Okay, so I take it you don't change plot details after you're done with your first draft, and just spruce it up a little bit? I used to have a problem with extremely complex storylines, added on with a vast array of characters, many of whom had little bearing on the plot. Even the passerby needed to have a personality, some back story and some kick-butt intro (while that's not always bad, given I chose to work with 20 characters or more at a time, it could be). At that time, I thought being complex and inundating my story with all sorts of details somehow made me ingenious. But one thing I've learned over the years, perhaps unwillingly, is that simplicity is the true art; a plot which may be effortless to follow and yet, thought-provoking, is one I strive for. Also, if I may ask, how long did the actual writing, and its subsequent editing, take? What do you propose should be the new line of thinking? I ask because I see what you mean--I've sometimes written scenes on paper, which is cumbersome because as I type I tend to edit and rewrite every other sentence. I don't really move on from one paragraph to the next unless it is to my liking. Sometimes I scrap a whole paragraph and restart. So I can see if someone who had to work with a paper and pen might choose to have a less-than-good first draft and take it up later in a second draft, but maybe with the modern era it's one handicap we don't have anymore. I usually write a first draft as if its my last. That doesn't stop me from not being happy with it when I finish the novel (I am a bit of a perfectionist), but at that moment in time, I seek absolute satisfaction from it. I can't move on if I don't like it, and sometimes I sit for hours at my computer screen because I can't come up with the perfect phrase. I guess it can be counterproductive, but it's just how I work--if I decided to go on, it would keep nagging me and I couldn't give it my best anyhow. I remember getting advice (I think on this forum) that it's better not to write a novel chronologically, but put down scenes whenever you get the right inspiration for them, and then weave those snapshots into a story. I simply cannot imagine doing that, I guess I'm a bit OCD but I could never write out of order. Especially since my story and its characters evolve so much as I go from one chapter to the next, if I were to write all the pertinent scenes beforehand, they would not truly represent my characters at all--it would be as if they were stagnant, unchanged. Writing the story as it happens helps me and my characters live through the hypothetical scenario which is their story, so when we come to the turning points, I know who they are and what drives them; their reactions are authentic. More than once I've changed the entire ending because by the time I got there, my characters were different people from what I thought they would be. I'm not saying your method is wrong in any way, because it has worked for you after all, just that it gives me goosebumps.
Each writer will find their own way that works for them. I write out of order because that's the way my mind works. If I were to put the thoughts of scene 50 to one side until I've finished scene 32, then by the time I get to scene 50, I would have forgotten what I was going to write, regardless of the amount of notes I'd taken. The evolution of characters is thoroughly followed through. If I'm writing the ending then I already know the basics of what my characters have gone through. Then when I go back and do a middle section, if the plot changes or something extra happens than I jump back to the ending to make sure earlier changes are accounted for. I'm not saying it's the right way to do it, but it's what works for me. And yes, there are times when I've had to change something completely because I went back to a section near the beginning and made one change that rippled through the rest of the book.
Scribner, Ernest Hemingway's publisher, is doing something fascinating these days. They've published "The Hemingway Library Edition" versions of The Sun Also Rises and A Farewell To Arms, and these editions include Hemingway's first drafts and revisions. Hemingway always seemed to me to be a supremely confident writer - his prose looked like it had to be that way; there was no other choice. But these editions show that Hemingway was as uncertain and tentative as the rest of us. He wrote several chapters of TSAR to open the book that were eventually deleted (they're included in the Hemingway Library Edition). He experimented with writing TSAR in third person before reverting to first, and that's included too. Lots of other early drafts of parts of these books are included, too. Check these editions out! It's kind of comforting to know that a Nobel Prize winner - one of the most famous and influential writers of the twentieth century - struggled with his work just the same way the rest of us do.
It is. (comforting to know that) but I doubt any writer or author would say they sat down to write and their first offering was what was published with no revision or editing whatsoever.
For me, as a self publisher, the worst part (or least liked part) it the advertising and getting my name and work out there to the readers. If, 18 month ago, someone had said to me that writing was the easy part, I would have laughed my socks off at them. But how true it actually is!
