I think that knowing what the general plot is about, the setting, and the main characters are really important before you start writing . Then you at least have an idea what your going to write about, but still have the fun of being surprised by unexpected events!
Of course I will - there is this really cute new invention on my keyboard called the delete key. I just pull it back a few thousand words (assuming it is that long) and rewrite it in a way that will make it work. I have yet to have a story that can't be tweaked, moved about, altered etc and find the ending. Whereas there isplenty on a road trip that can become unfixable my stories are never that bad. Usually I end up with several books at the end. I wrote one detective book but now have the material for three sequels lol The worst that happens is it takes a bit longer. I appreciate my methods are not for everyone - my husband pulls his hair out watching me write (he writes as well just much slower). He cries when I delete 40,000 words because I've changed the colour of my falcon. It was a good decision the whole purpose of the falcon changed and the world visually was then fitted round it.
Your argument of "getting lost" is irrelevant. People can get totally lost in stories or on roadtrips. You were implying that people may get lost on a roadtrip, but they will always be able to find their way to the ending of their story. I've gotten plenty lost while driving, and I still made it home. I guarantee there are more people who abandon their messy ms's than those who never make it home from a roadtrip. And you said it yourself, yours "are never that bad," so of course you can make it to the ending.
No that wasn't my arguement at all. My arguement is that the consequences don't compare. Being unprepared on a roadtrip can result in injury, death, loss of liberty. Being unprepared on a story is just rewriting or starting a new one. The latter is almost always fixable, easy to move on from and can be done by trial an error.
That's a fair point, but only if the reason you plan a trip is for safety precautions. If you're only concerned with fun and efficiency, then the methodology compares to that of writing a book.
It all depends on how much work you wanna do. I hate planning. I never used to plan. And the truth is, I was just plain lazy and impatient and wanted to get down to the writing. And then I was working on my first novel. I planned a little backstory, because I wanted it to make sense, but otherwise, I made no plans whatsoever. I didn't know where the story will go or what will happen, kinda "make it up as you go along" sorts. So, 44 pages in. I got stuck. Then I stopped for 3 years. I picked it up again and saw its potential, and started work on it again. But still I have not learnt. I reworked bits I liked and deleted bits I disliked and rewrote the connecting bits - but still, no plan in sight. As the story progressed, I got up to 230 pages. And got stuck. So guess what? I had to rework it again and rethink how it all comes together, and realised that half of it doesn't work. So I ditched the 230-paged incomplete draft. And I thought to myself, "I've worked on this for one whole year and now I'm starting from page 1. Horray!" I decided that was NEVER going to happen again. So I sat down and spent 3 months planning from start to finish - not every last scene etc, but simply a list of events that shows me how the story was gonna progress. I found knowing your ending is very important, because that could change the whole direction of your idea, and all the events change based on it. Once I finally figured out my ending, thanks to the planning, my novel took shape and finally, it had a direction, a theme, which means I could set things up to reveal certain things, foreshadowing the unfolding of events, character development etc. My dialogue became much deeper, because I finally knew who they were, based on how I know they will develop within the story. And it's not that things don't get changed - they still do. But even when they do change, they are minor rewrites - I do not have to ditch the entire draft and start from zero again. I just have to go back and tweak certain things, maybe add a few scenes, rewrite one or two dialogues, but that's it, because the direction of the story hasn't changed. And that means, you haven't wasted time writing nothing. Now I understand all writing is useful for improvement, but when it's a project, there's little that's more discouraging than having to start from zero and throw out all your existing work - TWICE. Now I have over 200 pages again and it's nearing the end. HORRAY!!! But of course, you could write without planning and some people just go back over it with a massive rewrite on the second go - but trust me when I say, you're giving yourself more work than you have to if only you'd sat down and done the planning in the first place. There's no difference, you'll still creating a story whether you're writing as you go along or if you're planning. The only difference is - the plan is a rough sketch, so you don't waste precious time, like a painter who does a rough sketch of his composition before he gets out his paintbrush and sets everything in stone. Can you imagine if Leonardo De Vinci or Michaelangelo didn't sketch and didn't plan their compositions before they embarked upon their huge masterpieces, and 2 years into the project they realise it wasn't the best it could have been, if only THAT thing wasn't there and he's added THIS other thing here instead? But they all sketch it out first, see if it works, and finally, pick the best idea, having assessed all the different ways of doing the project, and begin. And that way, they know they will finish. In other words, both ways can work, but I'm sorry, I can't stand wasting a whole year again. If you plan your story, it is much better stewardship of your time. For example, if I had planned, I would've been finished by now. But instead, I'm still working on the same novel. But what if I had finished because I'd planned? Then I could've been onto my second novel. While writing for the sake of writing is thrilling, when it is a project, it should be treated as such. It is a thrilling project, but if it takes 10 years to finish, you're at risk of growing too frustrated to ever reach the end. Some still do, but I know I'm not that sort.
