# The first draft of anything is sh**



## C Hollis (Aug 11, 2013)

Seven words from Hemingway.  Simple, to the point.

I believe those words, and I question those who argue against them.  The question that comes to mind:  If it's not ****, then you publish it without editing, right?

My rough draft is a brain purge.  I just type up words as the characters speak.  I don't back up to change words, and my dictionary, thesaurus, and style guide gather dust for 150 days during the purge.  Some argue that stifling that flow leads to a stilted, sterile final product.  I don't know, never tried it.

Regardless, my form of writing that first draft lends truth to Hemingway's words.  I just look back at the first draft of my works and think eww.

But, that is how I write.

Here's the question for the group:

If you believe Hemingway, why?
If you think Hemingway is full of sh**, why?

Come on.  Convince us why those words are, or are not true.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Aug 11, 2013)

I concur with Hemingway.

I'm not going to comment on grammatical concerns as those seem obvious. From my experience, I don't know enough about my characters, the setting, the plot and all of the story's surrounding conflicts to tell the story in the most engaging & immersing way the first time around. After I have written the draft, with all it's disjointed lines, added and deleted characters (even POVs), & other inconsistencies...only then do I have a true blueprint to build the best story. At the outset, I do rough outlines and in-depth character sketches, but I find these can only take me so far. They're for initial planning only, more similar to a sketch than a blueprint. 

When the conflicts of the story unfold & become real, my characters show who they could become, not who I once saw them to be. When the plot lines add and intersect clumsily, only then can I ascertain how best to surprise my reader...where to foreshadow events...where to place red herrings...how to effectively make promises & pay them off. 

Consider characters alone for a minute. At the end of a draft, they almost always sound too alike to make them feel real. Yes, there are differences, but those things that make each character stand out, make them distinct and real, take a focused effort and consistency throughout. Characterization, I think, is exceedingly important and often overlooked. Things like: occupation, the way a person talks, how they view others, education levels, aspects of personality...all these things among many, if handled in a consistent manner, can aid in making your story come alive. The players in it become real. That's impossible for me to accomplish on the first go. It's simply too much too think about right off the bat. When a draft is completed though, and entered the revision phase, now I can focus on one bit at a time...one character...one plot line....one scene meant to shock or surprise and everything that leads up to that scene.

I take notes on every idea along the way for consideration during revision. You could say the first draft, for me, serves the role of an extremely detailed second outline. So many things need to be expounded on or deleted.


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 11, 2013)

I don't agree. It varies from author to author, and even from story to story. I have no interest in convincing anyone else - if a person thinks their way is the only way, let them. We get a lot of "here's how I write, so that must be how everyone has to do it."


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Aug 11, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> I don't agree. It varies from author to author, and even from story to story. I have no interest in convincing anyone else - if a person thinks their way is the only way, let them. We get a lot of "here's how I write, so that must be how everyone has to do it."



I don't think anyone here is saying "my way is the only way". Im certain I'm not, and it's quite possible that Hemingway was speaking from his own experience as well and not generalizing every author. I can't be sure though. I'm not him and I never met the man. It's speculation to assume the phrase's exact meaning either way.

How else are informed opinions generated other than from personal knowledge and experience?


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 11, 2013)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> I don't think anyone here is saying "my way is the only way". It's quite possible that Hemingway was speaking from his own experience as well and not generalizing every author. It's speculation to assume the phrase's exact meaning either way.
> 
> How else are informed opinions generated other than from personal knowledge and experience?



I don't know what Hemingway intended or not, but it is clear from the OP that the comment is being presented here as universal. That's fine, if people want to believe it. I personally don't get the strong need for self-validation that so many writers seem to have, and that is evident in these sorts of conversations.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Aug 11, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> I don't know what Hemingway intended or not, but it is clear from the OP that the comment is being presented here as universal. That's fine, if people want to believe it. I personally don't get the strong need for self-validation that so many writers seem to have, and that is evident in these sorts of conversations.



