Is it necessary to plan every single scene out in detail or is it better to make a rough idea of where the plots going to start and end and fill the gaps in as you write? I personally do the latter but I'm not sure whether or not that's the best thing to do.
There is no best thing to do. Different methods work for different people. Use what works best for you.
I'm not going to say there is a 'right' amount of planning, but it is fairly obvious when an author had no idea where the story was going to end when they started it. I'd have some level of bare-bones outline before I started, even if it changes through the process.
HOW MUCH IS NECESSARY???? No no no... you can't ask that ha ha! You need however much you need. Plan until you are ready to write. Some people are for planning everything, others plan very little, but in the end you should plan as much as you feel you need. Sorry that it doesn't answer your question, but that's the best I can give.
From the way I've been going it seems I'm more for planning little and writing more , thanks for the help, at least I know I'm not doing anything wrong.
I plan out the main characters, the plot and some mysteries or something that keeps the reader hanging. Then I flesh out as I write the chapters, the first chapter practically writes the next and so on. Some times the story might even go its own way and introduce characters that just suddenly pop up (being logical) and well yeah. I think its best to set the major plots and events and characters in stone then just work as it goes.
I think you'd be surprised at how erroneous that statement is as a generality. A particular author? Could be true. But not overall. In answer to the OP, however much planning is needed for the author to finish that book.
I agree with everyone else here. And I will also tell you that...I do no planning what-so-ever! I sit down with paper and pencil and start writing. That method seems to work best with me, otherwise I feel limited and it really halts my creative process. But, that certainly doesn't work for everyone.
1. no 2. yes, for most successful fiction writers... if it works best for you, then it's 'the best thing to do'... there is no fits-all 'rule' for this...
For short stories, I'm fine starting with a vague idea and no real conception of where the story is going when I first put pen to paper. I've sold short stories that began that way and were never planned. For longer works, I can't do it that way, personally. Maybe someone else can.
Do you have references for that? Seriously, I don't think one can say "yes" - more like "It can". Unless one has done a reliable survey of methods used by "successful" fiction writers that backs that up. I just get a little uneasy when anyone say "most" about anything, because a) it's vague, and b) then new writers think that's what they should do - and as you stated at the end of your comment, it's actually whatever works for them.
Check out the stickied thread What's Your Writing Process? You will find this very issue is one of teh dominant discussions in that thread, so you can save yourself and other members from marching one more time down the same well-worn trail.
ok, sw... i see your point... so, 'yes, it can be, for some/many/most successful fiction writers... and is/was, for the successful fiction writers i have known personally [robert ludlum, noel behn, robin moore, burt hirschfeld, et al.] feel better now? hugs, m
