What kind of writing do I like to do, in service of my goals?

Creative researcher Michael Nielsen wrote a long essay called Developing Creative Identity. In it, he described his identity struggle when he left academia as a theoretical physicist to venture out on his own. On one hand, he no longer sees himself as a scientist, even though he still uses scientific methods in his work. On the other, he has been writing a lot but doesn't think of himself as a writer, just like we don't think of Albert Einstein or Charles Darwin as writers. In his essay, he walked through how writers such as Stewart Brand, Albert Einstein, and Ted Chiang write for different reasons and, hence, write differently. Some write to discover, bringing us on their learning journey. Some write to tell the truth, even if it might be dry and boring. Some write to express, teleporting us into different worlds. Eventually, he concluded that he sees himself as a creative researcher who pursues under-explored fundamental questions with whatever tools work best; writing being one of them.

Reading his essay made me reflect on why and how I write. I didn't learn to write in school. My education came from doing content marketing at Buffer. We wanted to help social media managers succeed, so our articles were often to-the-point and included explicit takeaways or tips you can try immediately. Because people liked that style of content, I stuck to it without thinking about other approaches. I didn't consider how "helpful" articles can take many different shapes: boring truths, winding explorations, or mind-shifting stories.

Nielsen's essay itself showed me a different shape from the one I'm used to. He offered no action steps or takeaways. But as he walked through his exploration (Was Albert Einstein a writer? How are famous scientists who write different from story writers? What kind of writer am I?), I felt I was on the same discovery journey as he was. But more interestingly, I reached a different conclusion. Yet I found his essay helpful, not because it has a neat conclusion for me, but because it guided me and let me find my own answers.

He writes as a way to discover. He explicitly noted that he isn't interested in writing to educate, even though some people might find his work helpful (like I did). Unlike him, I write because I want to help others. But now I know I don't always have to provide direct answers, tidy conclusions, or quick tips, especially because I don't always have them. That is the kind of writing I'm used to, but I suspect it isn't the only kind of writing I like to do, to help others. Boring truths are interesting to those seeking the truth; winding explorations are relatable to those who are wandering on a similar path; mind-shifting stories are helpful to those who want to get unstuck in their current world. I still have many kinds of writing to explore.