Style Is a Person, Not a Genre
Remember style by blogger. You can borrow moves, but not the whole skeleton of a person.
Remember Style by Person
Someone once asked me to sort drafts into narrative, practical and commentary. That didn't work well. Later I switched to remembering by blogger: one person uses business battles to narrate history, another keeps asking "and then what?" in class, and another dissects organizations using the chapter titles of a military strategy book. When mixing styles, name "whose which move" instead of imitating one person across the whole piece.
Borrowed Skeletons Go Hollow
I once tried putting a story about an airline, which had already been told clearly, into a different set of chapter titles. Yuyan, Faxin, Dingwei, Junzheng: the structure was complete, but the result was poor. The original had already finished explaining "cognitive warfare." Adding another layer of chapter titles is like rewriting the menu for a dish that is already well seasoned. Readers still taste the same dish, they just get tripped up by the menu first.
A Catalog of Moves, Not a Costume Shop
What you can borrow are specific moves: a number, a follow-up question, one strong collision at the opening. What you can't borrow is the whole person's skeleton. That skeleton grew out of their own material. Change the material and the skeleton goes hollow. An empty structure is noisier than having no structure at all.
So for me, a style library is not a costume shop. It's a catalog of moves you can name. Pick too much of one person and the article feels fake. Pick too little and it's just showing off. The middle ground has to be found by testing against a real draft, not by imagining it from a classification chart.
