Writing an academic article before even writing it: System of notes, errors and success in pre-writing strategies in legal research

Abstract

The background of this article is permeated by an unspoken tendency to drown even in a glass of water. Driven by the desire to overcome certain difficulties and self-imposed limitations, we are motivated by the will to improve our processes, starting to write with more order, peace, and joy, in order to contribute to the development of the legal field from a perspective of service to other researchers. In this context, we ask: how is it possible to establish a new work dynamic, using pre-writing techniques as a strategy to enhance our research? How can we write a well-crafted, polished text, if, in the field of law, we are so pressed by an oceanic demand for readings? How can we organize reading time and writing time, dividing ourselves between such demanding tasks, without the efforts in one weakening those we devote to the other – and vice versa? What strategies can we employ so that, in fact, reading and writing merge into one and the same thing? In search of answers to these – and other – challenges: (i) we resort to a review of interdisciplinary literature, to address a certain bibliographic scarcity on the theme of pre-writing in the methodological literature of law; (ii) we adopt an autoethnographic approach, through metalanguage, aiming to turn the very making of the writing process of this text into raw material for our research; (iii) finally, we rely on the support of our co-authors, sharing their expertise in the use of active reading techniques and the note-taking system developed by Luhmann, who conceived it as a continuous dialogue with his "box of notes" (zettelkasten). Thus, we believe we have achieved our goal of maximizing the dynamic between reading and writing, experiencing and presenting various techniques of active reading, pre-writing, and note-taking. The power of this proposal lies in promoting a healthy dilution of the boundaries between reading and writing, eliminating any unnecessary tension between the time dedicated to each. Indeed, by treating reading and writing as simultaneous and complementary tasks, we gain a more organic and harmonious view of the research activity.