I didn't see it that way. To me the post was presented as a discussion about processes. 


C Hollis said:


> But, that is how I write.
> 
> Here's the question for the group:
> 
> ...



Other writers do things differently than I. It's interesting, and sometimes enlightening to hear another's approach to craft. 

I see what you're saying about self-validation and I agree, to a point. However, it can be empowering, and confidence building, to realize some of the giants in literature faced the same struggles we all do, at any level.


----------



## Devor (Aug 11, 2013)

It depends. That's always the right answer, isn't it?

I think if you have a good feel for the concept, or plan in a way that removes most of those mistakes before you start, or else have developed a sound storytelling style that doesn't rely on multiple drafts, I don't think the first draft of everything will be sh**.

That isn't to say go publish your first draft without an edit, but it might not need the rewrites that the statement implies.


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 11, 2013)

I'm looking at the sentence that says "I believe those words, and I question those who argue against them." That's a "this is the right way" comment.


----------



## Aosto (Aug 11, 2013)

I haven't completed a novel yet, but here is my take.
Writing a novel is a lot like building a house or doing construction in general. You, being the architect, draw up the plans down to the very last measurement. You flesh out materials used, gather, and build.
Now at the end of the build you are left with a finished project that may or may not need minor touch ups. But you wouldn't rip apart the entire house because it "wasn't right". Its to costly. 
How does this translate?
Why would you spend 150 days writing a story you don't even know?
Why would you build a house if you don't know what its supposed to look like?
If you say 'sure, I'll figure it out as I go' then the end result will always he crap. But if you figure it out first. Then the end result will be awesome!


----------



## Sheilawisz (Aug 11, 2013)

From my point of view, the first draft of a story is like a little, helpless creature that you have just created.

At this point the creature has barely started its life, so you cannot expect your creation to be beautiful and brilliant already. The creature needs care, attention, polishing, nurturing and love, so it will eventually grow to be what you want it to be.

If you start your story believing that it is **** then you need to think differently, in my opinion.


----------



## ThinkerX (Aug 11, 2013)

For 'lesser' authors, Hemingways sentiment is probably pretty close.

For the pro's, though...Hubbard was supposed to be able to produce clean or nearly clean drafts right off.  Moorcock wrote the books for his 'Elric' series in something like a week each (hmmm...90,000 words/book, ten days, 9000 words/day - or maybe quicker).  Think something like this is true of Stephen King as well).


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 11, 2013)

Moorcock is one example of was thinking of, though how much revising he did in that week period I don't know. Doesn't seem like he could have done a lot. 

Personally, I see no advantage in assuming a first draft will be crap. Better to just evaluate each work on its own merits. If the first draft is great, then fine. If you're ten drafts in and its crap, then keep at it.

I had one story published in a print anthology that was a true first draft. The editor didn't even edit it. I sold another that was as close to a first draft as you can get - none of the published words were given more than a single pass, though I did yank out a number of consecutive paragraphs and replace them with a different direction for the story, so that can't really be said to be a first draft.

Most of my stories go through multiple drafts.

Depends on the story.


----------



## C Hollis (Aug 11, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> I'm looking at the sentence that says "I believe those words, and I question those who argue against them." That's a "this is the right way" comment.



Apparently I have offended thee, and for that I apologize.

But, no.  It was not intended as "this is the right way" comment.  Considering I am speaking of a concept and not a method, I'm not sure how it could be misconstrued as such.

Again, please accept my apology for offense.


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 11, 2013)

C Hollis said:


> Apparently I have offended thee, and for that I apologize.
> 
> But, no.  It was not intended as "this is the right way" comment.  Considering I am speaking of a concept and not a method, I'm not sure how it could be misconstrued as such.
> 
> Again, please accept my apology for offense.



I'm not offended and there is certainly no need for an apology. I disagree with the sentiment and I don't see any benefit in approaching one's work in that way.


