You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Reflection — An Honest Take 8 min

Honest Take — Before You Begin

Honest Take — Module 1: Writing — The Foundation Skill #

If you only do one module of this curriculum, do this one. Everything else is a derivative work. A talk is writing performed. A pitch is writing compressed. A difficult conversation is writing improvised under pressure. An RFC is writing weaponized for distributed consensus. Speaking, storytelling, async, pitching, the public long game — all of them collapse if the underlying prose is mush. This module is the load-bearing wall, and it's also the one where the Pass 2 temptation hits hardest: the book list is famous, and reading Williams feels like progress in a way that drafting a bad essay on a Saturday morning does not. The gate exists for a reason. Read the essay, start writing badly, and then go to the books when a specific wall appears. A writing book read before you have drafts to fix is entertainment.

Most engineers write like they're embarrassed to be heard. They hedge every claim, fence every sentence with qualifiers, open with "I just wanted to..." and close with "...but happy to discuss further." The prose is so polite it has no information in it. Here's the part that's specifically true of you if you're the introvert archetype this curriculum names: the casual voice you use in DMs with people you trust is more honest and more direct than your "professional" writing. The work of this module is not to polish your professional voice into corporate gloss; it's to bring the directness of your casual voice into your professional writing without losing the rigor. There is a register that is both polished and direct. That's the target. What's not permitted is the half-measure — lazy abbreviations and unfinished thoughts dressed as informality. The casual voice is a choice; sloppiness is the absence of one, and readers can tell which they're looking at.

Honest take on the canon, since the Going Deeper table will tempt you. Strunk & White is partially wrong — Geoffrey Pullum has documented that several of its grammar rules contradict the book's own examples and reflect 1918 prejudices more than the structure of English. Read it for the spirit (be brief, be specific), not as scripture. Pinker's The Sense of Style is the modern replacement, and his curse-of-knowledge chapter will change how you write technical docs. Williams's Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace is the deepest book on the list — do the exercises and your sentence-level prose transforms in about forty hours. The sneaky-best book is Klinkenborg's Several Short Sentences About Writing; read it twice and it rewires your sense of rhythm. (One earlier draft of this curriculum made Pinker an Essential; the other said skip it. The dispute is preserved in the table. My own vote is read the curse-of-knowledge chapter and decide from there.)

The practice that actually works — and the one you will resist — is writing badly first. Anne Lamott's term for these drafts is famous and unprintable in some workplaces; the point is that the only way to find out what you think is to put bad sentences on a page and improve them. Engineers hate this because we're trained on a model where you think the design through, then write the code. Prose is not like that. The thinking happens during the bad draft, not before it. If you wait until you "have something good to say," you will write nothing. The 1,200 words of garbage you produce on Saturday morning is the precondition for the 600 words of clarity you publish on Sunday night. Skip the garbage and you skip the clarity.

The checkpoint asks for published pieces, and I want to be specific about why publishing is not a vanity step. Publishing is the thing that converts you from "person who writes" into "writer." You can polish a draft in a private doc for six months and learn nothing; you can publish a flawed draft on a Tuesday and learn three things by Wednesday, because a stranger's question reveals an unstated assumption. Public writing is a feedback system. Private writing is journaling. They are different skills, and only one of them builds the asset this curriculum is after.

One boundary to set now, because this is the module where the habit forms: don't let AI draft for you. Use it to proofread, to critique structure, to find the word you're blanking on — the editing applications are real. But the drafting is where the thinking happens, and outsourcing the draft outsources the thought. It also flattens your prose toward the bland generated register that readers are getting better at detecting every month. Your voice is the asset this whole module exists to build; protecting it is worth more than the hours saved. (Both earlier drafts of this curriculum arrived at this rule independently. I'm an AI telling you this. The advice survives the irony.)

Conclusion #

Writing is the highest-leverage skill in your career and you have under-invested in it for as long as you've been shipping code. The good news about a discipline that compounds: starting late still puts you ahead of nearly everyone in your cohort, because almost none of them will start either. The checkpoint's published essays are the minimum. The maximum is a habit that lasts thirty years and changes which doors are open to you. Do the maximum.

Predictions #

  • Your first essay will take 8–12 hours and feel like bleeding. The fourth will take half that. That progression — not the essays themselves — is the actual deliverable of the module.
  • You will hit a wall around week three where you genuinely believe you have nothing to say. This is the curse of knowledge: everything you know feels obvious because you know it. Write the thing you needed five years ago. There is always a reader who is you, five years ago.
  • You will overuse the word "just." Williams will name the hedging pattern for you; you'll cut more than half of them on revision, and your prose will get instantly more confident.
  • You'll be tempted to write every essay about your primary stack. Resist for at least one or two — the non-technical essays are where the audience that isn't an engineer first finds you, and that audience is what compounds.
  • One of your essays — probably the one you almost don't publish — will get a stranger emailing you about it within ten days of publication. That single email will matter more than any like-count. Save it; it's the empirical evidence the system works.
  • You will read Williams and briefly feel that all your previous writing was bad. It wasn't bad; it was below ceiling. The "I see how much better this can be" feeling is the ceiling lifting.
  • Six months from now, you'll find an old message of yours and physically cringe at the prose. That cringe is calibrated taste — the part nobody can teach you, which writing for two months grows on its own.