@Charisma Well I started writing my first draft in late 1996 and finished in mid 2002. This was writing all the time in my spare time, and I had no creative writing instruction whatsoever. I just started writing scenes as they popped into my head. I was amazed at how much fun it was, and how powerful I felt. I wrote every day except for when I was physically prevented. I was working at the time, so I developed the schedule of getting up around 4am to work until around 7, when I had to go to work. Some days I had more time, if I had a later shift. I absolutely HATED the days when, for some reason, I was prevented from writing. Writer's block was not a problem for me. Being prevented from writing by other people's demands and the demands of a job was. But I got around it by getting up really early. Once I finished the first draft, I had two beta readers (both volunteered) to read it. One of the two is a writer himself, and the other was his girlfriend who had a lot of unofficial experience with editing ...helping him to edit his novels and also producing a fanzine. They both got me on the right track about many of the mistakes I was making. My over-writing, my use of passive voice when I didn't intend to, etc. They also gave me some fantastic pointers with a few of my story elements. He had spent a lot of time living near where my story was set, and she was a qualified doctor, so was able to give me lots of medical advice regarding one of my characters. I regard these two as the most thorough and most helpful of all my betas. As a result of a debate I had with them, I also ended up making the most significant change to my manuscript. Both my readers grumbled that I needed to 'cut to the chase.' They said they were getting fed up wondering why my main character was behaving so oddly. I kept telling them to have patience, that 'all would be revealed' but he said "look, a reader is just going to get fed up." And I argued back at him. "So you're telling me you want to know all about him at the beginning—oh, wait ...wait ...I can kinda do that!" So I wrote a Prologue chapter, giving the reader the traumatic event that formed the basis for the rest of the story. This revelation turned the emphasis of the story on its head. Instead of wondering why the main character behaves the way he does, my readers now know his background and the whole story has an entirely different focus. Instead of being a mystery, this is now a story about how he copes with his past, and where his coping strategies lead him. After doing the initial edit, I backed off and took a break, because I realised I was making changes one day, then going back the next day and changing everything back. Tinkering. The break lasted far longer than it needed to, due to other factors. I should have taken about a year. Just long enough to return to the MS with fresh eyes. I took a lot longer. During that interim period I started reading everything I could get my hands on about the craft of writing, so when I did get back to editing again, a couple of years ago, I was able to make sweeping changes without turning a hair. I also have had many other beta readers tackle the book at several stages during this process. All of them have read the entire novel, and three of them have read it twice. Each time I get feedback I make more changes. I dump some things, sharpen some things, rearrange some things, and tweak the wording. I'm very VERY close to the end now, and am hoping to at least start formatting for publication by the end of this year. So all in all I'd say, in total, around 6 years to write (and research) the first draft, and about 4 years in total to edit. (It's a long book.) I haven't been quite as disciplined about the editing time, so I think I could have cut that down a bit. But I can't emphasise enough how important it was for me to take a break from it after doing my first edit. I needed to see it with fresh eyes. I have started work on a second book, which, I hope will not take nearly as long to write. I have the research in place, and I won't make many of the mistakes I did writing the first time. Whether it will be as fun to write as the first one, I don't know. But I can honestly say, writing a novel is the most fun I've ever had sitting down. Where do I go from here? Time will tell...
In my current project, a historical novel, I've kept "drafts" at various stages of review. The first draft was exactly that, the product of my setting the complete story down for the first time. I then read through several times, focusing on SPaG errors, naming inconsistencies or duplicates, sequence issues and any obvious problems that jumped out at me. The product was my second draft. Then I went back and started doing a more substantive review, looking to consolidate, add some foreshadowing, generally tighten the story. That resulted in my third draft, which was turned over to some beta-readers. At this point, I discovered the great benefit of having someone else with a knowledge of good writing take a look at one's work: as thorough as a writer might be, (s)he always reviews the ms knowing not only the full story, but everything that lies behind it. As such, it's easy to forget what the reader doesn't know and therefore what has to be explained. The shortcomings in this regard were pointed out by two friends from this forum, one of whom was good enough to go chapter by chapter. The good news is that recognizing this tendency is a bit like riding a bicycle - once you learn how, you never forget. The end result of this round of editing, which is nearly finished, will be the fourth draft. This draft will be presented to other beta-readers, whose input, along with any other changes I decide to make, will result in a fifth draft. At that point, I will begin thinking about the publication process. Keep in mind that each of these five drafts involve multiple read-throughs and edits, all of which must be done before one can even consider submitting for publication.
Basically. I have beta readers who get each chapter as it's finished, so on a chapter by chapter basis things may change, but when I get to the last page, all that's left is clean-up. The "secret" to that is paying attention to what's already been written, and making sure the new stuff fits. It might be better for the person giving that advice, but I could no more do that than walk to the moon.