----------



## T.Allen.Smith (Aug 11, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> I had one story published in a print anthology that was a true first draft. The editor didn't even edit it. I sold another that was as close to a first draft as you can get - none of the published words were given more than a single pass, though I did yank out a number of consecutive paragraphs and replace them with a different direction for the story, so that can't really be said to be a first draft.
> 
> Most of my stories go through multiple drafts.
> 
> Depends on the story.



I assume the works you're speaking of are short fiction & not novel length pieces. There's a big distinction there, in my view, if we're discussing short stories or novels.


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 11, 2013)

T.Allen.Smith said:


> I assume the works you're speaking of are short fiction & not novel length pieces. There's a big distinction there, in my view, if we're discussing short stories or novels.



They are. I know some authors have apparently written novels in one draft, but there's no way I could do that successfully


----------



## C Hollis (Aug 11, 2013)

One thing I find interesting is the interpretation of the quote.

For some it seems the quote means that the story itself is junk.  I, for one, have never written a crappy story (tongue-in-cheek for those who read this literal).

I take it to mean the structure is junk.  Most of my rough's have similar issues.  When I'm dumping the story onto the screen, I tend to use too many that's, had's, just's, and was's.  I even recognize this as I am writing, but I don't want to interrupt the flow, so they stay that way until round one of edits.  There are other issues of the same caliber, but I don't let them slow me down.

Do I go into the process to write crap?  Um, no.  But I most definitely don't expect perfection from the outset; the story would never get written.  It takes several edits to get it where I like it, and I'm okay with that.  In a way, I envy those that have the patience and drive to make that first shot perfect.

Asimov was another author who poo-pooed the Hemingway quote.

The other interesting aspect is the interpretation of what is sh**.  Of course, some of us don't want to look back on our work and call it names...
I tend to think if it isn't ready to publish, then it's junk.  That's what the readers would call it.


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 12, 2013)

Isn't this topic to some degree about the quality you're seeking to produce?

Let's look at two of my favorite authors.

I can see John Ringo shooting his first draft to the editor, only making the necessary revisions (and maybe not even those), and publishing.  Truth be told, most of his books have spots where I find the writing iffy at best.  I still love reading them, though.

On the other end of the spectrum is someone like Patrick Rothfuss.  My understanding is that he agonizes over every word.  _Name of the Wind _joins _Eye of the World _and _Ender's Game _in my top three favorite books of all time.

Are you going to tell me that it's not okay to be John Ringo?  I buy everything he puts out.  He must be doing something right.

Are you going to tell me not to be Patrick Rothfuss?  Not many people can write a book that I list among my favorites of all time.

An author needs to find what works for them.


----------



## wordwalker (Aug 12, 2013)

Steerpike said:


> Personally, I see no advantage in assuming a first draft will be crap. Better to just evaluate each work on its own merits. If the first draft is great, then fine. If you're ten drafts in and its crap, then keep at it.



This is probably the key. The draft either is or isn't replete with crappitude-- the value of the OP lesson is in not making excuses if it does turn out to be, and to have hope that "many" stories succeeded in spite of starting there. What matters is *judging* how crappy the result is so far, and what to do from there.

We shouldn't take the lesson too literally, and say that the first draft *will* be crap before it's even done. (Or that a lot of care on the first draft has to be a waste; that's a writing methods thing. Some of us do plan more carefully, and we think the crap-prevention is worth the effort.)

Then besides the draft itself, there's how much further the writer's goals and plans are. Mr. Rothfuss obviously has higher standards for each individual word than most people, and wow does it show; the Ringos of the world may want to "just" entertain, or to explore their subject by getting a lot of books out while Rothfuss is crafting one. All part of the decision-making.


----------



## SeverinR (Aug 12, 2013)

I would say the first draft is never perfect, it can be improved. It might not be S*&t

I write the story as it comes to me. I don't try to write perfect dialog, tell about the scene, elaborate on anything other then the story.
So in the rewrite I focus more on painting the picture behind the story. Foreshadowing, hints, fitting the pieces together more pefectly.  
Each time I rewrite I look for typos and other errors. But I also try to make the scene better.

