How To Identify Your Own Style Of Writing

This article is to help identify which style, technique or strategy of writing that one may use. I will also help to understand the method in the way a writer writes and help in determining which approach may suite your needs. I hope that this information will help all to become more effective in writing to help suite the needs of the reader as well as the writer by identifying which style is best for both parties.
Architectural strategy
Bricklaying strategy
Oil painting strategy
Water-colour strategy
Architectural strategy
Writing which comes ‘out of an architectural drawing of the thing you are doing’ no such dismissiveness is intended here. Academic writers in a study who used this very common plan-write-edit strategy reported that they consciously chose their writing strategies.
These writers were less likely than others to see writing as a way of thinking. In these respects these writers tended to be Planners. While most writers agreed that they wrote better when concentrating on the topic rather than on the way they were writing.
Architectural Writers showed an implicit awareness of the role of the unconscious as they exhibited the strongest tendency amongst all groups to think that it helped to leave their evolving texts and to return to them later. They showed less of a sense of writing as intrinsically rewarding than other writers did; they were perhaps among the most pragmatic writers. They showed a slight tendency to be interlinear editors.
Writers who were word processor users showed a far stronger tendency than other writers not to find the size of the word processor screen restrictive.
Bricklaying strategy
I encountered examples of the metaphor of bricklaying in my review of writers’ accounts of their composing styles. They have to get every paragraph as nearly right as possible before you go onto the next paragraph. you are somewhat a bricklayer:
You build very slowly, not adding a new row until I feel that the foundation is solid enough to hold up the house. You are the exact opposite of the writer who dashes off his entire first draft, not caring how sloppy it looks or how badly it’s written.
In my survey, academic writers who frequently employed a sentence-by-sentence strategy were also very likely to work on a paragraph-by-paragraph basis. Their approach was, of course, largely sequential and the correction of linguistic slips tended to be done mainly as they wrote. They showed a stronger tendency than other writers not to complete a draft in a single session.
They showed some tendency to feel that it helped to leave a piece of writing and come back to it later. They usually had a clear idea of what they wanted to say and strongly disagreed that thinking would be difficult without writing: they tended not to be Discover.
They tended not to agree that the more they were concentrating on the topic rather than the way they were writing the better their writing was. They showed a stronger preference for handwritten letters than did other writers, and tended not to use the word processor (those who did so showed a strong tendency to find the screen size restrictive).
Bricklaying can be a slow process, and writers working in this way are referred to as ‘bleeders’ . Many writers who use this strategy may report – because they do only one complete draft – that they do little revision, even though they rework each chunk of text a great deal before proceeding to the next.
Oil painting strategy
Painting done in oils is reworkable over time in a way that painting with water-colours cannot be: in oils, one may paint over details in a way that would quickly become ‘muddy’ with water-colours. The surface of an oil painting typically has what is referred to as a painterly’ texture: revealing the marks of the making.
This writer usually begin with several ideas, start playing with them. You play with these ideas until they start to feel right. It’s something like oil painting. You lay on paint and lay on paint. Suddenly you have something and you frame it… It’s like watching a tele-type machine in a newspaper office to see what comes out’.
‘Each book is worked over many times. I like to compare This method with that of painters centuries ago, proceeding, as it were, from layer to layer. This first draft is quite crude… After that I rewrite it as many times – apply as many “layers” as I feel to be necessary’.
This minimal planning and maximal revision strategy is typical of Discoverers. Those who used this strategy frequently showed a strong tendency to write to understand better what they thought.
Most writers do not consciously choose their writing strategies. These writers were, of course, major revisers, and they often deleted a lot too. I wondered whether some writers abandon this strategy as they mature or whether the older generation simply did not grow up using it.
There was some tendency for frequent users of this strategy to agree that their writing was better the more they concentrated on the topic rather than on the way they were writing. They exhibited a strong tendency not to mind talking about work in progress, and also to feel that it helped to leave a piece of writing and to return to it later.
As for their use of writing tools, they were evenly divided over whether handwriting was too slow for them (other writers tended not to find it too slow). They were much more likely than other writers to be interlinear editors. In my survey the word processor showed up as being most frequently used by oil painters: 79% used one often. They showed a stronger tendency than other writers to report that they felt more productive since they had begun using the word processor.