Telling stories

[skip.knox]

I just came to a new understanding of my own process in writing. It has to do with telling stories.

One complaint pantsers have about outlines or other types of planning is that once it's all laid out, the author loses enthusiasm for the story. I neither doubt nor criticize that sentiment. Where I've been puzzled is why it doesn't appeal to me whereas planning does.

[aside: I prefer the term planning over plotting because there's so much more to producing a completed novel or short story than just the plotting part]

Here's my own take. When we tell a story, as in "tell me a story!", we can only do so because we already know the story. We've either made it up or we've heard or read it ourselves and now we relate that story to someone else.

This is what I'm doing with my own stories. I can't just write the thing, can't do the whole driving through fog with headlights (well, driving with the whole car, one presumes). Because how do I say what's next if I don't know what's next?

There's room for many variations here. Unless they're engaged in auto-writing, the most radical of pantsers are still thinking in their head of the next scene or part of the current scene. More commonly, I hear folks who say they envision a scene, maybe a chapter, and there are even some who envision the whole book in their mind without ever putting anything on paper. But they are still telling a story that is first inside themselves.

So, the difference now becomes external methodology. Over on the planning side, the least done might be to block out a fight scene or make a few general notes about a scene. Other people might plan out a whole book, but only in general terms. Plenty of room there for increasing detail, down to writing out every beat before ever "starting" the novel.

For me, at least, there's no loss of enthusiasm through planning. In fact, I gain enthusiasm. It's like when I was first able to tell my children about The Hobbit or other much-loved tale. It was precisely my detailed knowledge of the story that lent enthusiasm to my telling of it. So it is with my novels. By planning, I let the story take shape, the characters take shape, the theme take shape. When I've abandoned planning--usually when I simply can't find a way to plan through a scene or section and just take a breath and dive in--I feel anxious and muddled.

I've spoken before about how I feel that I as author have an obligation to do justice to my characters. They go through tribulations. My job is to relate their experiences in a way that will engage readers. If I don't do that, I've failed the characters and thus failed the story. It'd be as if I told my children The Hobbit for the first time but jumbled the narrative, got personalities wrong, and botched the ending. What a tragedy!

Planning lets me block out scenes, bring richer characters, and know exactly how to end a scene to tip the reader forward to the next one. With those pieces in place, I can enjoy myself in writing details of the setting, putting nuance into dialog, linger over language. To return to the Hobbit parallel, it's because I knew the story that I was able to voice the characters, knew where to put in a dramatic pause, and where to say that's all for tonight, kids.

To close on another analogy, the troubadors of old knew their stories, which is exactly why the singers were able to spin the tale for the audience. And if they did it well, everyone went home happy.

 

[Eduardo Ficaria]

I'd say that planning, plotting and putting oneself in the shoes of characters (aka "pantsying") are all necessary tools for writing fiction. To those three, I would add worldbuilding, as in creating a world/universe and its circumstances, and "philosophying", or finding the heart of a worldbuilding and the stories based on it. Each of them not only have their concrete use, but also give you different points of view on your fiction. And even when you already written several stories using a certain lore, you cannot really discard using any of them. Reapplying all those techniques over a known fictionscape can help you find new angles for future stories.

On the other hand, I find the suppossed rivalry between "pantsys" and "plotters" rather childish and really shortshighted, specially on the side of the pantsys. If you wander aimlessly in your writing, thinking that your characters will find their story on their own, that's how the reader will probably end up finding the final product: an aimless wander to nowhere. On the other hand, it's absolutely necessary to know your characters, their interests and motivations within the story and the worldbuilding. Therefore, one could say that a good fiction is a carefully plotted exercise in "pantsym".

So, plot to your heart's content, skip.knox , and ignore those pantsy crybabys. While they keep on wandering to who knows where, for no one knows how long, you'll be discovering the good trade routes that lead to interesting stories.

 

[Luís Santana]

In my opinion, the best way to tell stories is, to lean towards, the process of writing literary/commercial fiction.