My style of writing is bare bones first, then add the meat and muscle.

IMHO there is no perfect rule in Writing(& life). There is always the exception. (I wouldn't bet my life on being the exception though)


----------



## brokethepoint (Aug 12, 2013)

The problem is "The first draft of anything is . . ." is to vague.

Is it the, grammar, dialogue, plot, characters, world building. . .?

If I look at something that I write and think it is a pile of doo, then I delete it.  Why would I keep it and work on it?  Doesn't matter what you do with crap, it is still crap.

To me the statement is to catch attention, or create conflict, or feed someones narcissism.


----------



## Steerpike (Aug 12, 2013)

If Hemingway was just talking about himself, then great. He knew his own process better than we do.

As a general statement, it's useless. If what is meant is "it's OK if your first draft is crap; don't worry about it" then say that instead. That's my advice.


----------



## ThinkerX (Aug 12, 2013)

> The problem is "The first draft of anything is . . ." is to vague.
> 
> Is it the, grammar, dialogue, plot, characters, world building. . .?
> 
> If I look at something that I write and think it is a pile of doo, then I delete it. Why would I keep it and work on it? Doesn't matter what you do with crap, it is still crap.



Considering that I ended up deleting about a third of 'Labyrinth', rewriting the remainder, and doubling that remainder in size...I probably would have been justified in just calling it quits with that tale.  

In the end, I decided that the concept, the 'world', and the character interaction made the tale worth salvaging.  Those elements were unique enough, and powerful enough to overide all the plot meandering.


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 12, 2013)

My first drafts are all sh**.  Plain and simple.  Because I form too much of my story as I write.  I think... that in all art, free-form development is a part of most people's processes.  So if you're painting, you start with vague shapes and slowly reveal the true picture.  You stand back and have a look, then add some more shading or contrast.  It's a process and almost always, when you say you're done, you can go back to it and add a little tweaking to it and mke it better.  I'd compare a novel to any other art form... It's done, then it gets revised and done better... then another edit and it gets even better.  i think that sums up the statement. 

Sentences like:  "Cedrick was thirsty and began looking for a tavern"... become:  "Cedrick licked his lips and cringed.  He spit dust out.  Across the street, a tavern beckoned him, the smell of stale hops on the wind."

Was there anything terrible about the first draft?  Maybe.  But the revision is better.  and if edited again, it would be even better.  

Sometimes you hit a home run the first time.  Sometimes it takes time to coax the message out of your first draft words.  Like the painting, it's a process.  And once in  while, I paint something I don't want to touch again.  other times, when I go back, I can improve the image significantly by looking at it from another perspective, with a fresh eye or more patience.  

I would have to agree that the first draft tends to be weak, but that's just from my experiences.  Also, it does have a lot to do with one's process.  Some people wouldn't call it a first draft if they were in the "sketching phase" of their painting.  I tend to call it a first draft once a novel is completed and unedited.  Maybe some other people will edit as they go, completing a chapter and then polishing it before moving on.  That process is individualized and it depends largely on your perceptions of "finished".


----------



## Caged Maiden (Aug 12, 2013)

Just another note:

Whenever I get out to the range, I rarely hit a bullseye in my first shot.  Sometimes I miss the target entirely.  I think writing can also be a little like that, too.  Like, when you sit down to write, you need to get ideas flowing a little before you find your stride.  I bet if we wrote a book in 10 weeks (which I've done), they automatically look better because we're in good practice.  just like if I shoot every day, I might hit a bullseye with my first arrow.


----------



## Chessie (Aug 13, 2013)

Perhaps there are writers out there that can bang out an awesome first draft. Not me. I have found it to be rather freeing to just let the juices and words flow, with the ideas driving the story taking priority on paper. I can clean it up later and make it sound pretty then.