I agree with what some have said before. As for me I start by going through it in my head, letting my imagination get into the driving seat, see where it leads, if I like the idea, I write it down and develop it, I tend to write in my head, which works for me since I like to visualise scene and character interactions before I put it to paper. It just depends on what suits you, as for chapters themselves if I have an idea on what i want in it, I plan it out in a few lines, if an idea doesn't emerge straight away, I work on another area in the story. Same more or less applies to characters, I have a few in my story, and their roles as side/main characters change as the story flows in one direction or another. In all honesty it depends on your frame of mind, and your style, you can't really compare your method to someone else's because there will always be differences, same applies with the views on character sheets some think think they are rubbish, others think differently. Same applies to a story, just do what you think is best, the best critic is yourself.
I think we're going to have to agree both methods are good methods, if you know what you're doing. That said, those just starting out need to try all ways to truly find what works for them. Saying I'm not going to have subplots or my ms is going to be loose and all that, is not going to make me see the light and start using pretty outlines. This is true, doesn't mean not having an outline instantly results in this. I get the general idea of where it's going pretty early in, so I know I'm going to point B and I know a few of the big steps to get there. Yes, things become clearer as I go along, but that's how I prefer to write. It's my method and comparing both at the rough draft stages is kind of premature. No, but I wouldn't miss the big things with or without a plan. I did however come across Hersey, Pen. (I think it was in that state, it was years ago.) There were Hersey kisses on the lamp posts, I was in heaven. This is a good point about outlines, and I'm happy you're made it. Even those who outline, it's not stuck in stone and can easily change and be derailed for a short time. Sure I will. I don't drop ideas because they're messy; I drop them because I realize they're not as strong as I previously thought (by that, I mean the idea is not going to stretch past a short story/novella/etc). But this is why I say all ways should be tried at least once, so you know what your strengths and weaknesses are. You know why you work with plans and outlines and I know why I don't. Personally, I work with an outline and I do not get to the end, period. So, for me, if the story is going to get out, then I'm just going to do it without a plan. Oh, my major issue at the end of an MS is not going to be rewriting due to my lack of planning, it's going to be rewriting because I wasn't bothered with editing as I went along. I know very well that I have quiet a few run on sentences from hell, poor sentence structures that I looked at and went "In the edit, you're gone." I write on paper first though, so I'm not going to scratch out an entire sentence/paragraph, just note it to myself and move on. And that is good that you now know what works for you. Each writer needs to figure out their own methods, which ways will work for them and they do that by doing both ways. It doesn't work for you because you wrote yourself into a corner and can't work yourself out of it. Right now I'm sitting on a project because I'm trying to decide if I should use tunnels or a sewage system and if I should lose the tower and just make it a complex. This is the point where I'm working myself out of the corner I drew myself into, but I'm also now 3/4ths through this so I know where the ending is now. My method is mine and it works for me, not anyone else, just like your specific method works for you. This is a small piece of your writing method and all the bits are what makes you unique as a writer. If you're starting, try every way to find out what works for you and what doesn't. For all the painting comparison, that's a very different process and it breaks down by the type of art. Abstract may not plan at all, but then there are artist that spray paint on a canvas so... But an artist process is theirs as well. Some sketch on separate papers, some sketch on the actual canvas. You'll be hard pressed to find one who just starts painting on a canvas (If they're like the rest of us and are not about to waste 60 bucks for a 6 oz color of oil paint to 'play.' that is actually doing a scene. The differences in their processes are very different. Some do the sketches, some do the underpaintings, some start from small details and some start outwards and go in.
I'd rewrite anyway - it brings in depth, themes, motifs etc and for me is worth doing even if I had a clean draft. Personally, I think i'd be doing my story a disservice by not rewriting. Doesn't take me that long to write a novel - about 20 days for a first draft which is in effect the plan. By the time a lot of people have finished planning I've written a first draft of a second novel and gone back to the first one. So explain to me how planning is a better stewardship of MY time? It might be a better stewardship of yours but not every writer is that slow. Last time I planned a novel it was supposed to be from the POV of two straight nasty serial killers. They literally came out of the cleaning closet in a police station as detectives in the first line and now have four novel length stories drafted. I've only been writing two years have six novels drafted and one that was completed until I rewrote the first chapter again. Nothing wrong with the original one, but my writing and storytelling ability has improved hugely and it will be worth it.