Regarding writing chronologically ...I wrote my first novel completely out of order, getting scenes down and connecting them later. This was time-consuming and a bit trial-and-error ...but it worked. However, I'm doing the exact opposite for my second. I'm writing in strict chronological order this time. I didn't set out specifically to do it this way, but maybe my thinking is now less chaotic than my pantsing was for my first novel. This novel feels much different to write. I was able to start at the beginning and just move forward. Actually it's less exciting (for me) to write this way, but probably a lot more sensible! Mind you, I have a much clearer idea of how to organise a story this time, than I ever did when I wrote my first one. I think I'd recommend people who say they are 'stuck' or can't think of a beginning, to write out of order. As you get things written, the story does start to evolve in both directions. I know. I've done it. If I had started that first novel at the 'beginning' and worked slowly forward, I don't think I would have ever got it finished. But not everybody works the same way. Me? I'm trying both... I'd say whatever works, do it. BUT if what you're doing doesn't work, or you get stuck ...try a different approach.
This is a very good point @jannert as there are times when you know an outcome but are not completely sure how your character gets there. That's when I will write the end of a specific section and then deconstruct it backwards, continually asking who and why and where and how my characters get there. This is how I realised just how much of an impact my evil character's dastardly deed (in book two) had on not one, but three linked characters because of what they individually and without the other character's knowledge, did to the evil character in book one. That was one of those OMG raised hairs on the back of the neck moments. (I love those moments)
Wow, who'd thought that Struggle helps polish people. Without it, achievement is perhaps but meaningless. Perhaps that's what drives certain child prodigies or geniuses to homicide or suicide? (Granted there are many other reasons than just that, but I am attempting to fail at poetry.) Holy grail of writing! That is a lot of hard work. Granted you pushed on bit by bit, it's still commitment which definitely must've shone through. The novels I wrote were wrapped up in a few months during vacation, and now I think they need such work it may take years @_@ Wow. Five drafts. I'm am officially startled. I see. Well, like I said I do edit and revise on the go, but since many of my earlier novels were written as a teenager, but tone and style has changed a lot and so, I look at them with no less than repulsion. Plus, some of the plot details are so unrealistic I want to cover my face when I read some of them, and I would definitely need to make huge alterations to the plot in my first novel (if go back to it at all), tweak around the details in my second and third novel, to say the least. But perhaps with my newer WIPs, I'm more comfortable because I've gained some stability in my style and realism, and might not need to scrap whole chapters (might not.) And I feel much the same about that as you XD
I'm always writing the first draft to find out why I'm writing- searching for a deeper core hidden under the skin of fantasy or drama. What is my point, besides a story about a robot or suicide or abuse. The first draft is more about getting the tone and the initial skin down letting everything flow. The reread for the second draft is all about finding out where it evolved from my first thoughts, and what new theme has emerged. Not Pink started with only the theme of abuse but by the end of the first draft a new theme of redemption was there. The second draft is all about reshaping and sharpening scenes to reinforce the new theme. Sometimes it involves ditching scenes and writing new ones and even ditching and adding new characters. It's all about what works best to tighten your story so that it encompasses what you want - character arch, theme, goal. One book I ended up writing 3 drafts and still wasn't pleased with it. I'm still working on it. I've got a new plan of attack ( which I'm excited about ) The first draft was third person but I felt it was a little dry so I made the 2nd & third draft into first person ( I hated the 2nd and 3rd drafts!) In between those drafts I had a main side character an artist Malcolm who disappeared in the third draft. I didn't like his scenes and felt that they were distracting and pulled away focus from the main characters. 3 chapters had to be completely rewritten. In the new version I'm working on I've added an entire new character and goal to the story. The first draft I think took about four months - a little less for the rewrites. But they have years separating them. It's a very frustrating project.
It's all a matter of how you approach it. Some writers edit continuously, so that there is only a first draft and a final draft.
Interesting that you bring up themes. I think that while in the first draft, you may go on exploring anything from sexual slavery to spiritual cleansing (or maybe that's just me), causing the focus to shift without caution at times, later revisions might actually help you narrow it down to a few main themes, from which splinter off a few subsidiary themes. Later drafts may give more cohesion and meaning to the overall sequence of events. And I would hope so @EdFromNY, I dread rewriting as it is!
I think you missed my point, which is that the amount of work involved is the same, regardless of the number of intervening drafts you designate.
True, but at least it seems to be less. Plus what I really dread is monotony. Going over something as you work on it is not as monotonous as going over it a number of times in entirety.
Actually, I don't ever think of reviewing my work as monotonous. And going over a completed manuscript allows me to review the entirety of the story - do the various elements of the story fit together correctly? Is there comic relief where it's needed? Are there any issues of balance? I'm not arguing against editing as you go, I'm just not sure how one addresses such issues without several reviews of the complete manuscript. But in the end, we all have to do what we find works best.
I suppose the same way people wrote serial novels years back - by keeping track of the story already written as they wrote the new stuff. It's just like anything, really - the ones that do it don't find it difficult, and the ones who don't, do.