----------



## Kevin O. McLaughlin (Aug 13, 2013)

Scalzi talked about his writing process for a book a while back. He wrote his draft in something like nine or ten weeks. He then spent a morning scanning it for typos, to help his editor. Then he mailed it out. He stated that he expected perhaps a few dozen words to have changed before it went to print.

Dean Wesley Smith is rather famous for his methods of writing; with over a hundred trad pub novels to his credit, he doesn't do drafts. He writes, and sends the work out. Or, now that he is self publishing, he writes, then has someone proof it, then publishes.


My own method is to write the darned book, then have an editor go over it. I make revisions based on the edit, have it checked for typos and errors, and publish. If I was sending a work to a traditional publisher, I would write a draft, go over it once myself for problems, and send it out.

SOME writers produce first drafts which are "rough" and need multiple revisions. Nothing wrong with that if you prefer the method.
I prefer producing first drafts which are about 95-98% ready to go to print.


----------



## PaulineMRoss (Aug 13, 2013)

Mark Lawrence has said that he only does one draft. To be precise::



> My own experience is:
> i) I don’t write every day, or even every week. I don’t keep track on my word-count.
> ii) I don’t plan my story. I just start typing and see where I get to. Generally I don’t know what the next page will bring, let alone the next chapter.
> iii) My first draft may or may not be shit, but it’s the only one I write. Much later I check for typos, change the odd adjective, and send it off. I’ve tried revising work before and it feels like chasing my tail. I’m unable to tell if version 2 or 3 is better than version 1. So I don’t bother.



Full blogpost here: Mark Lawrence: Rules to Write by

Personally, I can't imagine revising and revising, and having umpteen draft versions. Don't you guys get bored reworking the same piece over and over? Doesn't it lose a bit of the just-written sparkle?


----------



## BWFoster78 (Aug 13, 2013)

> Personally, I can't imagine revising and revising, and having umpteen draft versions. Don't you guys get bored reworking the same piece over and over? Doesn't it lose a bit of the just-written sparkle?



There's a certain joy in taking something that you consider to be an ugly lump of coal and turning it into something much closer to a diamond.

The people who can send off barely polished rough draft or "tell if version 2 or 3 is better than version 1" are the ones who don't appreciate the differences small changes can make.  I don't think there's anything wrong with that for them; it's just not my POV.

Each time through, I take the worst parts of my draft and make them better.  Maybe I tighten a sentence or heighten tension or get more inside the character's head or express emotion better or smooth out a rough patch.  To me, the summation of these small changes greatly enhance the finished product.


----------



## Graylorne (Aug 13, 2013)

I must admit I've stopped reading other authors' self-rules and experiences. I've got my own and they do for me. 

For example, I revise constantly. It helps me stay in the flow, it helps me develop the story, so for me it works. I like revising. I like seeing the story develop and get better.
Some of my books have twelve or more major versions. That's the way I work. Someone else will do it different. It's the result that counts.

And no, constant revising doesn't slow me down. I did 13k. in 6 days, not a bad result to my mind.


----------



## Filk (Aug 13, 2013)

I love Hemingway; he probably has had the most profound influence on writing style. I take the quote as more of bit of inspiration, although perhaps it reflects method. It seems to say to me that one can write a first draft without fear of it being awful, because it is inevitably going to need improvement. This creates an atmosphere of honesty without censors. To me it says: "Write uninhibitedly."

Hemingway's stories, for me, are at the heights of the exploration of human emotions in literature. He also helped shape modern literature. I take it that he didn't always achieve the effect he was going for in his first draft, so editing was necessary to cull up the poignant emotions he is famous for. As for his intensive editing process, I think he achieved some wonderful works by it. I can't assume the quality of them before editing, but it would seem they benefited from the process.

I can imagine that one could master grammar and storytelling to the point that they would not need to edit. I'm sure it takes a certain mind or intelligence to do that, but I think that there's also a reason that Hemingway sticks out from the crowd as i doubt most people who publish first drafts do (not that there aren't exceptions). I think that reason is that he strove for perfection and wasn't merely satisfied with something "as is." Editing, if preformed correctly, ultimately improves the quality of a work of writing. It is also a skill as much as writing is a skill and must be painstakingly developed.

