This post is about writing the book. Because writing about the book is much easier than actually writing the book.
How Ben Casnocha wrote a book
A friend sent me this post by Ben Casnocha about how he and Reid Hoffman wrote "The Start-Up of You". I've been googling "how to write a book" lately - because how do you write one, seriously?? - and have been trying to find good advice and reference points. That post is the best thing I've come across. Ben goes into great detail about all the phases, the tactical things, the psychology of writing a book. Plus, their book is also about careers. If you've ever thought about writing a non-fiction book, go read the post.
Structure drives your point
I was intimidated by many parts of his story, but was especially comforted by the parts where he explains how hard it is to structure the book. I've written enough blog posts to know how to structure a blog post. (Tip for beginners: drop your first and sometimes first two paragraphs. Cut out your warm-up writing and the post will be structurally tighter.) Writing a whole book is a totally differently beast.
...we needed to upgrade the quality of the work in every way. It was not an issue of styling prose. We needed to deepen and better organize every part of every point.
YES. I've been going around telling people that I'm struggling with "style", when really my problem is (1) I need to know exactly what points I'm making and (2) structure. Specifically on structure, he writes:
Order is hard because order represents the logic of the point you’re trying to make. For a 60,000 word book, order and structure is one of the hardest challenges and “editing” for me was an exercise in re-ordering existing words as much as it was changing words.
Structure drives the point you make. (1) and (2) above need to be solved together. I hadn't thought about it quite that way before. It was a revelation to me that while I can write a perfectly decent sentence, it is surprisingly hard to manage the architecture of my book.
On the process of nailing down structure, Ben writes:
...we did not draft a detailed blueprint (outline) of the book and then put our heads down and execute. We had to figure out each point as we went. We started in the middle, then did the beginning, then the end, and then re-did everything. It was chaotic.
So it is supposed to be totally messy. My tactic so far has been, I'm just going to start writing a thing and see how it reads and iterate from there. It wasn't strategy so much as I just didn't know what else to do. But it is much easier for me to react to a piece and critique it, especially if it is a crappy thing. So I wrote 2000 words of a crappy thing. It's bad and I've felt stuck for the past week, but apparently this is how it's supposed to feel!
I love the quote from E. L. Doctorow:
“Writing is like driving at night in the fog. You can only see as far as your headlights, but you can make the whole trip that way.”
So I just need to keep driving... which is easier said than done. But at least I'm in the right direction and arguably engaged in the right activity of, well, writing bad initial drafts.
Thinking too small - again
The other thought that I've been mulling over is this notion of thinking twice as big. I have been thinking of this book as a small personal project. Just something that I feel like doing, because I have this idea in my head, and why not. In doing Career Coffee, I shipped and did something really interesting but have fallen into the trap of thinking too small - again. I feel like it is something that has been too good to keep so small. There is that quote that I think is credited to Leonard Cohen, "If I knew where inspiration came from, I would go there more often." When I'm writing these Career Coffee responses, I feel like I have figured out how to go there just about every time. There is advice that has come out of me that makes me go, man, where did that come from. But spending 2 hours per response can't scale.
Aiming for the mountain top
Absorbing the scale at which Ben and Reid think has me asking myself, how can I take bigger, calculated risks in my work? Richard Hamming has this excellent speech on how to do Nobel-worthy research. The first step is to go after important problems. He says,
...even if you believe that great science is a matter of luck, you can stand on a mountain top where lightning strikes; you don’t have to hide in the valley where you’re safe.
You need to aspire to something that big - get yourself to stand on the mountain top. I wrote a draft post about that Richard Hamming speech months ago, and every time I go back and read it, I get to the last line: "But what about doing truly transformative work on a scale that matters?" And I just don't know what that means to me.
So, what if. What if this book were not just a personal project to ship, but a significant effort at saying something original very loudly in screaming color?
I don't know if I can do it. My day job is not exactly a walk in the park. Then again, I think of how busy Ben Casnocha and Reid Hoffman must be, and whatever workload I have must pale in comparison to what they handle.
Maybe I need to design something so big that I will most probably fail at it. With all my side projects, my skills exceed the scale at which I've operated. I need to pick the goal without regard for feasibility. Tell myself, the failed bigger project trumps the successful smaller project. Since I know my problem is not shipping but in dreaming big, maybe that's what I need to do.
Write the book to shape the conversation around the role of passion in everyday careers.
[This is Day 6 of the YourTurnChallenge, a post a day for 7 days, organized by Winnie Kao and Seth Godin. You can see previous days here: Day 1, Day 2, Day 3, Day 4, Day 5.]