Linear or fragmented?

[Bryan Ekman]

I have always pondered whether authors write novels in a linear movement. Progressing from beginning to end. Or do they jump around, writing portions of the story, then assemble these fragments into a continuous thread?

After reading many posts, it occured to me that analyzing my writing habits might produce better results if I were less scattered when writing longer works. Yet I have always struggled to work from start to finish, finding myself forced to write what is ready to come out at the moment.

I would appreciate any feedback on what works for you and why.

[victoriastrauss]

I write linearly--from first chapter to last--because my ideas, themes, and characters deepen as I go, and every scene and chapter grows in some way out of what precedes it. I do know where I'm going (I work the main plot points out in advance, and know what the general content of crucial scenes will be), but I'm not able to accurately envision how everything will work till I actually get there in the narrative.

So even though I do a lot of advance preparation, it's still a process of discovery for me, and I'm still uncovering the true story right until the end. Often I realize that the way I conceived a scene or a plot point at the start just doesn't work anymore, based on how things have developed/changed in the process of writing. So if I'd written those scenes ahead of time, I'd have to throw them out because they wouldn't really fit with the rest of the book.

That's not to say my brain doesn't jump ahead--I'm always having ideas for nifty scenes or settings later on in the book. I note them down so I won't forget, and deal with them when I get to them (and often wind up throwing them out).

I know at least a couple of writers who don't write linearly, so that can work for some people. No one method is correct for everyone--the key is to find what works for you, which may take quite a bit of trial and error.

- Victoria

[PattiTheWicked]

I write in a linear fashion, because that's just the way my brain works. Now, there have been times when a scene has ended up being out of place, so I've moved it to a new location within the manuscript, but basically, I write the beginning first and the end last. I have a pretty good idea of where I'm going, and when I get there, it seems natural.

I've read about authors who write various scenes -- Diana Gabaldon comes to mind -- and then jumble them all around and write connector pieces to fill in the blank spots.

I'm reasonably certain that if I did that, my head would implode.

[sunandshadow]

I write somewhat non-linearly, and the only reason it works is that I'm working from an outline, so theoretically I know what every scene is supposed to contain, and I can write the easy ones, or the ones I think will best help me understand the rest of the book, first. That said, I still write mostly in order, because you still have to make up the details as you go along, and you want to weave these details together from chapter to chapter, which is easiest to do if writing from the beginning to the end. Also, if you're going to come up with some idea while writing which changes the whole book, it's best to do it near the beginning of the book so it takes less editing to work it in.

[GPatten]

I have always pondered whether authors write novels in a linear movement. Progressing from beginning to end. Or do they jump around, writing portions of the story, then assemble these fragments into a continuous thread?

After reading many posts, it occured to me that analyzing my writing habits might produce better results if I were less scattered when writing longer works. Yet I have always struggled to work from start to finish, finding myself forced to write what is ready to come out at the moment.

I would appreciate any feedback on what works for you and why.

All of the above, if I start with an idea from perhaps a word, or an idea, I open a new document and try to give it a name. From there I write around that word, add a few paragraphs of ideas, and start from there.

I try to get the first chapter written from these ideas and as I go from chapter to chapter, I may throw an idea below where I’ve been writing and include it when I come to that, or those ideas. Scattered ideas are alright, just place them where you can find them and use them.

[AndreaGS]

I tend to write linearly. If the urge to write a certain scene later in the book just hits me, then I write it out and just copy-paste it in once I get there.

[icerose]

I write both. Two of my finished novels I wrote in a straight line and the other two finished ones I skipped around because I would get stuck in places but would know this part so I would bookmark the gap and move on. So it really depends on the story and how smoothly my brain wants to work. For the most part I try to jot down notes for later and keep going straight, but sometimes I just get those gaps that I don't figure out until the end. Ah! The joys of electronic bookmarks.

Sara

[brinkett]

I write linearly--from first chapter to last--because my ideas, themes, and characters deepen as I go, and every scene and chapter grows in some way out of what precedes it. I do know where I'm going (I work the main plot points out in advance, and know what the general content of crucial scenes will be), but I'm not able to accurately envision how everything will work till I actually get there in the narrative.

I write very much this way except I do less advance planning. I agree with just about everything Victoria wrote in her post -- sometimes scenes don't work out the way I expected when I reach them (or are deleted), and so writing out of sequence wouldn't work for me.

[azbikergirl]

I tend toward linear, but if a scene comes to me out of order, I'll write it. Also, if I'm suffering from writer's block, I'll write a scene I'm excited about. I wrote the climax of my novel when I was about 2/3 of the way through.

[MillyBecker]

I never write from start to finish.

Mabe it's ADD...

