have a five page essay to write, don't think of it as having 1250 words of space you need to fill, think of it as 1250 words of knowledge you need to impart. So if you have 2000 words of relevant knowledge, and have to pare it down to 1250, then you have an all killer no filler essay.

So if you have to write why a thing happened, figure out three to five things that lead up to it, that made it easier, that made it necessary, that made it harder, that made it inevitable, and/or three to five people who featured prominently in the lead up, the occurrence, and (possibly) the aftermath. And then, break each of those things up into three to five supporting things (Three people who were important, and three reasons why each was important).

Being on the spectrum can make this kind of writing harder. I don't want to speculate too deeply into why, because I'm not qualified, but it always seemed to me to have something to do with the subjective decisions an essay writer has to make around what to explain vs what to assume the reader already knows. If you need to write a history of, say the Giantitp forums, do you tell your teacher what the Giantitp forums are? Who Rich Burlew is? Do you explain what a forum is? What the internet is? What a giant is? These often seem like obvious (sometimes even unconscious) choices by NT people, but they are complex when you look at them closely.

And the structure is:
-Tell them what you're going to say
-Say it
-Tell them what you said

Same structure from top to bottom. Like a program with subroutines, with each individual point nested into the larger point, and each nested point with the same structure. And if a nested point has, in itself, several smaller points, then same same.

"Describe the reasons for the end of the Third Age and the War of the Ring."

You could just say "The War of the Ring happened because Sauron was evil and wanted to rule all of Middle Earth and he started a war to do it."

But why did he want to rule the world (because he was a Maiar of Aule the Maker, and therefore already burdened with a love of mastery and control, who was corrupted by Morgoth into giving into his base urges)? How did he try to rule the world (through the perversion of natural processes into automation like cloning, perverting the Istari Sauruman who was also a Maiar of Aule and therefore kin to him and therefore subject to the same sort of corruption based on desire and control)? What were the conditions of the world such that taking over it was even possible (the fall of Numenor and the collapse of the kingdoms of the north, the desolation of Smaug, the splintering of the realms of Men into isolated and disparate states that could be easily conquered one by one, the fading of the elves from the affairs of Men).

Etc etc. Some of the answers to this stuff is in the base text (fading elves), some requires some extra reading (who is Smaug, what's a Maiar). And you could learn so so so much about the War of the Ring that you could never put it into five pages, but the more you know about it, the more you have to boil down your knowledge t into a more concentrated form, the stronger your eventual essay will be.

And you'll have a lot of information, and organizing it into a logical narrative is where the essay comes from. Like, all that stuff about Sauron being kin to Sauruman, is that a cause in its own right? Or should you mention that when you explain who Sauron is? Should you even explain who Sauron is, or do we assume that everyone knows that? It all depends on how you lay out the material, which is what outlines are for. Try to group the data into larger chunks, and then group the chunks, and once you have all of it into a couple of nice big juicy pieces, you have your central thesis. Then you tell them your thesis, and then lay it out, and then tell them the pieces of the thesis, and the pieces of the pieces, and then wrap it up.

For five pages what your'e looking for is, probably two or three top-level contributing factors, and each factor having three to five sub-bits (which can be their own contributing factors, or reasons for their relevance, or a combination). One paragraph per bit and a couple of transition. So that's something like 15 paragraphs, each paragraph imparting a single idea.

And at each point you follow the same structure:
-Tell them what you're going to say
-Say it
-Tell them what you said

Example:
-This essay will show that the War of the Ring was primarily caused by the following three factors: Lack of communication and cooperation between civilized realms, Sauron's embrace of modernism and automation, insufficient budget to pay Ian McKellan to play every part in every movie.
--Factor 1 - The first factor is the lack of communication between civilized realms. This is important for the following three reasons: Reason 1, Reason 2, Reason 3. And this was caused by the following three causes: Cause 1, Cause 2, Cause 3.
---These are the three reasons why this was important
----Reason 1
----Reason 2
----Reason 3
---So we can see that lack of communication between realms was important for these three reasons.
---These are the three causes:
----Cause 1
----Cause 2
----Cause 3
---So we can see that these are the three causes
--Factor 2....