This is a question to those of you who write by the seat of your pants.* It is also a question of clarification to anyone who would give the advice of "just write" to someone who is stuck on brainstorming or planning. When you write your very first draft of a scene, what constraints do you apply to your writing style? What constraints do you only apply to revisions? Some examples of constraints: Narrator's knowledge. Assume two characters are simultaneously doing different things in different rooms. One of them is the point-of-view character, i.e. the reader only knows what that character knows. Each characters' actions are important to the story because they will have consequences on the other character. Do you write what each character does, just so you can see if it works out logically on paper, with the intent to eliminate knowledge unavailable to the POV character when you revise? Or do you restrict yourself from writing such knowledge in the first place? (Related question: do you ever write a first draft in first person, or do you always write in third person even if you intend to change it to first person later?) Narrator's voice. Do you ever prevent yourself from writing a sentence because you are trying think of a way to write it so it "sounds" right? Or do you just write whatever knowledge comes to your mind in a matter-of-fact way, with the intent to revise it later so the same knowledge is expressed in a consistent voice that enhances the experience of reading? This especially applies to first person narration. Character's voice. The dialogue counterpart to narrator's voice. Do you allow yourself to write wooden dialogue, where the characters just express their thoughts or they express information you want the reader to glean from dialogue, without worrying how that "sounds"? Do you ever write something like "_____ made a witty response that made _____ laugh" with the intent to go back later and think of something specific for the character to say? Or do you stop yourself from moving forward until you have written dialogue that sounds somewhat natural and conveys the information you want the reader to know? Character opacity. Related to narrator's knowledge. How transparent do you allow the characters to be? That is, how much internal monologue and how much statement of internal state (even as simple as "that made _____ happy") do you allow yourself to write, just to keep yourself as informed as possible about your own characters, before finding another way to express characters' thoughts or deciding not to express them at all? Those are just some possible constraints; I am asking if you apply those constraints or any others to your first draft. As a perfectionist who is utterly dependent on a plan, if someone told me "just write" and I took that advice, then I would be inclined to apply no stylistic constraints whatsoever to my first draft. I would just write what happens in the story as it happens, in the easiest, most matter-of-fact manner possible. That is because I interpret "just write" as a way to combat writer's block, and if I ever stop for one second to worry about how I should express a piece of knowledge, then that defeats the purpose of combating writer's block. Is that how you write your own first draft, if you are a pantser*? Is that how you intend for your advice to be followed, if you say "just write"? * By that, I mean you write in a linear fashion with minimal planning. When you need to decide what happens at a given point in a story, you strongly prefer to write complete scenes, one after the other, to discover from those scenes how the characters themselves want to behave, and to let the characters move the story forward. Contrast that with beginning with a high-level goal in mind regarding the direction the story should take, then adding layers of increasing detail, e.g. by going from the high-level goal to a few-paragraph plot synopsis, then to a few-page plot synopsis, then to a list of scenes, then to a rough outline of each scene, or some other plan-driven process.
I actually just write! And it's never perfect! There are always plans and a basic story line in the background and my writing is put to one side every so often in favour of research and plan changes but, I write out of order and as my characters 'act out' in my head so a lot of first drafts that concern characters are actually heavy with dialogue. A lot will be 'he said' or 'she said' with minimal action/movement/description/emotion. When I go back to the beginning of that section for a read through, that's when I start thinking about surroundings and movement of characters, what are their expressions? where are they (indoors or out)? what are their emotional states? etc and as I read through, I add those things in. Sometimes the dialogue changes with the addition of these extra bits, sometimes it doesn't. Then I will usually leave it for a few days while I work on something else. When I go back to it, I make more changes and also take time out to do any extra research or check any facts. This is also where paragraphs sometimes get moved about too. I don't always stick to a rigid plan though. The thing about writing, is you don't have to get it right the first time ...
It helps to know if you are writing in first person or not. But it depends on the draft. Just getting the basics of the story out, it's not that important. But a true draft rather than a detailed outline, you might want to have some idea how you are planning to present the story to the reader. That doesn't mean it can't change as it evolves, though.
That's a good point! I write from two POV and can be known to go back and change the POV if I think that particular part of the story would work better seen through the eyes of MC1 or MC2
My first drafts are my only drafts, other than considering what my betas mention and then polishing, so whatever I write is what I want the reader to read. (And yes, I'm a discovery writer, through and through )
Yes, I do pay attention to style because I feel it's important to help me set the tone of whatever I'm writing. Start as you mean to go on, and all that. I find it hard to ignore style because for me style is the sort of framework that keeps my story from running wild.