[Bryan Ekman]

Thanks for all the great replies. I will try several of the techniques mentioned, especially this one.

That's not to say my brain doesn't jump ahead--I'm always having ideas for nifty scenes or settings later on in the book. I note them down so I won't forget, and deal with them when I get to them (and often wind up throwing them out).

[Button]

I'm totally linear.

I start at the beginning, I put my characters in a place and cause a lot of trouble. They are the ones getting themselves out, not I. How in the world am I supposed to know what will go on in chapter 11 when I haven't even gone through 2-10?

I might get an idea for later in the book, like I may think a werewolf in the bedroom might be an interesting thing to throw at a character, but I work through up to a point where I think the werewolf might fit.

And as much as I will say I plan before hand, I don't outline or always end up where I think things are going, and I don't force my characters into a box going "the ending should be here, get there or... die trying!"

But don't go with what anyone else says. You should be more concerned with how you write. Every one has their own methods. The best thing to do is find writers whose work you admire and mimick their habits.

[maestrowork]

linear.

i don't think i can ever jump around. my brain doesn't work that way. my characters tell me things at every turn, and the only way to make them speak is by writing from start to finish...

[Zane Curtis]

Much as it offends my maverick sensibilities, I'm going to have to go along with the crowd on this one. I start at chapter one, scene one and work forward from there. There are numerous reasons why:


That's the way people are going to read it, so that's the way I'm going to write it. It's all too easy to lose sight of the reader when you allow yourself to get ahead of them.
Outlining is hopeless. I've never done a plot outline from a cold start that didn't look goofy once I started writing and seeing the situation through my character's eyes. These days I still outline, but it's a "hot" outline that I make up as I go along. It's not so much a device for defining the story, as a summary of the story so far. And of course, that's useless for predicting what scenes are going in down the track.
As a writer, there are some scenes I look forward to writing more than others. If I allowed myself to write all of those first, what incentive would I have to stick with it and write the difficult bits?
In a first draft, my notion of the story is rather fluid. I just don't know what I'll finally settle on until I can see the situation developing as I write it, and make the best choice of how to proceed from the dozens of possibilities swimming around in my head. Anything I write out of sequence will probably be completely redundant by the time I catch it up.
Writing a novel of 80 to 120 thousand words is quite a challenging organisational task. Without some sort of methodical approach, it's quite easy to tie yourself up in insoluble knots. I know if I tried to write a novel out of sequence, I'd probably wind up with five alternative versions of chapter three, and a bunch of assorted scenes I have no idea how to put together in a logical sequence. And I've watched other writers get themselves into this much trouble.

[LightShadow]

I write a few portions, but for the most part write in sequence. Bouncing around is for the re-writes, touch ups, etc.

[Bryan Ekman]

Another round of thanks for all the input. I shall continue onwards, incorporating many of the great ideas.

On a side note. Thank you so much for making this first thread a great one! Forums can be so dangerous nowadays, with all those hungry trolls. =)

[Senta]

I can't write in a linear way, in fact I find that often I write the ending first, then jump around inside the landscape of the book to find out where my main passion is going. the shape of the book follows my passions.

[Bryan Ekman]

Outlining is hopeless. I've never done a plot outline from a cold start that didn't look goofy once I started writing and seeing the situation through my character's eyes. These days I still outline, but it's a "hot" outline that I make up as I go along. It's not so much a device for defining the story, as a summary of the story so far. And of course, that's useless for predicting what scenes are going in down the track.

This is what generaly drives me to just write and see where the story takes me. Pre-planning doesn't work well for me atm. Though I'm working on ways to structure my efforts.

i don't think i can ever jump around. my brain doesn't work that way. my characters tell me things at every turn, and the only way to make them speak is by writing from start to finish...

A wonderful point!

[Zane Curtis]

This is what generaly drives me to just write and see where the story takes me. Pre-planning doesn't work well for me atm. Though I'm working on ways to structure my efforts.

Yep, I'm right with you on that. I've experimented with lots of different ways to structure a novel without resorting to a plot outline. What works for me is the simplest kind of structure of all, which I first learned from Michael Moorcock, and which I've since tweaked to my own tastes.

You want to write a novel of 100 thousand words? You can start by breaking that down into smaller, more manageable parts. That can be three parts of 33 thousand words, four parts of 25 thousand words, five parts of 20 thousand words, or whatever you fancy. Writing 100 thousand words without a safety net is rather difficult, but 20 thousand words is rather less so. You can focus on each part in turn, and divide it down further into a number of chapters. (Personally, I like to break it down into five parts with five chapters in each, because I prefer to do everything in lots of three or lots of five -- but that's a different story.)