And so on. Each one is a little closed loop, often containing subloops. And the opening of every loop is: here's what I'm going to say and the loop isn't closed until you say it and then say, this is what I just said. And when you've opened all the loops and subloops and then closed them all in opposite order, ending with "And so here you can see that the War of the Ring was caused by these three factors" you're done.

And you don't have to say it all magna *** arte. Don't focus on being scintillating, just focus on being clear and organized. ND folks are a bit of a disadvantage here because when NT people say 'smart' they 90% of the time mean 'good communicator.' People who say unintelligent things with style and flair almost always come off better than people who say brilliant things too fast or boring or plodding (I myself am a person of perhaps slightly-above average intelligence but very-above-average communication skills, and I can speak from personal experience that being able to speak engagingly with little preparation is basically a Cheat Code for life).

But you have to work with what you got. And if you can come up with enough data, grind it up and lay it out in a series of interlocking points, each of which is clearly book-ended, and each of which clearly belongs where it is, then you've got a good essay.

[Peelee]

The pencil story is a good story, but it's not relevant to what your'e talking about. The goals of the Pencil Rant are: fill eight minutes and make someone want the pencil. Those are not your goals. Your goals for an essay are: present five pages of organized facts that support a central thesis. Almost opposite goals.
I disagree here. The goal for an essay in general is that, yes, but that's not the question. The question we are asked is, "I cannot fill five pages without feeling like I am repeating myself." In which case I think there will be some disconnect between people on the concept of "repeating yourself" (see the Dickens example). I also think that the pencil story can help, because it helps show that there are different aspects that one can focus on if that fails. A pencil is a pencil, but you can talk about the quality, the feel, the historical impact, the cultural impact, interpersonal impact, etc.

And, not to put too fine a point on it, to not shy away from bull****ting some of it if needs be.

[truemane]

I disagree here. The goal for an essay in general is that, yes, but that's not the question. The question we are asked is, "I cannot fill five pages without feeling like I am repeating myself." In which case I think there will be some disconnect between people on the concept of "repeating yourself" (see the Dickens example). I also think that the pencil story can help, because it helps show that there are different aspects that one can focus on if that fails. A pencil is a pencil, but you can talk about the quality, the feel, the historical impact, the cultural impact, interpersonal impact, etc.

And, not to put too fine a point on it, to not shy away from bull****ting some of it if needs be.

We're mildly into semantics here, and I think we mostly agree, but the Pencil Rant was mostly made up stuff and rhetorical devices specifically deployed to fill time. If you are a very good writer, you can get away with some of that in an academic essay, but not much, and ideally you shouldn't be using the same tactics. And the OP has already indicated that they aren't good at that sort of thing, so I wanted to help re-frame the issue from 'How can I fill five pages with meaningless words' to 'how can I acquire and organize enough knowledge so that I have five pages worth of stuff to say'?

But as far as focusing on things around the pencil as a means of adding both weight and detail to your thesis, I agree.

But it's less: sell me the pencil than it is, lay out a series of organized facts about the pencil that support the thesis that it is the best pencil.

Yeah?

[Peelee]

We're mildly into semantics here, and I think we mostly agree, but the Pencil Rant was mostly made up stuff and rhetorical devices specifically deployed to fill time.

Indeed. And last that I knew, MonkeySage was a chem major (possibly changed now), and if it's a lit class that they only need the credits for, who cares if the teacher sees through it? Most likely fewer points will be knocked off for padding than would be knocked off for not meeting the minimum number of pages, since at least padding is trying.

[truemane]

Indeed. And last that I knew, MonkeySage was a chem major (possibly changed now), and if it's a lit class that they only need the credits for, who cares if the teacher sees through it? Most likely fewer points will be knocked off for padding than would be knocked off for not meeting the minimum number of pages, since at least padding is trying.