Yeah, the time 'stewardship' thing just isn't a good argument for outlining. Time is time, whether you spend it writing the actual story, with editing/revising, or spend it writing an outline that will need all the actual writing filled in and editing/revising. Outlining or not is an argument that's not winnable by either 'side', just as edit-as-you-go and revise-after-completed is not. What works for one writer will not work for another. Or it may. With adjustments. Or not. Sometimes.
Agreed -- if you are writing consistently, happy with what you are doing and completeing works there is no need to change. However, if you are not achieving what you want with your writing then it might be worth trying.
Absolutely. Every writer - even old hats - should be willing to try new methods if what they're currently doing isn't working. And doing it one way for one story doesn't mean you have to use that same method for the next.
Exactly how I feel. Right now not outlining, going with the flow is working for me. Outlining has proved a bloody waste of time - I tried it twice and within two chapters none of it held water. However, if later on I think it is beneficial I will.
My day job involves programming. When I was a junior developer, upon receiving a project, I would dive straight into it. Time and time again, my team leader would tell me to slow down. Read the specifications carefully first. Nothing beats getting it right the first time. The best developers do things slowly. Of course, programming and writing are different things. Still, I take the same approach for them both. As in, I outline. To this day, I still end up having to rewrite half my novels, but I believe that's due to inexperience. If I slow down more and outline with greater care before writing that first draft, the overall process should become smoother.
Mine too, and without false modesty, I'm quite good at it. I plan ahead, and I diagram and model solutions before I write a line of code. That isn't how I write, though. I start with a general idea of a storyline, and a minimal mental sketch of the characters. The story and the characters grow organically as I write, and I find the results more fluid and believable then if I try to pre-plan to the minutest detail.
Man, you need to think about each scene in advance and get the story all in your head before you start writing. Lots of notes with ideas until you know exactly what's going to happen in act 1, 2, 3. You don't start writing until you're absolutely gagging to put the whole story from your head onto paper. Like Mozart had it all in his head and just zapped it down on paper. Then you start writing. That way, it doesn't actually take long to write 300 pages. A week or two of intense labor. Then you put it aside for a few months and come back to it and you'll see the strong and weak bits. Then you refine.
This works for some writers, but not for others (including me). I don't even want to write a story that I already know. Why do I want to spend all that time telling myself what's already in my head? I treat writing as an exploration. When I start writing, I'm searching for the new ideas t'hat make the scenes good. I assemble scenes involving my characters and I let them amaze me. I don't even have a fixed ending when I start - why would I do that? I have a general direction, but I might wind up in a different place than I had planned. Earlier today I used an analogy of driving from Florida to California, taking a lot of detours. I love the idea of winding up in British Columbia instead of California, and realizing that it's a better place to stop. Who knew? Not me, until I got there. My point is that if you know where you're going, you get to a boring place. You don't find El Dorado. You find someplace you already know too much about, and your reader knows too much about. If I bore myself, I think I bore my readers. Whirlwind, you have a different take. You say, "You don't start writing until you're absolutely gagging to put the whole story from your head onto paper." If I'm absolutely gagging to to put the story on paper, I'm already bored with it. It doesn't work for me. I like to find the story as I write it. Everyone talks about making an outline. I treat my first draft as my outline. My first draft is for finding out what my story is about. When I get to the end, I turn around and survey what I've written, and I usually say to myself, "Well done. Stuff to fix, but well done."
I get the idea in my head, figure out where I want it to go, and just start writing. I know the beginning, and the end, but the points between A and B, who knows what will happen.
This depends on why you write. If you're doing it for yourself, fine. Do whatever. But if you are given an assignment and a deadline, well you kind of have to look at it as a product. And that is not a bad way to look at it, if you're writing for an eventual audience.
I can write a novel as fast as yourself without the outlining - I'm not sure what your point is beyond some writers work faster than others ? I know published authors with deadlines that work at my speed and others that are faster/slower. Others work with a plan and others don't. If I was working at it 'intense' full or even part time and didn't have children to look after as I write then a novel draft in a long weekend would be possible. Personally, I think one to two weeks is a long time for intense working on a novel draft, plus you've spent time planning before that ?? That kind of timetable would suggest I was ill or had something distracting me from writing full tilt.
Neither way is bad. I write my assignments the same way that I do my writing, with the briefest idea of what I want. The A's I received didn't seem to harm me none. Go figure that I can write for an audience and for myself without an outline. Why? Because that is my method. Because it is Minstrel's method. We do not have to have an outline to have a solid manuscript. Each writer has their own methods and no one's is better than the other's.
