100% agree with this. I've noticed the same thing. Kudos to those who churn out content week in week out and don't get paid for doing so, because they're better than me. Quality over quantity has always been the way, and I want to respect my subscribers' time so I try not to fill their inboxes with random content.
As someone who's been writing for about 1 year, and whose content errs toward long-form stuff, I aim to upload roughly once (maybe twice) a month which works better for me. Good writing and good idea generation all take time, and those who publish surface level content frequently are clearly outsourcing everything [including their thinking] to LLMs.
Writing high volume for the sake of content is bad, I agree, but writing high volume I also believe is the path to finding your own best ideas. Have to open the tap and leave it open to let the water flow, to some extent.
High volume writing is also how to find your own voice. Your book will be a banger because you have written a million words before it, not because you have "only" written 1 book before.
One thing i'd say with writing something like High Agency is skill issue.
Even with all the knowledge and AI tools for writing, if your skill isn't there:
1. Your piece won't be as good as you'd like it to be
2. You still have to solve distribution (e.g. engineer word of mouth)
So even though I work a lot on my pieces, they still aren't great yet.
The solution can be learn more (courses, read books, have more experiences to reflect on) but also practice of expressing these things in a way that hits the right notes. That latter part can only happen with reps, alongside the immersion of the former
Absolutely agree. The world would be a better place, if creators followed the credo of thinking brutally hard about whether what they are putting out is really adding tangible value. I get it - it's an awful feeling, this nagging question whether any of your stuff will ever get discovered if you don't publish regularly, but it's helpful to trust the process. Forget publication schedules, focus on adding real value. Be someone people are truly, genuinely looking forward to when your stuff shows up in their inbox. I believe that good things will happen from there. Some of the people you mentioned are great role models here and also among my own favorite contemporary non-fiction writers.
AI slop doesn't happen in a vacuum though, everyone's feel forced to live by the rules of the algorithm. The audience doesn't matter in that case, they're writing for the audience of one which is not made of flesh and bones.. Good luck to them :)
Love this! My current filter for writing: it has to be an idea I just need to get out, or something that is materially impacting how I approach my life. Leading to a weird cadence, but much higher commitment when I do choose to write.
100% agree with this. I've noticed the same thing. Kudos to those who churn out content week in week out and don't get paid for doing so, because they're better than me. Quality over quantity has always been the way, and I want to respect my subscribers' time so I try not to fill their inboxes with random content.
As someone who's been writing for about 1 year, and whose content errs toward long-form stuff, I aim to upload roughly once (maybe twice) a month which works better for me. Good writing and good idea generation all take time, and those who publish surface level content frequently are clearly outsourcing everything [including their thinking] to LLMs.
Great read. I can picture this getting written at 2am in a fever a la Jerry Maguire with his manifesto - The Things We Think And Do Not Say
Writing high volume for the sake of content is bad, I agree, but writing high volume I also believe is the path to finding your own best ideas. Have to open the tap and leave it open to let the water flow, to some extent.
High volume writing is also how to find your own voice. Your book will be a banger because you have written a million words before it, not because you have "only" written 1 book before.
Speaking of writers who publish infrequently, I'd add Simon Sarris to that list. If you haven't read him, I think you'd enjoy his work.
One thing i'd say with writing something like High Agency is skill issue.
Even with all the knowledge and AI tools for writing, if your skill isn't there:
1. Your piece won't be as good as you'd like it to be
2. You still have to solve distribution (e.g. engineer word of mouth)
So even though I work a lot on my pieces, they still aren't great yet.
The solution can be learn more (courses, read books, have more experiences to reflect on) but also practice of expressing these things in a way that hits the right notes. That latter part can only happen with reps, alongside the immersion of the former
Great stuff here, Jack. I wrote about this years ago - it's even more relevant today: https://moretothat.com/make-classics-not-content/
Absolutely agree. The world would be a better place, if creators followed the credo of thinking brutally hard about whether what they are putting out is really adding tangible value. I get it - it's an awful feeling, this nagging question whether any of your stuff will ever get discovered if you don't publish regularly, but it's helpful to trust the process. Forget publication schedules, focus on adding real value. Be someone people are truly, genuinely looking forward to when your stuff shows up in their inbox. I believe that good things will happen from there. Some of the people you mentioned are great role models here and also among my own favorite contemporary non-fiction writers.
AI slop doesn't happen in a vacuum though, everyone's feel forced to live by the rules of the algorithm. The audience doesn't matter in that case, they're writing for the audience of one which is not made of flesh and bones.. Good luck to them :)
Love this! My current filter for writing: it has to be an idea I just need to get out, or something that is materially impacting how I approach my life. Leading to a weird cadence, but much higher commitment when I do choose to write.