Approaches to Writing: McPhee v. Klinkenborg

John McPhee and Verlyn Klinkenborg, two of my favorite writers, approach composition quite differently from each other. McPhee is a structuralist. He always starts by making a plan, conceptualizing his entire piece in outline. In his Draft No. 4 (2017), he says, “I always know where I intend to end before I have much begun to write.” Klinkenborg is an anti-structuralist. He’s against outlines. In his Several Short Sentences About Writing (2012), he says,

You’re more likely to find the right path –
The interesting path through your subject and thoughts –
In a sentence-by-sentence search than in an outline.

Who is right? I can see the merits of McPhee’s structuralism. But Klinkenborg’s sentence-by-sentence search appeals to me, too. Neither writer is dogmatic about his method. McPhee says, “What counts is a finished piece, and how you get there is idiosyncratic.” Klinkenborg says, “You decide what works for you.” 

Composing these ephemeral blog notes, I find I’m more Klinkenborg than McPhee. One point both writers agree on is the importance of following your interests. McPhee says, “I include what interests me and exclude what doesn’t interest me.” Klinkenborg says, “Start by learning to recognize what interests you.” That is one of this blog’s main aims.