… are idea and stream-of-consciousness.
Idea: The more vivid the vision of the title (i.e. the idea), the more precise, effective, natural and appealing the work. One need not worry about words or sentence formations. The vision must remain forever clear.
Stream-of-consciousness: This is a difficult task, not because one can’t capture what one is thinking as one thinks it, but because it is often meaningless and unappealing babble. It’s natural to ask whether it’s possible to control the nature of such a work. Careful reflection, however, reveals that the effectiveness of this kind of work, like that of the previous kind, depends on vision, although this time subtle and implicit, rather than being explicitly defined in the idea.
It turns out, however, the two kinds of vision being discussed are of the same essence, in that both need clarity in thought, a certain direction (even though the thought-stream might superficially seem to be without direction), one which results from a stillness within — when thoughts, even if random and fish-like, float about in a stream which is steady and uniform.
In other words, the effectiveness of either kind of work depends on a solid realisation of what one wants to say, not in the head but in the heart. This is what they mean by, “One must write not merely because one wants to write, but because one knows what one has to say.”