Personally, I like to edit my writing. I find that there is always room for improvement in my own work, but I'm no professional writer either. I think that if I were to write something perfect the first time around, I would find that out in an attempt to edit. Until I do that, I'd have to agree with the quote. The "s" word may be a little harsh though, but it makes for a better quote hehe


----------



## Guru Coyote (Aug 13, 2013)

This may have already come up in this thread...

I think the value/quality of a 'first draft' very much depends on when you write it. Do you sit down at the keyboard the moment you have a fresh idea? Or do you mull it over in your head for days before you even begin to commit it to paper/electrons?

I used to have a very 'bad' reputation in school regarding essays and similar homework. I would start writing it at the last possible moment... and yet achieve good grades. How? Simple: just because I wasn't actively writing and revising... didn't mean I wasn't actively *thinking* about the topic and laying it out in my head. I was one of those kids who always had a narration / commentary going on in their heads (and often mumbled them too). So when I then did sit down to write the essay, I only had to physically write it, it was all ready to go anyway.

Sometimes, first drafts can be like that. And sometimes, first drafts are more like rough sketches, tryouts.


----------



## A. E. Lowan (Aug 13, 2013)

Guru Coyote said:


> I think the value/quality of a 'first draft' very much depends on when you write it. Do you sit down at the keyboard the moment you have a fresh idea? Or do you mull it over in your head for days before you even begin to commit it to paper/electrons?
> 
> I used to have a very 'bad' reputation in school regarding essays and similar homework. I would start writing it at the last possible moment... and yet achieve good grades. How? Simple: just because I wasn't actively writing and revising... didn't mean I wasn't actively *thinking* about the topic and laying it out in my head. I was one of those kids who always had a narration / commentary going on in their heads (and often mumbled them too). So when I then did sit down to write the essay, I only had to physically write it, it was all ready to go anyway.
> 
> Sometimes, first drafts can be like that. And sometimes, first drafts are more like rough sketches, tryouts.



Guru, we do something very similar to this.  My writing partner and I role play all character development and world building before a single word appears on the white screen.  Then we tend to start producing character vignettes and short scenes and passages which may or may not appear at some point in the books.  Around this time we begin outlining.  Our outlines are so dense and detailed they're really more pre-writing, but I am a writer who needs a clear blueprint to write by - and even then our characters tend to jump out and change things.  I let them.  I prefer to have them take the bit in their teeth and pull me along their own stories.

Once I have a chapter written, it's ok.  I see it as a freshly quenched blade - I know I have a good sword in there, and I have already done all the work of smelting and forging, but what it needs is polishing to really shine.  I give each chapter a polish or two before I move on to the next.  The psycho perfection freak in me won't let me move on until I'm happy with it.  It's not ready for publication yet, but I can stop poking and move on to the next thing.


----------



## Chessie (Aug 13, 2013)

^^ Oh for sure, I have scenes marinating in my head for days before I write them. I write daily, so I have the scenes noted down before I get to them. I like writing the first draft through without stopping for revision...although every now and then something will catch me that says "Stop for a minute, this needs to change now because it doesn't make sense with the rest of the flow." 

I fix it and move on. Who knows what my method will be like later on in life, but for now its one draft, one revision, I'm done, move on to the next project. Otherwise, I'll get anal retentive and drive myself crazy. Different strokes is all. I'm with Pauline in that revising over and over gets rather boring after a while. I lose the mojo for the story and the essence of what it was to begin with. Revising over and over isn't for me, that's all I know.


----------



## A. E. Lowan (Aug 13, 2013)

Chesterama said:


> Otherwise, I'll get anal retentive and drive myself crazy.



  As I'm already anal retentive and crazy, I wonder what I'll eventually morph into?


----------