Fair enough. I was trying to help improve their writing, rather than help inflate their word count, but it's possible I answered the wrong question.

[Peelee]

Fair enough. I was trying to help improve their writing, rather than help inflate their word count, but it's possible I answered the wrong question.

It's equally possible I'm answering the wrong question. I'm approaching this strictly from a "help me pass this specific class" point of view, and not "help me improve my writing overall." If it's for a class in their major, then yes, I'll change stance and go with you and Palanan's advice.

On a wholly unrelated note, I absolutely advise Monkeysage to take some Game Theory math classes, if available. Super fun.

[truemane]

You don't hear 'super fun' in the same sentence as 'math' too often.

[Peelee]

You don't hear 'super fun' in the same sentence as 'math' too often.

Well, unless you talk to me on a constant basis.:smallwink:

[Tawmis]

I have never been good at, in my view, turning a sentence into a paragraph. When it comes to writing assignments with page minimums, I can't ever reach those minimums, no matter how hard I try. Part of it is because I don't like repeating myself. I can do background, but even then I don't see a point in saying more than what needs to be said to answer the prompt.
Example: In 5 pages, explain how this historical figure did this, based on the source literature.
At most, I can get 3 pages out of it.
After a conversation with a friend of mine who has the exact same problem, and realizing that we're both autistic, i wonder if that might have anything to do with it.

So, one of my closest friends, her daughter is considered to have high functioning autism. She used to see how I'd write all the time. Couldn't understand how I could do it. There's even a thread on this very forum where I write backgrounds for people. (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?591882-Need-a-character-background-written-up)

So when she asked me how I did it... I explained how it all started for me.
I was in the 4th grade, and the teacher began reading The Hobbit to the class, every day, for several weeks.
My mind was simply blown. When we reached the end, I checked out The Hobbit for two years from the school library. (I am pretty sure they thought I was the slowest reader; but whenever it was due, I'd turn it in, and ask if I could check it out again). What I was doing was not only re-reading it, I was copying some of my favorite parts, writing down what Tolkien wrote down. I was trying to channel and understand how he'd done what he'd done. I then took some of those pages, and wrote them in my own words, to try and not only understand what he did - but see if I could write something similar (which, in my view is similar to: Example: In 5 pages, explain how this historical figure did this, based on the source literature.). I remember in the 6th grade, my teacher asking me how long it was taking me to read The Hobbit, and I explained I'd already read it like sixteen times. He asked me if I'd read Lord of the Rings, which continued the story. Mind. Blown.

Anyway, I kept writing from the 4th grade on. Over and over. Some of them were absolutely horrible. (I wrote one called "S.O.S." - which was about teenagers who sold their souls to Satan to become famous rockstars; so the band name was "Sons of Satan" - but after awhile, realize it's not worth it, and try to redeem themselves - and rename the band, lyrics, message, to "Save Our Souls"). I also wrote one called "The Killing of Mrs. Krammer" (which was my typing teacher; long story), which had been a knock off of a book I was reading for my reading class called "The Killing of Mr. Griffin" (Pretty sure it was Griffin). My story was stupid, and involved a typewriter crushing her skull.

On and on, I kept writing. Now I've written some short stories (not to be published, probably, ever), working on a novel (that may one day see the light of day), tons of poems, and lyrics (all written quickly, so not very good in my own opinion).

But the thing is to keep writing. Don't be afraid of mistakes. Taking writing challenges. I used to be on an ElfQuest forum, where once a month they'd do "Writing Grab Bags" where everyone suggested a random element (could be anything: snow, a rusty knife, a death in the family, etc) - and the moderator would pick three - and you'd have to use all three in a story, poem, or even a piece of art.

Another thing I do, I will put a few albums on shuffle and write a line or two or three, that somehow involves or mentions the song title.

So for example, when I shuffled "Hall of the Mountain King" and "Sirens" by a band called Savatage (both of those albums contain songs of those titles, for example)... I might write a line that says:

"King Raynar, Lord of the Barenkar Dwarves, stood and turned his head slightly, listening for a sound he'd not heard in a very long time, as sirens echoed through the hall of the mountain king. The goblins were coming."