 

[Mad Swede]

My grandmother always said that story telling is an art. A good story teller uses their voice to convey feelings, actions and scenes, and does so in a way which keeps you interested in the characters and wanting to come back for more. My grandmother was especially good at telling me folklore and myths. But, as she said, that sort of verbal story telling works because we share a common cultural background, the setting if you like for all those stories.

Writing a story in your own setting is more complex. You need to have some idea of where the story is going, because thats the basis for what will happen to the protagonists. Only then can you develop their feelings, emotions and actions. Only then do you get to the point where you can describe the scenes. But, because you can't be sure that your readers share your cultural reference frame you also have to think about the setting and what that means for the story. And once you start doing that you find that the story changes, because the setting becomes one of the driving factors in the story and the reasons the characters feel and act the way they do. In short, there's a much bigger need to think things through. You can call that planning or plotting if you like. But you have to do it.

How you do your planning is up to you. Most authors seem to have some form of structure, notes, timelines, etc, and it's usually written down somewhere. I don't write it down, because I can't. Being dyslexic, it has to be in my head. But I do think things through before I reach for the keyboard - how else do you think I get away with only one draft?

 

[pmmg]

Well...any parents who has a kid say tell me a ghost story before bed, has probably made something up out of whole cloth.

I dont know. I think when people compare Pantsters to Outliners, they really mean those who have a full draft of an outline written out vs those who wing based on something loose in their head. I am sure there are many gradients between the two extremes, and everyone is somewhere on the sliding scale, maybe even more places than one depending on what scene they are in.

For myself, I have never successfully worked with outline. Even in school, I would write outline after I wrote the paper, and only cause it was something I was required to turn in. I do have a type of outline in my head, but sometimes its just a very far point I am hoping all these scenes add up to by the end. I like the term Way-pointer, but does the label matter? Words on page is better than words in my head. Dont matter how they get there.

 

[Mist Dragon]

I don't like outlines, but I do like to figure out what is going on. I think what I don't like about an outline is because in school you had to do the rigid structure and remember which section got a number, letter, capital or lower case. It was an exercise in form and remembering rules, and when you are a kid those weren't things that were fun to do, and I hated them. Now I'm good with lists, and sub lists, and using them in ways that make sense to me, but I don't call those outlines, because of the deep-rooted hate of the idea of one.

Do I do something similar to an outline minus the form? In a way I do.

 

[pmmg]

I don't like outlines, but I do like to figure out what is going on. I think what I don't like about an outline is because in school you had to do the rigid structure and remember which section got a number, letter, capital or lower case. It was an exercise in form and remembering rules, and when you are a kid those weren't things that were fun to do, and I hated them. Now I'm good with lists, and sub lists, and using them in ways that make sense to me, but I don't call those outlines, because of the deep-rooted hate of the idea of one.

Do I do something similar to an outline minus the form? In a way I do.

That was my experience in school as well. I dont view outlines the same way anymore, certainly not as formal, but they never really became a part of my routine. I got the next scene in my head, I am ready to go without it.

 

[Mist Dragon]

I do like planning though. Most of the stories where I have a good solid plan and know where the story is going turn out a lot better than if I just wing it, I find there is still plenty of room in those scenes for things not really in the plan, but if something is going to impact the overall plan, I can then adjust it to compensate. So, for me I find the plan a set of boundaries I need to consider if I don't want to revise the whole thing, which can still happen if I get a really good outcome that is better than the original. I find there is less chance of me reaching a point in a story where I can't get to a satisfying end that is believable and makes sense.

 

[skip.knox]

It always saddens me a little when I hear people's bad school experiences. In all forms, truly, but the outline is a casualty often mentioned here. I was fortunate in that I had no one "teach" it to me--where "teach" in this case means to insist there's only one way to do it, and that adherence to correct form overrides outlining as a method for learning and retaining (and recovering) information. Like a bad parent, there's almost no limit to the damage they can do.