It's all very simple, but it's amazing how powerful that idea can be. For one thing, you can sketch in the dramatic development of a novel, without getting into the details of plot. For example, for a novel in five parts: the first part might become the hook that introduces the characters and conflict and draws the one inexorably into the other; the second part might be an escalation, where you start to raise the stakes for the protagonists; the third part might be the crisis, where you take down your protagonists and cause them to lose absolutely everything; the fourth part might be the redemption, where the protagonists have to try and piece their lives back together, and at the same time, try to avoid their triumphant enemies; the fifth part might be the climax, where the protagonists come back from the wilderness and kick some bad-guy butt. There are any number of other ways you might divide it all up, so it needn't become formulaic.

The great strength of this method is that, at each stage of the novel, you've got a target and a word count to aim for without pinning yourself down to specifics. It works for me.

[Jamesaritchie]

Linear. The last thing I want to know is what's going to happen down the road, and then try to make what I'm writing at the moment lead to that far away scene.

[katiemac]

My first draft was completed in linear fashion. Right now I'm importing a few new scenes, and it's causing even more scenes to become fragmented. And it's driving me nuts! There's no way I could write an entire ms in pieces.

[DragonHeart]

Linear for me as well. I tend to be a very logical person, and trying to write out of order would just give me a headache. Only on a couple very rare occassions has a scene demanded to be written before that point in a work. If I get an idea for a scene addition I'll just make notes for it and write it into the next draft.

I don't use outlines though. I'm not very good at thinking ahead, so I just take my work one thought at a time.

~DragonHeart~

[Kiva Wolfe]

Linear, because I work from a detailed multi-book outline. I only deviate from this writing rule when I need to add a scene or chapter, or get stuck in a creative quagmire. In this case, jumping a chapter can help. More often, I think the scene or chapter over and over until I get unstuck, and then I sit down and crank it out.

[La Reine]

I've only written one novel and it was in a diary format. I wrote it in a fragmentary way, sort of as different ideas came to me.

I began the story where I thought the beginning was (when the protagonist moves to another country), but I later found out that could not be the beginning because of the events of the story.

Also, the ending was/is a tricky matter. I've been at three points that I thought were surely the ending but it turned out they weren't. I'm still trying to figure out what the ending will be.

I think I work in chapters, not in a linear progression. The last chapter can come before the first but you already sort of know how you want to present the story beforehand, except in exceptional cases where you have to have all the pieces together in order to determine what the whole will look like.

[preyer]

usually non-linear. i have no problem skipping around from place to place. i write what turns me on the most at the time and don't worry about linking things together with 'boring' scenes. the challenge is to not make those scenes not boring. i haven't found that going one step after another has helped because i just don't write transition scenes that are boring to me. and if it's a chore, oh, well, like i wouldn't have to write it anyway, and at least i won't rush through one just because i know what's after that is something i really want to get into. after i'm done writing the fun stuff, guess what? i write more fun stuff. if i can't write in the moment, even the fun stuff comes out like it was a tortured process. strike while the iron is hot, eh?

i don't work from outlines, either. i've tried and found myself abandonning them after the third point. i tend to retro-write a lot of the story, the advantage for me there is knowing the character when i write the beginning instead of some vague composite that has to find some definition later.

not to say i have no method. as mentioned, with the fragmented approach, chapter three may have five possibilities. well, i like that freedom of being able to choose. i can see someone who doesn't like to make decisions from a group of options not liking it, but i find it liberating. can it be a mess? it can be a mess either way, lol.

i take a lot of notes. i also write a lot of cliffhanger-style stuff, so there really isn't a lot of transitions needing to be done. before i sit down to write, i have a broad sense of where i'm going anyway, so if i'm starting off in the middle of the book, i'll go until it fizzles out, start somewhere else, probably go back to the first part, or just wait until i'm inclined to finish it. in a way, i write huge fragments. there is one caveat here: the beginning of the story can feel dry, but that's cool, too, because it's a challenge to make it good. i just like challenging myself like that. the linear approach has just stalled me too many times, the option i take just to get out the rut sometimes winding-up not being the one i really wanted to take.

it's not a scatterbrained approach, just one i use to maintain self-interest in a story long enough to get it done. if there's no challenge in it for me, i don't think about it and it's crap. well, it may be crap anyway, but at least i was entertained in the process. :)

i should also probably note that i write to entertain myself. if you're entertained by it, too, hey, that's great, but that's my secondary goal.

one last thing, i write slow, trying to get everything in the first draft as close to the way i want it as possible. i'm not one of these 'write it all down as fast as possible and write it good later' kinds of writers. if i did that then i'd definitely be a linear writer. in fact, i'd probably write a whole lot more, but i'm not prolific in the least. i spend enough time editing, gawd knows i don't want to rewrite the damn thing all over again. :)