I told my friend these same things; and she did it (especially the song exercise, which she found to be quite fun). However, eventually she discovered art was more her talent, and explores that over writing.

Just because you can't write "X" amount of pages doesn't mean you're a "bad" writer. It may not be your thing. Or, you just need to keep hammering away at it. Like any good dwarf, hammer at the forge, until you've made a beautiful weapon to be proud of.

For some writing comes easier. For most, it took a ton of practice. Few ever master it. But many swim in her waters.

[Peelee]

I remember in the 6th grade, my teacher asking me how long it was taking me to read The Hobbit, and I explained I'd already read it like sixteen times. He asked me if I'd read Lord of the Rings, which continued the story. Mind. Blown.

That got a good laugh out of me. Now I'm imagining being told that Firefly had three more seasons on ABC after Fox canceled it and everybody knew about it but me, just to get a sense of how you must have felt.

[jdizzlean]

i can write descriptive stuff pretty easily, where i have issues is interjecting dialogue into my writing.

[Peelee]

i can write descriptive stuff pretty easily, where i have issues is interjecting dialogue into my writing.

You should collaborate with Kevin Smith.

[Razelquin]

I think the big question is do you want to write better papers (academic works, school assignments) or prose (novels or game descriptions).

If it's papers, you're gonna want to repeat yourself in different ways at different points so it doesn't seem like you're repeating yourself. If there's a p[age limit you need to hit then be verbose. Over speak and over explain. You want to be the opposite of concise and brief, you want to fill the page with excess words that aren't blatantly excess.

On the other hand, if this is prose then you want to do none of that. you don't want to over speak in anyway, or repeat yourself. The best way to get better at prose writing is to simply write stories you want to write, while also reading stories in that genre and see how those authors do it. Having a friend or two read over your work and give feedback will help you find the mistakes you're making and correct them.

[Xyril]

If it's papers, you're gonna want to repeat yourself in different ways at different points so it doesn't seem like you're repeating yourself. If there's a p[age limit you need to hit then be verbose. Over speak and over explain. You want to be the opposite of concise and brief, you want to fill the page with excess words that aren't blatantly excess.


Respectfully, this depends entirely on the quality of your school or teacher. Unless the assignment is literally "I want you to write solely for the sake of practicing language and construction, and I couldn't care less about meaningful content," being deliberately verbose just to fill the minimum page number shouldn't get you more than the minimum passing grade, if even that. And if it consistently does give you a decent grade, I would seriously question the value of that particular teacher or institution.

[Aedilred]

I have never been good at, in my view, turning a sentence into a paragraph. When it comes to writing assignments with page minimums, I can't ever reach those minimums, no matter how hard I try. Part of it is because I don't like repeating myself. I can do background, but even then I don't see a point in saying more than what needs to be said to answer the prompt.

Example: In 5 pages, explain how this historical figure did this, based on the source literature.
At most, I can get 3 pages out of it.

After a conversation with a friend of mine who has the exact same problem, and realizing that we're both autistic, i wonder if that might have anything to do with it.

If you're talking about historical essays in particular, or indeed humanities essays in general, they tend to be phrased in the form of a question.

The obvious thing to do is to try to answer the question. But in my experience, the trick is not just to try to answer the question as presented, but to challenge the question. Explain why it's the wrong question, or why it's oversimplified, or why it can't be answered. Take the most radical position possible and try to defend it. This isn't just a way to fill space: it shows that you're thinking about the topic and applying original thought rather than just regurgitating what you've learned, which is a pathway (ime) to higher grades.

Also, that example question says "based on the source literature". That's an invitation to talk at length about the source literature. Explain what every authority on the subject said, where they agree, where they disagree, where the gaps are, and (if appropriate) why they're all wrong. In a timed examination you will be limited to the sources you can remember but if it's a take-home essay you can keep researching and finding new sources, easily enough to fill five pages.