I don't think that's what @aikoaiko was saying. I think the two of you simply didn't agree on the definition of "planning." That's a long way from saying you don't know how you write. We all know you're a pantser (like me!). Hmm. Maybe the forum should invest in some fuse-lengtheners.
I do both. I'll plan the overall plot (who the protagonist is, what'll happen on a larger scale, who'll live/die), but I let the smaller subplots bubble up to the surface while I write. It's got structure but it's not too constricted.
"Aha! You see, here? This is an example of smartness! I have said that zis iss der quick fuse, and it iss der quick fuse. "The quick fuse!!" - Franz Liebkind in "The Producers" (Mel Brooks)
It kind of depends on the length of the story I'm working on. I hardly ever really plan shortstorie, but I do plan the outline and characters of my longer stories because I don't get anywhere with long stories if I don't plan them.
hmmmm, I plan to an extent. I have a timeline/calendar/journal and endless bits of paper but these tend to get filled in as I write, mainly as a reminder for me so that I get the continuity right and I know which season that part of the story is set in. No good having my character sat in the garden waiting for bar-b-que'd steak in the middle of a winter snow-storm ... The journal is full of research. Pictures and notes from the web and other sources but what I tend to do a lot of, is ask myself questions. When I come to a part in my writing where I'm not sure what happens next, I write down a list of questions. I ask myself how my character got to where they are now and then what would happen if they ... and then I jot down different scenarios and take a look at how each one affects other characters in the story.
Maybe. I'm just tired of people inferring if not outright claiming that everyone plans but some won't admit it. If you can't work without planning, fine. Just don't assume no one else can.
I like to just go with my ideas. Sometimes I just can't help it, and I replay it over and over in my mind until it's perfect and all. Sometimes it just happens.
If the reason for the research is "I need to research whether cyanide was available to ordinary people without a prescription or other legal authority in Montana in 1925", yes, that's probably planning. If the reason for the research is, "I'm looking for inspiration for a book that might, or might not, be set in early twentieth century America, or maybe nineteenth, maybe neither, I'm not sure, so I'm going to read Only Yesterday and Perfection Salad and Growing Up With The Country," I wouldn't call that planning.
I tend to plan briefly and add detail as I go. Though I still find it hard to continue a story. Im pretty awful at plot progression. I guess that calls for more planning but then it gets dull as others have mentioned
I don't know how all this started, but I in no way inferred or assumed anything about your personal method, and I NEVER said you didn't know how to write. We have a difference of opinion, that's it. Jeezus!
Not necessarily. "I think this character needs to be killed now; poison might work; cyanide's the first one that pops into my head; I wonder how easily Bad Guy could get cyanide...". Research is something that's done in order to write the story. It might be included as part of one's plan; it might happen because one makes a turn in the story and finds it's needed. Looking up a word in the dictionary is not planning - it's research.
Awesome question! For me it varies. Sometimes I'll have the whole story in my head, other times I have a small idea and I just write and insert random things as I go along. So for me it depends. I've done both and continue to do both. I must admit, however, that not having a whole story planned right away is easier for me. You just make things up as you go along, insert what fits or would be interesting, and end up building and building. When you have a whole story planned, you need to almost cater to the original story and avoid deviating too much otherwise there may be loop holes. I also find that when you write impulsively, the stories are much longer and more intricate which, in my personal opinion, makes for a better story.
Basically, yeah. I think the confusion came about from the gray areas that exist between planning and research; sometimes I don't even know which I'm doing because it's not always clear-cut where the line between the two goes. Or that's the way I see it anyway, a purely subjective opinion. Not that any of this really matters much anyway. Anyhow, for the topic, I think that there's a danger in over-planning. @KaTrian and I have fallen into that trap a few times, and I believe a part of it stems from "young writer's syndrome," i.e. insecurity: you want to eliminate each and every plot hole imaginable, so you plan the living shit out of every chapter, scene by scene, line by line, right down to the coreographies of discussions (how the characters move while having a conversation) even if none of it ends up in the actual story. I find that taking it that far kills the joy of writing. At least for us. At some point we just realized writing wasn't fun anymore and after some self-reflection, we figured out it was the over-planning. There's nothing quite so exhilarating than sitting down to write the first chapter of a totally new story: you only have the characters and the basic premise, and then... you just write, go wherever your feet (or your fingers) take you. I love that soaring feeling of freedom and I never want to lose it. Of course doing draft after draft doesn't really allow every second of writing to be that much fun, but at least we get to experience it whenever we start a new story or add a new plot twist/change the main plot or whatever and get to write new material into an old story. So I guess there's something to be said about mixing pantsery and planning.
