Accordion Writing

McKenzie, Jamieson 1984. Accordion Writing - Expository Composition with the Word Processor. The English Journal 73(5): 56-58.

While computer stores offer half a dozen books on word processing, most of which promise "wonders," a quick skimming usually leaves readers disappointed. After ten chapters on loading disks, saving files, formatting and editing, there may be only a single chapter on writing technique. Few books explain how composing with a word processor (WP) can be radically different from composing with pens, pencils, and typewriters. (McKenzie 1984: 56)

While looking for a way to organize xhtml notes, I stumbled upon the "accordion", meaning collapsing or expanding portions of a hypertext. Amazingly, this paper looks like a promising guide to writing papers with computers, a topic I had not thought to search out willingly but which I now find extremely promising. Aren't we all writing our papers on computers without learning how to do so more effectively?

Those who spend hundreds of hours writing with the WP report major transformations of style, productivity, and process. Fluency grows, flexibility develops, and originality springs from its hiding places. Liberation from the fear of errors can set creative expression in action. (McKenzie 1984: 56)

On more than one occasion I've expressed my misgivings about word processing in its historical perspective. Right about the time McKenzie was writing, word processors took over the general academia. Liberation from the fear of errors gave way to more errors due to general inexperience with the new technologies. Anyone can notice, when reading texts throughout the 20th century that the quality drops conspicuously right about this time, and the 90s become nearly unreadable. This is my personal rationalization for ignoring the era of my childhood, which I lived in but which is nearly alien to me in the history of thought.

This article will describe a type of composition unique to the WP, a process discovered by me while struggling over a difficult section in my doctoral dissertation. The process is called "Accordion Writing" because it involves expansion of an essay from the inside out, followed by compression of the essay as editing takes place. (McKenzie 1984: 56)

From what I've skimmed, this involves first setting up the subheadings and then expanding upon them. It doesn't seem like a novelty if put like that, given the zettel method that's been around for at least over a century, or the very obvious sight of old books like E. R. Clay's The Alternative having been written as a system, making its contents an expansion of the 11-page table of contents.

Most expository writing with pens, pencils, and typewriters is linear. The writer typically begins with an outline and proceeds to write the topic sentence of the first paragraph. The next step is to build the supporting sentences and shape a good transition into the next paragraph. Such a process puts an extraordinary amount of pressure on the writer to know in advance what should be written. While the eraser provides some flexibility to change ideas and the pen or pencil can be combined with scissor and paste to move sections around, the old technology of writing generally places a premium on control of thought in advance of writing. (McKenzie 1984: 56)

Linear vs. dynamic? My previous attempts at writing have usually preceded by disorganized jabs at organizing the quotes I've gathered, and then proceeding to write a linear sequence where the transitions are achieved only due to the linearity. I can't say that I've planned ahead much, since I go where my train of thoughts take me, but it does take me to dead ends quite often, because one train of thought doesn't easily go to 20 pages without clipping the paper into distinct sections. In a paper on self-communication I achieved this by writing about six different authors. That turns out to be too rigid, and transitions come to depend upon the superimposed chronological sequence, which implies causality, possibly fallaciously.

Step One: Listing Ideas - Accordion writing allows for composition that matches the kaleidoscopic nature of thoughts wandering through the mind. In drafting an article about the elements of good teaching, for example, accordion writing would start with a divergent listing process. The writer jots down every aspect of good teaching that comes to mind, discarding none. (McKenzie 1984: 56)

The thing is, I've already "jotted down" everything I might need to write a paper, so that calling them to mind would make all that work superfluous if I were to go about this process unaided; if I use the aid, on the other hand, I will get bogged down for much too long with reading through, and dividing up topics and finding interrelations. I've dreamt of altering this process by feeding myself quotations and notes at random, but have not figured out how to achieve that with any card flipping program (the problem consists in transforming the contents of the blog into an XML dataset that would respect xhtml; it has to be done manually, which is much too much work). Actually, jotting down the most important topics for a single paper might be reasonable; plan the thing ahead by setting the train stations in a sequence on a quick run.

The list might well grow to 30 or 40 ideas. And the author might then store the list on a disk while thoughts percolate for several days. In moments of daydreaming (while driving, running, [|] or sitting bored), new additions might spring forth. These can be added to the disk until the author is satisfied. (McKenzie 1984: 56-57)

God I'm thick. This is eminently doable. One could use a smartphone Writer app to list ideas.

Step Two: Narrowing Focus - Time for compression. The author reviews the list and decides that several items aren't worth commenting on in this article. With a few swift attacks of the cursor, the list is pared down to six elements that the author cares most about. (McKenzie 1984: 57)

That's why it's called an accordion - expansion and compression alternate. Funny how McKenzie suggests six elements - a coincidence.

Step Three: Building Paragraphs - The next step is expansion again. The writer looks at the list and zeroes in on "passion." The cursor moves to "passion" and constructs a topic sentence.

Passion is central to excellence, whether it be the passion that led Van Gogh to paint without selling many paintings, Emily Dickinson to write without publishing many poems, or Socrates to ask questions until the State gave him a fatar dose of hemlock.

At this point, the writer may jump to other spots and write other topic sentences, or the flow of ideas may lead to an example, anecdote, or supporting details for the "passion" paragraph. The next view shows some of both techniques, each section numbered to show the sequence of writing events. (McKenzie 1984: 57)

Topic sentences are seen in old tables of contents: "[1] Language, in its primitive function, to be regarded as a mode of action, rather than as a countersign of thought. [2] Analysis of a complex speech-situation among savages. [/] The essential primitive uses of speech: [3] speech-in-action, [4] ritual handling of words, [5] the narrative, [6] 'phatic communion' (speech in social intercourse)" (Malinowski 1946[1923]: 296). When first reading it, I noticed that PC is only one linguistic mode of action among others - that is why I think the passage is divisible into six topic sentences like that (theoretical, empirical, illustrations).

Having recently completed an editorial piece on the importance of passion in teaching, the writer makes a note to load relevant sections from that piece into the new one. The WP allows one to mine the same vein mayn times. This time a group of research projects are summarized, and the writer begins to comment. (McKenzie 1984: 58)

That's a good idea. I should attempt to summarize posts, pick out the most relevant portions, and then comment upon them (again).

Step Four: Refinement - The process continues until all six original phases have been fully developed, each deserving several paragraphs or pages. When the expansion phase is completed, the writer uses the cursor much like a paring knife, returning to the quickly entered phrases and sentences to cut out the weak language, reduce verbosity and upgrade the choice of words. At this point it is possible to pay considerable attention to sentence structure, transitions, and coherence. If parallelism is desirable, the cursor rapidly brings sentences, phrases, and clauses into line. (McKenzie 1984: 58)

A vivid image, this. Sounds like my thoughts about a paraphraseological dissection of PC. Parallelism, very poetically, is the exact method - finding enough similar phrases, with surrounding contexts offering either affirmations or divergent tracks or tendencies (channels, waterways for consciousness to flow).

When the automobile first appeared, people kept thinking of it as a "horseless carriage." So with the WP. Most commentary stresses the editing features of the WP. Just as the automobile drivers learned to leave their whips at home, it is time we recognize the fact that writing with a WP represents a fundamentally different way for us to bring our written expression into line with the way we think. (McKenzie 1984: 58)

An admirable contribution. One can hope that the future will bring our written expression even closer to our thinking, perhaps link our minds up with the web, even. That certainly appears to be the way technology is concretizing. What I notice is that this paper, too, has six sextions, an introductory theoretical account, an analysis of a six phase illustrative and analytical sequence on the topic of passion, and an account of four steps. Parallelisms!